Way too early 2019 mock draft

[Roger G]

Anyone else find it odd that not only Lou is a little too low at 3 but Pheesa at 6!? Both are better pro prospects than Gabby & 2/3 current college players (Durr) in the national USA pool. Their versatility will get them both off the board in the top 4 IMHO. Shepard is solid but highly doubt there’s a coach in America crazy enough to take her over Pheesa. Same with Durr over Lou.

Can you imagine how lucky a general manager would feel getting Napheesa at 6? Both her and Katie Lou are virtually unstoppable. The combination of size and skill.

 

[meyers7]

Eye test says Shepard’s a better creator and facilitator than Collier. Different players but Shepard as a passing 4 has more potential to me in the pros than Collier playing the 3 or 4. If Shepard shows her range again next year and excels in the high post, she should be a highly coveted pick. Strong, physical 6-4 players who aren’t afraid to bang, and also possess good perimeter skills don’t grow on trees.

Eye test huh? I guess it would have to be eye test, because stats don't really make the case.

As a facilitator Collier had 122 assists to Shepard's 93. Pretty good by both, but Collier was better. And Shepard's range?? 0-2 from 3 pt? While Collier was a 34% shooter. And 43% last year.

Also Collier is a bit better on 2pt FG%, not much and Shepard is a bit better in rebounding (again not much). Blocks? Collier again 63 to 28. Steals? Collier again 60 to 31. They were pretty close in scoring average. Turnovers? Shepard wins this one 84 to 56 (oh wait. )

Shepard is good, but I'd take Collier before her.

 

[bbballfan23]

Eye test huh? I guess it would have to be eye test, because stats don't really make the case.

As a facilitator Collier had 122 assists to Shepard's 93. Pretty good by both, but Collier was better. And Shepard's range?? 0-2 from 3 pt? While Collier was a 34% shooter. And 43% last year.

Also Collier is a bit better on 2pt FG%, not much and Shepard is a bit better in rebounding (again not much). Blocks? Collier again 63 to 28. Steals? Collier again 60 to 31. They were pretty close in scoring average. Turnovers? Shepard wins this one 84 to 56 (oh wait. )

Shepard is good, but I'd take Collier before her.

Thank you!! Eventually the eye test is trumped by production!

 

[bballnut90]

Eye test huh? I guess it would have to be eye test, because stats don't really make the case.

As a facilitator Collier had 122 assists to Shepard's 93. Pretty good by both, but Collier was better. And Shepard's range?? 0-2 from 3 pt? While Collier was a 34% shooter. And 43% last year.

Also Collier is a bit better on 2pt FG%, not much and Shepard is a bit better in rebounding (again not much). Blocks? Collier again 63 to 28. Steals? Collier again 60 to 31. They were pretty close in scoring average. Turnovers? Shepard wins this one 84 to 56 (oh wait. )

Shepard is good, but I'd take Collier before her.

As I noted before—I don’t think you can compare the two based on stats and I agreed the stats favored Collier. Shepard played against a more difficult schedule and was playing out of her natural position this year. She has 3pt ability (she took many at Nebraska) but didn’t utilize that part of her game this past year playing in the low post. Watch both of them play and evaluate them on that.

If you go by stats alone, Natalie Butler would’ve been the sure fire #1 pick in the draft.

 

[Orangutan]

Shepard and Collier is such an odd comparison to me because they are totally different players. Especially last year, they played totally different roles.

Shepard played as a true low post "5". How many major-conference 5s had more assists than Shepard? Very few, if any, I'd guess. Also, her assist total may undersell her passing because one of her best skills is outlet passing, which often won't get her an assist on the score sheet but can be crucial in creating transition opportunities.

 

[DallasBUFan]

Can you Imagine though how good Vegas could be in the future if they did draft Brown or McCowan? They would have a dominant center, a great Forward in Wilson, having Moriah and Plum at the guard position. In the WNBA post play is huge, from what I saw last season.

Top 4 teams all have 1-3 dominant 4/5 players.

Minn - Fowles, Brunson
LA - Parker, Ogwumike, and Lavender
Conn - Jones the stand out from last year and Ogwumike is back this year.
Phoenix - Brittany and company

In my mind if you have one of the 6'7 post on the floor with Aja, it will be a lot to guard for many teams. I am no expert on all the roster's so I know I am missing a few post, but noting the most notables for them. If it were Kalani the Hi low game could be a game changer for them due to her passing abilities and able to hit the jumper. If you pull Kalani out that would pull someone like Griner out and give Aja room to work!

 

[Shades]

A lot of this will depend on how these players do this season. It’s all speculation until then. I tend to lean towards Las Vegas taking Lou #1 give the fact they have Moriah & A’Ja. They need a shooter & long wing. Why take another 5 in back to back seasons? Didn’t make sense. I think Pheesa would be the next best “fit” for them. Not saying she’s a better pro prospect than Brown or McCowan but she would be better to put next to A’Ja than the other 2.

Yep, it’s all educated speculation this early. We’re also speculating the order of the teams. For the mock draft I supplied, I was at the mercy of their order of picks. We don’t know for sure that Las Vegas will have the #1 pick.

The best rule of drafting is choosing talent over fit. So if you have a clear #1 (like Wilson was this year), you should take her despite team needs. It just so happened Las Vegas needs just about everything but they’re better set at guard. To me, McCowan is my clear #1 at this point. She’s tall, she’s strong and fit, and her potential is through the roof. I liked her for the same reasons in last year’s draft discussions and she only has further validated my liking her. So even if Vegas gets the #1 pick, I’d have them taking McCowan even though center won’t be their biggest need (unless Bone is awful this year). It doesn’t hurt that Laimbeer likes his players big and strong.

 

[Huskee11]

Lots of great analysis in this thread about the respective abilities of the players, the importance of size, team needs, etc.

I would agree with many that McCowan is the likely number one at this point.

But I could easily see Lou at two. And, if I`m in the front office of the Sparks or the Sun and its my job to sell tickets, I am begging the powers that be to move up to get Lou at two.

 

[UConnCat]

When I think of Napheesa as a professional I think of Delisha Milton-Jones (without the D-nasty). DMJ is also 6-1 but was able to play bigger because of her long arms. I think the same is true for Napheesa. DMJ benefitted greatly from playing alongside All-Star and Olympian Lisa Leslie so big parts of Napheesa's success will be which team takes her and her teammates. DMJ eventually developed a decent 3-point shot and I think Napheesa is ahead of her in that regard.

 

[Orangutan]

You must not have seen Napheesa her sophomore year. She played out of position a lot this season. Many times standing out on the perimeter while Azura was in. Wasn't a coincidence she did much of her damage in the 1st and 3rd quarters. Her stats were better and she had to share a lot more than Shepard.

She had better get used to standing out on the perimeter because that's where a 6'1 player is going to be stationed in the WNBA.

I don't see how she "had to share a lot more" than Shepard. Their usage percentages are actually pretty close (24.1 for Shepard to 23.5 for Collier) and Collier shot a little more frequently than Shepard.

 

[bballnut90]

You must not have seen Napheesa her sophomore year. She played out of position a lot this season. Many times standing out on the perimeter while Azura was in. Wasn't a coincidence she did much of her damage in the 1st and 3rd quarters. Her stats were better and she had to share a lot more than Shepard. Look at her numbers against ND in 2 games this year.

Pheesa... 39pts, 14rebs, 5ast, 2to, 16-30FG, 2-3 3pt, 5-5FT, 3blks, 2stls
Shepard...25pts, 19rebs, 7ast, 5to, 12-27FG, 0-0 3pt, 1-3FT, 1blk, 1stl

This comparison isn't close. Shepard may be bigger but Napheesa's defensive presence seems to stand out a lot more than Shepard's. Btw. UConn had the #2 strength of schedule in the country.

Where do you project Collier as a pro—a 3 or a 4? I watched plenty of her as a sophomore and was quite impressed. I thought the consistency wasn’t there this year and the addition of Stevens impacted her play. Curious to see if she returns to form this upcoming season. I see her more as an undersized 4. DMJ is a good comparison, although Collier is probably better offensively than Delisha and not the same caliber player defensively.

I’m not going to crunch and analyze more stats, but I’ll just reiterate that I think Shepard has a more unique skill set and if she continues to progress like she did this past season, she could be a top 4-5 draft pick.

 

[wallman]

I am still on the fence about both McCowan more athletic than Brown and seems to have the potential to cover further away from the basket and Brown who is way to slow to cover any big in the W but can finish better at the rim. Both or one could be lottery but I will wait to watch this coming season. The only for sure lottery at this moment for me is KLS, the other 3 could be from a short number of players which will be decided upon over the year and what a team needs come draft time.

 

[CamrnCrz1974]

But I could easily see Lou at two. And, if I`m in the front office of the Sparks or the Sun and its my job to sell tickets, I am begging the powers that be to move up to get Lou at two.

With all due respect to her tremendous collegiate accomplishments, I think it is a fair question to ask if Katie Lou Samuelson is the second best player prospect for the 2019 WNBA Draft.

At #2, you take the best player available, irrespective of position (see Bouie, Sam and Jordan, Michael). You want someone who has All Star/all-league potential.

As far as correlating fan ticket sales, there is not a lot of empirical evidence that shows that having a player from a certain area moves the needle significantly. Now, when Phoenix drafted Diana Taurasi (remember, a city to which she had zero ties), ticket sales went up because she was/is a star and regarded as a "once in a generation" type of player. But outside of those examples, the only situation that I can recall moving the needle was Shoni Schimmel, whose presence brought Native American fans to her games, whether at home or on the road.

UConn had Kelly Faris on its roster for a number of years. That did not move the needle in terms of attendance. That brings up another question -- what if Samuelson (like Faris) does not (did not) play? Would people still flock to games if the player is not going to start or see significant action off the bench.

Katie Lou is an incredible shooter and has great height. But for the professional game, she has average lateral quickness/speed. Also, as a small forward/bigger guard/wing, she could be defending players like Elena Delle Donne (who was at the three on offense and defense last year in Washington), Maya Moore, Diana Taurasi (who played anywhere from 1-3 last year in Phoenix), Monique Currie (an example of a player who is ridiculously physically strong), Alyssa Thomas (who was the default small forward for years until Chiney Ogwumike was injured and she moved to a better spot as a playmaking four; with Chiney back, will A.Thomas move back to the three?), etc. Athletically, she does not have the natural gifts as someone such as Gabby Williams (to use an example from UConn), where such gifts lead to greater pro potential.

On offense, KLS is not as adept off the dribble and creating in the one-on-one setting (without a pick) as Asia Durr or Arike Ogunbowale (using players in 2019), for example. She needs more screens to create separation, but once she does, her release is incredibly quick.

Now, if a team is going to put KLS at the two, she will have the same issue defensively in terms of quickness (though some recovery will take place because of the height advantage). But that means having a versatile wing player who can rotate between the 2 and the 3 defensively, which would allow KLS to move between the two positions on offense and defense, depending upon matchups.

Samuelson is a very, very good player (and an elite player at the college level), but for a #2 pick, much more will be expected. I see her being drafted in the #4-#8 range (we see how players can fall, as Azura Stevens fell to #6, even though I had her at #2, in terms of prospect potential). I just do not believe her ceiling is as high as other players in the 2019 WNBA Draft, in terms of professional potential and growth. As an example, it is much easier to fix a shot (e.g., Jasmine Thomas did it last year; curious to see how Gabby Williams performs in terms of extending her range and being a consistent threat from outside) than it is to all of a sudden become quicker and more athletic.

But if I am drafting between #4 and #8 and I have a chance to draft KLS, I am seriously considering doing so.

 

[wallman]

Well you said Stevens would be NPOY this year Cam It does not make sense that you would promote Stevens at 2 in the draft when she clearly did not show any defensive prowess for man to man and yet you try to put down KLS. From watching and then hearing KLS played with the injuries she did this year and still played at both ends, it comes off as a little strange.

You then bring up Durr and Ogunbowale, both of which show no defensive prowess and show a much lower IQ and aversion to getting the ball to their teammates.

And are you saying it is much more difficult for white girls to become more athletic?

 

[CamrnCrz1974]

I think what Shades is trying to get across is with Griner's "tools", she should be better than all those players. You shouldn't be comparing Griner to what Parker/Moore/Fowles has done. You "should" be comparing them to her.

So you kind of support Shades argument, she is not living up to her potential.

I disagree with the point about tools. Griner is very athletic for 6-9, but she is not as athletic as Tamika Catchings or Maya Moore (or even Gabby Williams). Yes, she has physical tools in terms of her height and wingspan, but she does not have a strong base in terms of her legs/leg strength (in contrast to someone like A'ja Wilson, whose base is incredibly strong).

Also, in terms of tools, Parker's feel for the game and court vision are things that cannot be taught. She is literally a 6-4/6-5 playmaker. That is why a player like Ben Simmons (to use the NBA example) is so gifted, because of what he can do at his height.

Griner does not have the natural tools/gifts of Parker or Moore.

At NO POINT did I support Shades' argument. Shades explicitly stated that Griner should have 5 MVP awards and 4 WNBA titles. No one had that in five years in the league. No one has five MVPs now, for a career. Shades also brought up teammates, but ignored (initially) the fact that three of the four teammates he mentioned sat out last year.

What Griner has done from a collegiate freshman to now is remarkable. Obviously, @easttexastrash saw Griner more times than I did in college, but throughout her career, she greatly expanded her shooting range (which she has continued in the W). She can defend much better without fouling (and can play with foul trouble while being effective). In just five WNBA seasons, she has accomplished the following:

• 4× WNBA All-Star (2013–2015, 2017)
• WNBA scoring champion (2017)
• 5× WNBA blocks leader (2013–2017)
• WNBA Peak Performer (2017)
• All-WNBA First Team (2014)
• 2× All-WNBA Second Team (2015, 2017)
• 2× WNBA Defensive Player of the Year Award (2014, 2015)
• 2× WNBA All-Defensive First Team (2014, 2015)
• 2× WNBA All-Defensive Second Team (2016, 2017)

In just five years, Griner ranks 8th all-time in the history of the league in total blocks and #1 in blocks per game. And in her fifth year, despite being injured for a good portion of he season, she still lead the league in scoring (offense) and blocks (defense).

Yet, for Shades, the aforementioned accomplishments are not nearly enough, notwithstanding that, collective, the first five years of Griner's career have more overall individual accolades than Diana Taurasi and Candace Parker and are close to those of Maya Moore. There is no empirical evidence or data that Griner possesses such a vastly greater amount of physical tools than Taurasi, Parker, Moore, etc. that should warrant such discrepancies in treatment or holding Griner to such an impossibly high standard (while also recognizing that basketball is a team game and while one player can make a difference, one player alone cannot win you a WNBA title). But if Shades wants do that, we can certainly look at LeBron James and his first five years...

 

[CamrnCrz1974]

Well you said Stevens would be NPOY this year Cam It does not make sense that you would promote Stevens at 2 in the draft when she clearly did not show any defensive prowess for man to man and yet you try to put down KLS. From watching and then hearing KLS played with the injuries she did this year and still played at both ends, it comes off as a little strange.

Actually, I said Stevens had the potential to be the best player on UConn (and for stretches, she was). As an aside, Stevens did show good defensive acumen on the help side, but had trouble with certain players one-on-one (A'Ja Wilson for example).

The professional game is all about potential. Stevens' ceiling is much, much higher -- in terms of ability to get better -- than any other player in the draft not named Diamond DeShields.

Furthermore, I am analyzing this from the professional game perspective (full disclosure -- I consulted with the Phoenix Mercury on drafts, including 2004 and 2005, watched film with the Mercury GM, and was in the draft war room), not a collegiate one (which your post does).

You then bring up Durr and Ogunbowale, both of which show no defensive prowess and show a much lower IQ and aversion to getting the ball to their teammates.

As I explained, it is much easier to teach certain things (e.g., becoming a better shooter, becoming a better on-ball or off-ball defender) than it is to improve vertical leap, athleticism, speed, etc. The latter represent natural tools/gifts.

And are you saying it is much more difficult for white girls to become more athletic?

Where did I say that...or anything close to it? Please point to my post and any comment that I made about race. It is offensive that you would even post such a suggestion, much less accuse me of doing so (notably absent from your post is any comment from me about race or anything else about any white player other than KLS). Truly offensive, which is why I am bringing in @HuskyNan and the moderators into this.

 

[wallman]

If you find it offensive then you made an offensive comment that KLS is not athletic which is not true so that was my only summation was that she is white. Plus you say that the traits can be learned but you have a player in KLS who is 6' 3" with the skills already that you say can be learned. Interesting that you don't point out how will players in the W guard a player her size with those skills. And most GMs would not pass on a player with the training she has had and those skills.

When Stevens was in the game Uconn had to resort to Zone and I never saw her show ability to react to the offense when there was a switch necessary as she always got caught and that seemed to be what frustrated Geno the most. But again you talk about potential and athleticism and yet KLS has shown a lot of growth at Uconn which in turn shows that she has that potential you want to talk about.

 

[CamrnCrz1974]

If you find it offensive then you made an offensive comment that KLS is not athletic which is not true so that was my only summation was that she is white.

Just to be clear...

You made a conclusion based on nothing I said in my post, but did so sua sponte. When I took issue with your unwarranted conclusion, stating it was, in fact, unwarranted and also offensive, that means, per your post above, that I made an offensive comment in comparing KLS' athleticism and natural gifts/tools to those of other players - which is what basketball analysis is - even though you brought up race, you made the initial unwarranted conclusion, and you took it to a place outside of basketball skillset.

Got it.

 

[wallman]

I made an easy conclusion on your remarks. I also think I was correct in making that conclusion. The analysis was not based on "athletic" ability as you are insulting a player who has shown that she is capable of leaping and running just like athletes of all colors can.

 

[UConnCat]

I am still on the fence about both McCowan more athletic than Brown and seems to have the potential to cover further away from the basket and Brown who is way to slow to cover any big in the W but can finish better at the rim. Both or one could be lottery but I will wait to watch this coming season. The only for sure lottery at this moment for me is KLS, the other 3 could be from a short number of players which will be decided upon over the year and what a team needs come draft time.

I agree. Lou will be top 3. You rarely find a combination of that size with her shooting range, skills, toughness and IQ. She had a tremendous season playing with shredded ligaments in her ankle. She'll only get stronger and better.

 

[wallman]

I agree. Lou will be top 3. You rarely find a combination of that size with her shooting range, skills and IQ. She had a tremendous season playing with shredded ligaments in her ankle. She'll only get stronger and better.

I agree Cat.

 

[CamrnCrz1974]

I made an easy conclusion on your remarks.

You made a conclusion based on things I never said, issues I never raised, and on discussion points that were clearly outside of basketball skillset and professional potential which I made. That is not an "easy" conclusion; that is an "unwarranted" one.

I also think I was correct in making that conclusion.

As the expression goes, "Good thing you do not get paid for thinking."

 

[wallman]

Actually I do get paid for thinking so sorry to disappoint you and I won't apologize for making money. And again I disagree with what you said on all accounts. Just as I disagreed on your accounts of Stevens.

 

[hugefan]

Well sounds like someone didn’t watch our team much this year or maybe has some other issues. There are some great replays showing KLS finishing fingertips at the rim and beating a lot of athletes down the court, how’d she do that I wonder.

 

[Orangutan]

 

[wallman]

Yep, Turner's size says "4" but her skill set says "5". She's not going to get taller, so it's either learn the skills of a 4 or try to make it as undersized 5. Her career prospects are much better if she can manage the former.

Turner IMO definitely had the better potential pre injury. Lets hope that she will come back as strong if not better than she was.

 

[DallasBUFan]

Well good thing we still have an entire season to see how all this plays out...

 

[Orangutan]

Also, as a small forward/bigger guard/wing, she could be defending players like Elena Delle Donne (who was at the three on offense and defense last year in Washington)

Elena isn't especially quick herself. And she's a good example with respect to KLS because as you note she plays the 3 and she's not a great individual defender. KLS can't guard Maya? Ok, who can? You're not drafting KLS for a defensive stopper. I rarely watch games specifically with defense in my mind but my instinct is that KLS is a better individual defender than EDD.

Lou might go after McCowan and Durr but I don't see many others that would go in front of her.

 

[wallman]

Well good thing we still have an entire season to see how all this plays out...

Yes a full year and WNBA season to see how things turn out. I must admit that I am excited for this coming WNBA season.

 

[DallasBUFan]

Yes a full year and WNBA season to see how things turn out. I must admit that I am excited for this coming WNBA season.

I am too!! Will LA be the team to beat or will Minn, Conn, or even Phoenix take that spot?
LA is my team, I tend to root for more. As one of my fave players are on that team.

The Wings should be really interesting too, with the addition of Cambridge and the rookies they got in the draft. I think they may surprise a couple people. However, not that much of a fan of Fred.