- Joined
- Feb 19, 2017
- Messages
- 1,577
- Reaction Score
- 3,730
Exactly! There are three premium PGs (Paige Bueckers, Zia Cooke, Azzi Fudd) left among the 18 finalist.
I'm not picking on your post but there is a general frustrating often misunderstood point it raises. Nyah & Rickea are rated #1 & #2 and that was good enough to get them an invitation to the trails. The trials are exactly that, it is a trials so even if Nyah & Rickea had killed it at Boo Williams or EYBL they were still at a trial. At the trial, in the judgment of the committee, Nyah & Rickea were outperformed by other players. It really is that simple.I agree with everything you said but who was more talented at the wing spots over Green and Jackson? Nyah & Rickea are rated #1 & #2 overall for 2019 by prospects nation and I can assure you those rankings were no bluff. Rickea Jackson owned Boo Williams last month on a Michigan Crossover team that's talented but it's clear that Rickea is the player that makes the engine go. Nyah has steadily improved all three levels of her game each year and is clearly one of the best guards in her class. It's a head scratcher as to why neither made the team but I hope The USA Committee has made the right choice because they clearly didn't last year.
Also.... did Brea Beal get and invitation to the trials or has her stock dropped? She's an athletic nightmare on the wing and can guard positions 1-4. Last year I thought she was the second best player in the 2019 class (behind brunelle). But I haven't heard anything on her this year.
This is old news and Kevin is truly one of good guys that are in it for the benefit of the girls. He personally made phone calls to college coaches on behalf of my Daughters and opened up dialogues where I could not have.
Kenny seems to have many complains these days. Perhaps you, Kalina and those other critics missed an earlier post from a very wise woman which stated that Kevin would not be involved in the selection of Belles players to this team. USA basketball appointed Kevin to that position, Idk, may they though that no Belles players would be trying out for this team? While we are at it let's not have Kara Lawson or Catch weigh in on any player trying out for USA basketball that have pledged to go to TN.The Belles are a great organization and I'm sure he is a good guy but that still doesn't mean he should be selecting players where he could derive some benefit or at least be accused of doing so as is the case this year..Kalina is only one of many critics who are making this point....
Kenny seems to have many complains these days. Perhaps you, Kalina and those other critics missed an earlier post from a very wise woman which stated that Kevin would not be involved in the selection of Belles players to this team. USA basketball appointed Kevin to that position, Idk, may they though that no Belles players would be trying out for this team? While we are at it let's not have Kara Lawson or Catch weigh in on any player trying out for USA basketball that have pledged to go to TN.
Kenny seems to have many complains these days. Perhaps you, Kalina and those other critics missed an earlier post from a very wise woman which stated that Kevin would not be involved in the selection of Belles players to this team. USA basketball appointed Kevin to that position, Idk, may they though that no Belles players would be trying out for this team? While we are at it let's not have Kara Lawson or Catch weigh in on any player trying out for USA basketball that have pledged to go to TN.
No I must have missed that post about Lynch not being able to choose any Belles player. that would certainly make a big difference..
I have it on good authority that Kevin Lynch will not be present for discussions about Philly Belle players nor will he be permitted to vote for their inclusion on the final roster.
Generally speaking, there's a big difference between Lynch and somebody like Lawson....Lynch makes a pretty good living convincing Mom, Dad and their Daughter that playing for the Belles will bring extra regional and national exposure to enhance their college scholarship viability.......Lawson, as far as I know, just recently took a position as a coach for USA Basketball, I have no reason to assume she has any reason to favor one player over another.....I'm just looking to have the most qualified (international experience) and open minded selection committee possible...as I'm sure you know, the USA WBB coaching and player selection has not always been the greatest recently
I get really annoyed with all the 'experts' who every year claim bias and or incompetence from the selection committee. USA basketball at all levels is set up to create a committee that has representatives from a range of stake holders - specific to the junior selection committee I believe they always have one AAU stakeholder who this cycle is from the Philly Belles. They also have a HS coach (from TX), two former pro/USA players, former USA junior HC, two college coaches (not D1) and Carol Callan. At age 16 and under ranking services are pretty meaningless though no one seemed to have a problem with the invitees selection by USA and the pay your way adjustment to the selection has opened the door for some lower exposure kids to get seen and occasionally selected.
As others stated the trial process at U16 is the first chance for any of these kids to be evaluated in a meaningful way against comparable players in a mix and match setting where AAU/HS team quality and competition is taken out of the equation. I am sure a certain amount of previous exposure creeps into the evaluation by individuals who have seen some of these players in different competitions, but the primary evaluation is based on the 4 days in CO and how individuals perform there and how they integrate with the other players and the coaches.
Becoming a participant in USA committees is a high honor that people take seriously - and while they may arrive with their own biases and quirks they work very hard to conform to the USA ethos and to set aside those biases for the good of the committee they serve on. That is in stark contrast to all those outside 'experts' whose primary self interests are never far from the surface. The idea that one AAU representative out of 8 members of the committee can railroad the selection process is pretty silly, or that a group of 8 disparate members brought together for a selection cycle is rife with 'politics' that exhibits a bias against one AAU organization, one state, or one region and for another.
One pretty consistent comment from all the outside evaluation was that this cycle of junior talent is far superior to the previous one - going so far as to say that few if any of the previous U16/U17 team members would have made it through to the last two selection pools in this year's cycle. While I am not sure of that (I continue to fault the coaching at least as much as the selection/talent), it does point to another issue that we all see in both incoming college classes and WNBA drafts - they are cyclical and especially at the very top end. An U16 team that has a Stewart, Parker, Moore, etc. is better able to thrive than one that does not and a lot of years those types of players are not available. As international competition improves, age specific teams that are only drawing one a few years of talent as opposed to the NT that is selecting from 15 years of talent will remain very cyclical. And USA dominance for the NT team is going to be strained in this coming cycle in a similar way to the 2006 bronze WC team that was very young and missing the leadership from an older generation some of whom returned to lead the 2008 Olympic gold effort before finally retiring.
This was my favorite comment so far from 'outside experts'
I get really annoyed with all the 'experts' who every year claim bias and or incompetence from the selection committee. USA basketball at all levels is set up to create a committee that has representatives from a range of stake holders - specific to the junior selection committee I believe they always have one AAU stakeholder who this cycle is from the Philly Belles. They also have a HS coach (from TX), two former pro/USA players, former USA junior HC, two college coaches (not D1) and Carol Callan. At age 16 and under ranking services are pretty meaningless though no one seemed to have a problem with the invitees selection by USA and the pay your way adjustment to the selection has opened the door for some lower exposure kids to get seen and occasionally selected.
As others stated the trial process at U16 is the first chance for any of these kids to be evaluated in a meaningful way against comparable players in a mix and match setting where AAU/HS team quality and competition is taken out of the equation. I am sure a certain amount of previous exposure creeps into the evaluation by individuals who have seen some of these players in different competitions, but the primary evaluation is based on the 4 days in CO and how individuals perform there and how they integrate with the other players and the coaches.
Becoming a participant in USA committees is a high honor that people take seriously - and while they may arrive with their own biases and quirks they work very hard to conform to the USA ethos and to set aside those biases for the good of the committee they serve on. That is in stark contrast to all those outside 'experts' whose primary self interests are never far from the surface. The idea that one AAU representative out of 8 members of the committee can railroad the selection process is pretty silly, or that a group of 8 disparate members brought together for a selection cycle is rife with 'politics' that exhibits a bias against one AAU organization, one state, or one region and for another.
One pretty consistent comment from all the outside evaluation was that this cycle of junior talent is far superior to the previous one - going so far as to say that few if any of the previous U16/U17 team members would have made it through to the last two selection pools in this year's cycle. While I am not sure of that (I continue to fault the coaching at least as much as the selection/talent), it does point to another issue that we all see in both incoming college classes and WNBA drafts - they are cyclical and especially at the very top end. An U16 team that has a Stewart, Parker, Moore, etc. is better able to thrive than one that does not and a lot of years those types of players are not available. As international competition improves, age specific teams that are only drawing one a few years of talent as opposed to the NT that is selecting from 15 years of talent will remain very cyclical. And USA dominance for the NT team is going to be strained in this coming cycle in a similar way to the 2006 bronze WC team that was very young and missing the leadership from an older generation some of whom returned to lead the 2008 Olympic gold effort before finally retiring.
This was my favorite comment so far from 'outside experts'