USC #1 & #2 | Page 5 | The Boneyard

USC #1 & #2

NycUcWbbFan said:
You’re making a fallacious argument — appeal to authority i.e. if it were MBB instead of WBB to double down on your priors.
Expand ...
How is that a fallacious argument? People choose when and when not to compare the men's and women's game, and many WBB fans will gladly make the MBB comparison when it shows WBB in a more favorable light. Why cherrypick when and when not to make the comparisons?

I stand by what I said. If we were talking about a men's player, there wouldn't be any blowback. But because we're talking about a women's player, specifically a UConn Husky, there is blowback--and there shouldn't be. She's a bust. Her gender and where she goes to school should not matter when it comes to this label. A bust is a bust.

As you know, the WNBA does not allow early departures from college as the NBA. People can make an inference in MCBB that top recruits who don’t depart early for the NBA are not any good. You cannot make the same inference in WCBB.
Expand ...

You can still infer that a player is a bust when she has not produced at the level of her peers in the same calendar frame. WBB players don't need to go to the WNBA early for people to see that they're on a different trajectory than those who haven't had similar production. You can see that from the production as well as the accolades. Azzi does not have the production nor the accolades of a player who was the #1 recruit in her class. That's the truth.

FWIW, uninjured Kiki Iriafen wasn’t that impressive until her junior season after having two full prior seasons.
Expand ...

But Kiki wasn't the #1-rated player in her class, was she? Was she even Top 5? Top 10? Top 20? Stanford had depth at her position. Lucky for them, she stuck it out.

And as for that junior year at Stanford that you're trying to downplay--Kiki scored more points that season than Azzi has scored in her entire collegiate career. And I think we know which player is being discussed as a potential #1 overall draft pick in 2025 and which one isn't.
 
WBBTakeover said:
How is that a fallacious argument? People choose when and when not to compare the men's and women's game, and many WBB fans will gladly make the MBB comparison when it shows WBB in a more favorable light. Why cherrypick when and when not to make the comparisons?

I stand by what I said. If we were talking about a men's player, there wouldn't be any blowback. But because we're talking about a women's player, specifically a UConn Husky, there is blowback--and there shouldn't be. She's a bust. Her gender and where she goes to school should not matter when it comes to this label. A bust is a bust.



You can still infer that a player is a bust when she has not produced at the level of her peers in the same calendar frame. WBB players don't need to go to the WNBA early for people to see that they're on a different trajectory than those who haven't had similar production. You can see that from the production as well as the accolades. Azzi does not have the production nor the accolades of a player who was the #1 recruit in her class. That's the truth.



But Kiki wasn't the #1-rated player in her class, was she? Was she even Top 5? Top 10? Top 20? Stanford had depth at her position. Lucky for them, she stuck it out.

And as for that junior year at Stanford that you're trying to downplay--Kiki scored more points that season than Azzi has scored in her entire collegiate career. And I think we know which player is being discussed as a potential #1 overall draft pick in 2025 and which one isn't.
Expand ...
“Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.”

You’re applying the MBB principles, which I imho pointed out doesn’t apply, to your argument.

I remember the arguments on Aaliyah Edwards during the end of her sophomore year, vis a vis Laeticia Amihere. They have both been drafted to the WNBA in the first round, with Aaliyah becoming an AA.

The point is, in head-to-head comparisons in WCBB — and it doesn’t matter where the players were initially ranked in high school —the only fair comparison, imho, is after each have exhausted their eligibility.

I find your arguments unpersuasive as you have your principles and I have mine. Let’s just leave it at that,
 
NycUcWbbFan said:
“Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.”

You’re applying the MBB principles, which I imho pointed out doesn’t apply, to your argument.

I remember the arguments on Aaliyah Edwards during the end of her sophomore year, vis a vis Laeticia Amihere. They have both been drafted to the WNBA in the first round, with Aaliyah becoming an AA.

The point is, in head-to-head comparisons in WCBB — and it doesn’t matter where the players were initially ranked in high school —the only fair comparison, imho, is after each have exhausted their eligibility.

I find your arguments unpersuasive as you have your principles and I have mine. Let’s just leave it at that,
Expand ...
The suggestion Azzi is a bust is completely off the mark. In what planet of sports is your #3 scorer on the team as a frosh that helped your team get to the WCBB Finals (let that sink in- The Finals.) a bust? On top of that she was the 3rd leading scorer in the NCAA's for UCONN her frosh year. On top of that UCONN loses to UCF in rd 2 if not for her leading UCONN in scoring. In what reality is this considered a bust for a freshman?

And yet one of the posters here identifying Azzi as a bust has also tried so hard to downplay the Freshman Sarah Strong when he or she said that they don't expect a lot from freshmen. Now all of a sudden when a player like Azzi produced as a freshman like she did her freshman year, that doesn’t count? You woudl thinkwith no expctations ot what Aziz did - that would count. But noooooo. :)

And anyone calling her a bust because of her ranking would be lunacy. Games are won by performance. Not High School rankings.
 
Last edited:
NycUcWbbFan said:
Amplifying Hophuskee’s point.

#1 Recruits that had immediate impact in their first year.
# National championship.
## Derailed national championship due to injuries.
### See contrast with Megan Walker ¥: 2017-18 UConn Huskies Women's Roster and Stats | College Basketball at Sports-Reference.com
@ Runner-up.
@@ KLS replaced graduated Kaleena in starting lineup. Napheesa didn’t have as much impact as classmate KLS.
¥ Derailed national championship due to being upset by Achilles heel teams or being beaten by Notre Dame or by Stanford.
Expand ...
I love this post. Imo some UCONN fans just want to look at things all negative unless they win a title. That only could be true when UCONN is "dominant." Geno has all but said so. Anyone thinks that's wrong - we can ease get the quote.

Anyhow, I don't know much about Southern Cal - all their pickups but in regard South Carolian - what has made them special these last three-four years is that they closed down the paint. And one good way to beat them was go bombs away from the outside. Paige did as a frosh and Caitlin did as a junior. You had to get hot because their ability to score was so hard to stop so winning 58-57 games was also hard to do because you couldn't hold them to such a low number.

And this is where I think Sarah (and Jana) will have to shine. Because I Don’t know enough about Jana - for conversation looking at Sarah -- if she can score some baskets and be a threat on the inside then that changes a lot. UCONN can run "an Offense" instead of being forced to only score from the outside. UCONN doesn't need to score a lot - but score enough to be a legit threat.

The ability (or lack thereof) for Sarah to score inside and to also rebound (i.e. they don't go easily over the top of her) will dictate a lot of UCONN's potential success they would have vs South Carolina and other big/physical/athletic teams.

But to completely disregard a #1 recruit is just crazy.

The good think about Sarah is that she is also known for being an excellent outside shooter. SO it's not like she is "inside-or-bust." UCONN can win games just from the perimeter vs very good teams which is why in summation we're right there with the 2 SoCar and SOCal teams. Another big Achilles for UCONN is their youth up front. Which is why I put them behind these teams. Iriafen imo was important for SoCal.
 
NycUcWbbFan said:
“Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.”
Expand ...
I've been pretty firm in what I've said regarding Azzi being a bust and how this would not be an issue if her gender or school affiliation were different.

You’re applying the MBB principles, which I imho pointed out doesn’t apply, to your argument.
Expand ...
You haven't done so, as I mentioned that WCBB players do not have to go pro early for everyone to see that other players have not reached expectations (hence the label, "bust"). You can spot a WCBB bust just as easily as you can spot a MCBB one. Accolades, achievements, and statistics are still recorded and discussed in WCBB, are they not?

I remember the arguments on Aaliyah Edwards during the end of her sophomore year, vis a vis Laeticia Amihere. They have both been drafted to the WNBA in the first round, with Aaliyah becoming an AA.
Expand ...
How is this related to the discussion of Azzi being a bust, unless you're saying that either (1) both players were considered the top prospects in their respective classes but failed to reach lofty expectations (which isn't true--neither player was the #1 player in her class) or (2) both players far exceeded expectations to the point where they were considered the top player in their respective classes once they graduated (again, untrue--as neither player is named "Aliyah Boston" or "Caitlin Clark")?

The point is, in head-to-head comparisons in WCBB — and it doesn’t matter where the players were initially ranked in high school —the only fair comparison, imho, is after each have exhausted their eligibility.
Expand ...
If that were the case, then why were there so many "Caitlin versus Paige" discussions during this past season? You mean to tell me that there weren't any "Stewie versus Dee" conversations back in 2015-16? Seems to me like you can have these discussions in earnest even if a player's eligibility hasn't been exhausted--as long as the outcome is favorable towards certain players. Since these conversations do not favor Azzi, we have to wait to see how her career plays out.

I find your arguments unpersuasive as you have your principles and I have mine. Let’s just leave it at that,
Expand ...
I do not care one bit. I have a right to my opinion as you do to yours. I am of the opinion that Azzi is a bust and nothing you've said or will say will change that.

Now--I'll end it on THAT.
 
joe brown.gif
 
.-.
WBBTakeover said:
If that were the case, then why were there so many "Caitlin versus Paige" discussions during this past season? You mean to tell me that there weren't any "Stewie versus Dee" conversations back in 2015-16? Seems to me like you can have these discussions in earnest even if a player's eligibility hasn't been exhausted--as long as the outcome is favorable towards certain players. Since these conversations do not favor Azzi, we have to wait to see how her career plays out.
Expand ...

So you're evalaution fo a bust or not is to primarliy define where High School Evaluators ranked a recruit before they played one second of college hoop?

Why would anyoen care one bit the argument between Paige vs Catlin --vs if Azzi was a bust?

You are tying in two different things? Or is it because she doesn't meet the High School Evaluators expectation of greatness but was a big part of UCONN winning some crucial NCAA games and overall being the 3rd leading socrere for a FInals Team then it means she is a bust?
 
hoophuskee said:
So you're evalaution fo a bust or not is to primarliy define where High School Evaluators ranked a recruit before they played one second of college hoop?
Expand ...
Uh yes--because that's what a projection is, by definition. High school rankings are meant to project what a player is supposed to be on the next level. Otherwise, why would they exist?

When evaluating a bust, you weigh that projection (expectation) against performance (reality). When they are incongruent, that's when the "bust" label comes into play.

Why would anyoen care one bit the argument between Paige vs Catlin --vs if Azzi was a bust?
Expand ...
Because your friend was claiming that we can't have discussions/comparisons about players' careers until a player's eligibility has exhausted. I pointed out that there have been plenty of "Paige versus Caitlin" discussions here and elsewhere well before either player's eligibility has exhausted (Caitlin's has; Paige still has eligibility). So, if we can talk about Paige and Caitlin while they still had collegiate eligibility, then we should be able to discuss Azzi while she still has hers.

You are tying in two different things? Or is it because she doesn't meet the High School Evaluators expectation of greatness but was a big part of UCONN winning some crucial NCAA games and overall being the 3rd leading socrere for a FInals Team then it means she is a bust?
Expand ...
It's very simple. She is a bust because she lacks the accolades, at this point of her career, of a player who is supposed to be the #1 player in her class (a projection--as discussed earlier). She has no national championships. She has not made her way onto various All-American teams. She's not in discussion to be NPOY. We're not talking about her being a potential lottery pick in the upcoming draft. She's a UConner who shoots the ball pretty well, so I get why some are defensive and overprotective. There have been plenty of UConn players over the years who shot the ball well (Sue, Diana, Maya, Stewie, Paige). But those that I just named aren't busts. Azzi, however, is a bust. It's okay to admit it. Her career has not panned out the way anyone would've imagined to this point.
 
WBBTakeover said:
Uh yes--because that's what a projection is, by definition. High school rankings are meant to project what a player is supposed to be on the next level. Otherwise, why would they exist?

When evaluating a bust, you weigh that projection (expectation) against performance (reality). When they are incongruent, that's when the "bust" label comes into play.
Expand ...
I have NEVER EVER heard such a definition defined as "A bust" the way you are defining it. Performance should mean everything. My God-- not a H/S ranking. What happens if you or I know more than the Evaluators for a specific player? We're supposed to only abide by their faulty analysis and blindly go with it? What happens if they are wrong? Then you are either crucifying or overhyping the player.

Tamika Williams was the #1 H/S player - never a WCBB A/A- was she a bust?
When UCONN went to the Finals a few years ago - would you consider CWilliams, Liv Ododa, and Evina Westbrook all busts? SO looking back in that 2021-2022 season, in H/S CWll was #1, Azzi 1st, Caroline 5th, and Liv 5th and Evina 2nd. SO when UCONN go to the Finals -- might you be suggesting that UCONN go to the Finals with Paige, a trending AE, and five busts?

As for Alliayah Edwards - she was about the 23 ranked player coming out of her class - and yet this year she was named 2nd team All-American. SO would you say then she is probably among the greatest players in UCONN history because of her jump from 23 to 6-10?
 
hoophuskee said:
I have NEVER EVER heard such a definition defined as "A bust" the way you are defining it. Performance should mean everything. My God-- not a H/S ranking. What happens if you or I know more than the Evaluators for a specific player? We're supposed to only abide by their faulty analysis and blindly go with it? What happens if they are wrong? Then you are either crucifying or overhyping the player.
Expand ...
Performance is not measured in a vacuum. There has to be something that you're measuring it against. That's where expectation comes into play. If a player is ranked highly, then the expectation is that the player will perform at a very high level at the next level. I do not see how that is such a difficult concept to grasp (except that you're wanting to make excuses for a UConn WBB player who has not lived up to her lofty ranking).

If performance and expectation are not aligned, then there is a problem. That happens when a highly-ranked player fails to perform up to standard. That makes said player a bust.

Tamika Williams was the #1 H/S player - never a WCBB A/A- was she a bust?
Expand ...
Yes. The fact that she was literally a classmate of three players who would go on to have better (and, in some cases, much better) collegiate and WNBA careers proves that.

When UCONN went to the Finals a few years ago - would you consider CWilliams, Liv Ododa, and Evina Westbrook all busts?
Expand ...
Yes. Zero NPOY awards amongst that group. None of those players made an All-American team for UConn. Zero national titles. None of them were lottery picks. ONO went from playing on Team USA to barely being a second-round WNBA draft pick--at 6'5. That's not a bust?

SO looking back in that 2021-2022 season, in H/S CWll was #1, Azzi 1st, Caroline 5th, and Liv 5th and Evina 2nd. SO when UCONN go to the Finals -- might you be suggesting that UCONN go to the Finals with Paige, a trending AE, and five busts?
Expand ...
Yes. It makes what Paige and Geno accomplished that year all that much more special.

As for Alliayah Edwards - she was about the 23 ranked player coming out of her class - and yet this year she was named 2nd team All-American. SO would you say then she is probably among the greatest players in UCONN history because of her jump from 23 to 6-10?
Expand ...
Yes. Aaliyah (the correct spelling of her name) is a two-time All-American who played in three Final Fours. She's nowhere near the UConn Mount Rushmore, but she's in a much better position legacy-wise than Azzi Fudd.

Is it really that hard to grasp? I certainly didn't think so.
 
WBBTakeover said:
Performance is not measured in a vacuum. There has to be something that you're measuring it against. That's where expectation comes into play. If a player is ranked highly, then the expectation is that the player will perform at a very high level at the next level. I do not see how that is such a difficult concept to grasp (except that you're wanting to make excuses for a UConn WBB player who has not lived up to her lofty ranking).

If performance and expectation are not aligned, then there is a problem. That happens when a highly-ranked player fails to perform up to standard. That makes said player a bust.


Yes. The fact that she was literally a classmate of three players who would go on to have better (and, in some cases, much better) collegiate and WNBA careers proves that.


Yes. Zero NPOY awards amongst that group. None of those players made an All-American team for UConn. Zero national titles. None of them were lottery picks. ONO went from playing on Team USA to barely being a second-round WNBA draft pick--at 6'5. That's not a bust?


Yes. It makes what Paige and Geno accomplished that year all that much more special.


Yes. Aaliyah (the correct spelling of her name) is a two-time All-American who played in three Final Fours. She's nowhere near the UConn Mount Rushmore, but she's in a much better position legacy-wise than Azzi Fudd.

Is it really that hard to grasp? I certainly didn't think so.
Expand ...
This stuff about performance not measured in a vacuum is code for blindly listening to others. It defies common sense. Some players ranked 6th or 8th will be best suited for being role players – not All-Americans as an example. That doesn’t make them a bust. Just because there is faulty analysis from an Evaluator doesn't make a player is a bust. The root Cause of the problem is that the Evaluator in some cases is just flat out wrong. And in regard to the Fan that defines what a bust is - is using the faulty analysis put forth by the Evaluator. To not even be able to question it—is just mind-boggling. I’ll say again “HIGH SCHOOL EVALUATORS.”

That's why the player is not a bust. You put faulty information into a computer it will spike out wrong data. Same with the H/S Evaluations.

And I want to thank you. For suggesting UCONN had FIVE BUSTS while getting to the Finals. IMO is so outrageous - I'm putting an IG here. You are literally making up excuses that ignores performance all because of what a H/S evaluator says is beyond comprehensible. It's okay that we think for ourselves instead of being led on leash without our own observations in which in some cases we might know more about the game or the player than the Evaluator.

This isn't a court of law to define who is a bust. We can use logic. Five “busts” on a team that got to the Finals; Just wow.
 
Last edited:
Timeout on the Azzi drift. Let’s get back to the thread topic.

C’mon U$C. Play us in Vegas on opening day. You have been. Irked in the obscurity of the PACN for years . Move toward the light. This is a win-win for US both. Nobody’s SOS or RPi or NET will be hurt. A big TV audience with Cali viewers moving to the light will help the GAME!

C’mon Trogganses, it’s the right thing to do.
 
.-.
visitingcock said:
Timeout on the Azzi drift. Let’s get back to the thread topic.

C’mon U$C. Play us in Vegas on opening day. You have been. Irked in the obscurity of the PACN for years . Move toward the light. This is a win-win for US both. Nobody’s SOS or RPi or NET will be hurt. A big TV audience with Cali viewers moving to the light will help the GAME!

C’mon Trogganses, it’s the right thing to do.
Expand ...
Pray GIF by reactionseditor

That's it. Put it out there to manifest.
 
WBBTakeover said:
WBBTakeover said:
I do not care one bit. I have a right to my opinion as you do to yours. I am of the opinion that Azzi is a bust and nothing you've said or will say will change that.

Now--I'll end it on THAT.
Expand ...
Expand ...
I would also disagree with you here. Since women still play 4 years in college and Azzi still has 2-3 years of eligibility, it's premature to call her a bust.

By your definition, Iriafen was a bust after two years, then redeemed herself as a junior. Neither Amihere or a comparable Kiah Stokes were really busts in college, in fact as reserves behind stars they were good enough for wnba.

When Azzi plays, she's fine, when she's hurt she's a bust. We will see how it develops.
 
packwrap said:
I would also disagree with you here. Since women still play 4 years in college and Azzi still has 2-3 years of eligibility, it's premature to call her a bust.
Expand ...
It's not premature at all. She's been out of high school for three years and has not produced at the level of a #1 ranked recruit. She's a bust.

By your definition, Iriafen was a bust after two years, then redeemed herself as a junior.
Expand ...
She was not a bust, as she was not a Top 5 recruit, a Top 10 recruit, or even a Top 15 recruit. She was a four-star recruit according to Hoopgurlz. Her college coach overloaded on bigs. She had a former Top 5 recruit one year ahead of her and a Top 2 recruit one year behind her. There were also multiple senior bigs ahead of her in 2022-23.

Neither Amihere or a comparable Kiah Stokes were really busts in college, in fact as reserves behind stars they were good enough for wnba.
Expand ...
Nobody called either a bust, especially Kiah Stokes.

When Azzi plays, she's fine, when she's hurt she's a bust. We will see how it develops.
Expand ...
That's life. When Greg Oden actually played, people saw potential in him as well.
 
WBBTakeover said:
That's life. When Greg Oden actually played, people saw potential in him as well.
Expand ...
Well we agree on Greg Oden, but that's my point. That played out fully. He never recovered, he's a bust.

Zion we don't know yet. Promise then injury, but it's not over yet.

Good to see all this interest just over the transfer portal! The real season will be fun. Have a great night!
 
hoophuskee said:
This stuff about performance not measured in a vacuum is code for blindly listening to others. It defies common sense. Some players ranked 6th or 8th will be best suited for being role players – not All-Americans as an example. That doesn’t make them a bust. Just because there is faulty analysis from an Evaluator doesn't make a player is a bust. The root Cause of the problem is that the Evaluator in some cases is just flat out wrong. And in regard to the Fan that defines what a bust is - is using the faulty analysis put forth by the Evaluator. To not even be able to question it—is just mind-boggling. I’ll say again “HIGH SCHOOL EVALUATORS.”

That's why the player is not a bust. You put faulty information into a computer it will spike out wrong data. Same with the H/S Evaluations.

And I want to thank you. For suggesting UCONN had FIVE BUSTS while getting to the Finals. IMO is so outrageous - I'm putting an IG here. You are literally making up excuses that ignores performance all because of what a H/S evaluator says is beyond comprehensible. It's okay that we think for ourselves instead of being led on leash without our own observations in which in some cases we might know more about the game or the player than the Evaluator.

This isn't a court of law to define who is a bust. We can use logic. Five “busts” on a team that got to the Finals; Just wow.
Expand ...
Great reductio ad absurdum argumentation. I typically don’t use that argumentation with legend-in-my-own-mind quixotic-stake-the-flag-on-the-internet types.

It’s a board where people with like interests need to coexist. That should be the prime directive here, obviously.
 
packwrap said:
Well we agree on Greg Oden, but that's my point. That played out fully. He never recovered, he's a bust.
Expand ...
People were calling him a bust long before we saw a resolution, so no point there. And it didn't have to play out because of what we all saw from Kevin Durant as a lanky 18-year-old.

Zion we don't know yet. Promise then injury, but it's not over yet.
Expand ...
As someone who likes Zion for many reasons (among them collegiate affiliation), I think we know where he's trending. The number of games played in versus the number of games eligible to have played in do not lie. It's still unfortunate.
 
.-.
NycUcWbbFan said:
Great reductio ad absurdum argumentation. I typically don’t use that argumentation with legend-in-my-own-mind quixotic-stake-the-flag-on-the-internet types.

It’s a board where people with like interests need to coexist. That should be the prime directive here, obviously.
Expand ...
His or her view of basketball and probably sports in genreal is the exact opposite how I view sports. :) No point going further but it's why I responed in that manner. It's more than just h/s rankings. It's how to view the game. In this case and in other I also stake-the-flag:)

Anyhow, both SC teams are going to be terrific. Juju is amazing. On a given day she'll be able to outshoot anyone and be brutally unstoppable.

With SoCar - Joyce Edwards I expect she'll be very solid and provide them with an easy floor. They are a freak athletic team -- and if they can get / rely on one elite efficient scorer - they'll be a beast.

IMO they are tier 1.
UCONN, ND and Texas are tier 2.
WIth UCLA and NC State a fraction lower.
 
visitingcock said:
Timeout on the Azzi drift. Let’s get back to the thread topic.

C’mon U$C. Play us in Vegas on opening day. You have been. Irked in the obscurity of the PACN for years . Move toward the light. This is a win-win for US both. Nobody’s SOS or RPi or NET will be hurt. A big TV audience with Cali viewers moving to the light will help the GAME!

C’mon Trogganses, it’s the right thing to do.
Expand ...
Why not try for Paris? Again. ;)
 
asuwish said:
As of now I think USC west (The women of Troy) will be the preseason #1 ranked team. USC east (the Gamecocks) will be #2. UConn, and Texas will be debated at #3 & #4. USC west now has two of the top ten players in the country, a great freshman class, and lots of depth. Adding two experienced transfers is a BIG deal. USC east has almost everyone back (YES, the one player they lost was a big loss, emphasis "BIG" but they have great depth, size, and with only 1 loss in 2 years (I know everyone did not play both years), they know how to win. I see about 3 or 4 other teams that could also win it.
Expand ...
USC Carolina still has better overall talent other than Watkins and Iriafen.
 
WBBTakeover said:
People were calling him a bust long before we saw a resolution, so no point there. And it didn't have to play out because of what we all saw from Kevin Durant as a lanky 18-year-old.


As someone who likes Zion for many reasons (among them collegiate affiliation), I think we know where he's trending. The number of games played in versus the number of games eligible to have played in do not lie. It's still unfortunate.
Expand ...
And what does all this have to do with USC#1 and USC #2? NOTHING, everyone of your posts on this thread is not part of this discussion. If you want to discuss busts start another thread.
 
.-.
LwrcasefaN said:
I'm not convinced that Watkins is the perfect defensive replacement for Cardoso. Good defender no doubt, but better off ball in the trenches as a help defender in my opinion. Athletic, but I can see her getting into foul trouble trying to defend a traditional 5 or big bodied post player without help. Seems a little light in the pants to be banging with bigs all game.
Expand ...
Watkins is VERY strong and a leaper. The Gamecocks were minus Cardoso when playing UCONN and I don't think we missed a beat.
 
cockhrnleghrn said:
Watkins is VERY strong and a leaper. The Gamecocks were minus Cardoso when playing UCONN and I don't think we missed a beat.
Expand ...
But UCONN didn't have a dominant post. Watkins CAN be VERY strong and a leaper while at the same time NOT being the same impact on Defense as Cardoso. -- There is no way she has the same Defensive impact that Cardoso brought vs the top tier teams. Less-than-top-tier? --- -> sure. - the SC Defense and her can devastate them.

Just want to say I am not slamming your team. Yury team is a beast and I can't see them to start year being anything but #1 to start. I value experience and in the backcourt you have a 5th year senior in Paopao and age=wise a 4th year player in Raven - as a result your sop home pg has terrific leadership to assist her - with Bree Hall as an experienced Wing-- just terrific. .

And your frontcourt is loaded with experience and talent too. And IMO the freshman Edwards is also going to be a huge boost (just like Sarah Strong will be for UCONN).

I can’t see anyone having any valid reason to not rank SC preseason #1. But losing Cardoso is a hit. I’d be very surprised if Tac had much of an impact her frosh year vs the top 5 elite teams. Your frontcourt strength of Watkins, Feagin, Kitts and Edwards is loaded with 3 experienced players and one super-talented freshman. That is very impressive. This is where you have the big “paper” advantage over UCONN – again. Ugghhhhhhhh grrrrrrrrrrr!

Because of your balance also including experience – you are going to have an advantage night-in-and-night-out. Though ofc your team is in no way unbeatable.
 
hoophuskee said:
But UCONN didn't have a dominant post. Watkins CAN be VERY strong and a leaper while at the same time NOT being the same impact on Defense as Cardoso. -- There is no way she has the same Defensive impact that Cardoso brought vs the top tier teams. Less-than-top-tier? --- -> sure. - the SC Defense and her can devastate them.

Just want to say I am not slamming your team. Yury team is a beast and I can't see them to start year being anything but #1 to start. I value experience and in the backcourt you have a 5th year senior in Paopao and age=wise a 4th year player in Raven - as a result your sop home pg has terrific leadership to assist her - with Bree Hall as an experienced Wing-- just terrific. .

And your frontcourt is loaded with experience and talent too. And IMO the freshman Edwards is also going to be a huge boost (just like Sarah Strong will be for UCONN).

I can’t see anyone having any valid reason to not rank SC preseason #1. But losing Cardoso is a hit. I’d be very surprised if Tac had much of an impact her frosh year vs the top 5 elite teams. Your frontcourt strength of Watkins, Feagin, Kitts and Edwards is loaded with 3 experienced players and one super-talented freshman. That is very impressive. This is where you have the big “paper” advantage over UCONN – again. Ugghhhhhhhh grrrrrrrrrrr!

Because of your balance also including experience – you are going to have an advantage night-in-and-night-out. Though ofc your team is in no way unbeatable.
Expand ...
Is it a “hit?” Well, it’s logically a hit any time you lose a top 5 draft choice. Losing Boston to the draft was a hit just as much as losing Kamilla is. It’s definitely a change that Dawn will need to address.

And Watkins has some flaws that need to be corrected or accounted for. She does not have the “ballast butt” that both Boston and Cardosa have . This helps positioning without fouling in the low post. Ashlyn has to rely on upper body strength and leaping ability. Reliance on the former can lead to excessive foul calls. And she is a poor FT shooter. Add to this, she is.a bit of a whiner when called for a foul which could mark her for further calls by some refs. She needs to learn to control her emotions and keep the opponent out of her head.

But she has advantages that B&C lacked. Much more speed and can cover more ground than either. She can jump higher than either and blocked more shots per minute than Cardosa. She has a better (Though not superior) mid range. She can leave the bucket to defend the midrange and even three pointers. She needs to put up softer shots at point blank range ( as does Chloe) and further develop her hook shot.

Yes, it will be a change . I think Dawn is up to the task of managing the change and limiting the “ hit.” I don’t expect us to go undefeated again but I do expect us to be as good as last year - so long as we don’t have off-season, lazy big heads. Does that mean a repeat championship? We’ll see. Luck is always a factor.
 
Last edited:
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,122
Messages
4,553,894
Members
10,437
Latest member
poppopwow


Top Bottom