| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Ex-Ref
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 8949
Back to top |
 Posted: 04/07/24 1:54 pm ::: Generational Players |
Reply  |
|
Just wondering...how many can there be, you know, in like, one generation???
They just said that Dawn called Fulwiley a generational player.
And Clark.
And Bueckers.
And Juju.
And Angel.
And Hannah.
And that's just this year's players!!!!
_________________
"Women are judged on their success, men on their potential. It’s time we started believing in the potential of women." —Muffet McGraw
“Thank you for showing the fellas that you've got more balls than them,” Haley said, to cheers from the crowd.
|
|
jmh1982
Joined: 25 Dec 2012
Posts: 84
Location: Tucson, AZ
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/24 6:28 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Not all great players are "generational players". Of that List I would probably say Caitlin and Paige are the only two. Hannah and Juju could be there by the end of their college careers, but need to gain a good amount of efficiency to be on the level of Paige and CC.
Milaysia certainly has some generational ballhandling skills, but will have to round out her game a bit to get to that level.
|
|
Conway Gamecock
Joined: 23 Jan 2015
Posts: 1900
Location: Here
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/24 7:36 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| jmh1982 wrote: |
Not all great players are "generational players". Of that List I would probably say Caitlin and Paige are the only two. Hannah and Juju could be there by the end of their college careers, but need to gain a good amount of efficiency to be on the level of Paige and CC.
Milaysia certainly has some generational ballhandling skills, but will have to round out her game a bit to get to that level. |
Based on the thought processes being offered here, why would Paige Bueckers be considered a generational player? What has she accomplished for Connecticut, during the current generation of Connecticut women's basketball, that hasn't been accomplished before her time?
At least with Clark, she has accomplished scoring more points in a career than any other WCBB player has accomplished.
For that matter, Juju and Hannah fall in the same argument. Fulwiley too, although at least she has accomplished a major career achievement during her time in college that none of the others have done, or done yet.
But going back to Bueckers: besides the team achievements, does she own any career records for Connecticut as a WBB player?
People scoffed at the notion that Aliyah Boston for South Carolina was a generational player - although I don't recall that Dawn Staley ever called Boston that: members of the Gamecock fanbase did call her that however. But unlike Bueckers, Boston DOES own a championship ring....
Last edited by Conway Gamecock on 04/07/24 7:39 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66927
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/24 7:39 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| A generation of college players is only four years
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7848
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/24 7:40 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Clark is. Fulwiley might get to be by her senior year too.Not sure about the others. Yet.
_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
|
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7848
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/24 7:41 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Duplicate post.
_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
|
|
jmh1982
Joined: 25 Dec 2012
Posts: 84
Location: Tucson, AZ
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/24 8:30 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Conway Gamecock wrote: |
| jmh1982 wrote: |
Not all great players are "generational players". Of that List I would probably say Caitlin and Paige are the only two. Hannah and Juju could be there by the end of their college careers, but need to gain a good amount of efficiency to be on the level of Paige and CC.
Milaysia certainly has some generational ballhandling skills, but will have to round out her game a bit to get to that level. |
Based on the thought processes being offered here, why would Paige Bueckers be considered a generational player? What has she accomplished for Connecticut, during the current generation of Connecticut women's basketball, that hasn't been accomplished before her time?
At least with Clark, she has accomplished scoring more points in a career than any other WCBB player has accomplished.
For that matter, Juju and Hannah fall in the same argument. Fulwiley too, although at least she has accomplished a major career achievement during her time in college that none of the others have done, or done yet.
But going back to Bueckers: besides the team achievements, does she own any career records for Connecticut as a WBB player?
People scoffed at the notion that Aliyah Boston for South Carolina was a generational player - although I don't recall that Dawn Staley ever called Boston that: members of the Gamecock fanbase did call her that however. But unlike Bueckers, Boston DOES own a championship ring.... |
We appear to be talking about two different things here. I am talking about talent, not accomplishments. Paige has spent a lot of time out due to injuries so not shocking that her accomplishments aren't great, but her on court talent is generational IMO. A lot goes into winning beyond talent and the same with putting up record breaking numbers. Both of those things require being healthy..
|
|
Conway Gamecock
Joined: 23 Jan 2015
Posts: 1900
Location: Here
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/24 8:40 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| jmh1982 wrote: |
| Conway Gamecock wrote: |
| jmh1982 wrote: |
Not all great players are "generational players". Of that List I would probably say Caitlin and Paige are the only two. Hannah and Juju could be there by the end of their college careers, but need to gain a good amount of efficiency to be on the level of Paige and CC.
Milaysia certainly has some generational ballhandling skills, but will have to round out her game a bit to get to that level. |
Based on the thought processes being offered here, why would Paige Bueckers be considered a generational player? What has she accomplished for Connecticut, during the current generation of Connecticut women's basketball, that hasn't been accomplished before her time?
At least with Clark, she has accomplished scoring more points in a career than any other WCBB player has accomplished.
For that matter, Juju and Hannah fall in the same argument. Fulwiley too, although at least she has accomplished a major career achievement during her time in college that none of the others have done, or done yet.
But going back to Bueckers: besides the team achievements, does she own any career records for Connecticut as a WBB player?
People scoffed at the notion that Aliyah Boston for South Carolina was a generational player - although I don't recall that Dawn Staley ever called Boston that: members of the Gamecock fanbase did call her that however. But unlike Bueckers, Boston DOES own a championship ring.... |
We appear to be talking about two different things here. I am talking about talent, not accomplishments. Paige has spent a lot of time out due to injuries so not shocking that her accomplishments aren't great, but her on court talent is generational IMO. A lot goes into winning beyond talent and the same with putting up record breaking numbers. Both of those things require being healthy.. |
So your argument for including Bueckers as a generational player is due to some talent that she has, that the others do not have?
And that this talent has not yet been fully realized due to an injury-filled career, but if those injuries had not happened, that surely that talent would have shone completely?
So therefore, your definition of a generational player, concerning Bueckers at least, is due to POTENTIAL of what she could do if she had been healthier than she has? Is that enough to rate being a generational player in your mind? Sheer potential of talent, and above actual production and achievements at the highest level?
So then, what "potential" have Fulwiley, Hildago, Watkins, et al NOT shown thus far in your mind, that excludes them from this club of elitism? These players are talent-less I guess?
Bueckers has played in three (3) NCAA tournaments. This season is supposed to be her healthiest since her freshman season, but she played in over 39 minutes as a sophomore in the national championship game versus South Carolina - more than anyone else on her team for that game. Was she injured then?
|
|
jmh1982
Joined: 25 Dec 2012
Posts: 84
Location: Tucson, AZ
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/24 9:18 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Conway Gamecock wrote: |
| jmh1982 wrote: |
| Conway Gamecock wrote: |
| jmh1982 wrote: |
Not all great players are "generational players". Of that List I would probably say Caitlin and Paige are the only two. Hannah and Juju could be there by the end of their college careers, but need to gain a good amount of efficiency to be on the level of Paige and CC.
Milaysia certainly has some generational ballhandling skills, but will have to round out her game a bit to get to that level. |
Based on the thought processes being offered here, why would Paige Bueckers be considered a generational player? What has she accomplished for Connecticut, during the current generation of Connecticut women's basketball, that hasn't been accomplished before her time?
At least with Clark, she has accomplished scoring more points in a career than any other WCBB player has accomplished.
For that matter, Juju and Hannah fall in the same argument. Fulwiley too, although at least she has accomplished a major career achievement during her time in college that none of the others have done, or done yet.
But going back to Bueckers: besides the team achievements, does she own any career records for Connecticut as a WBB player?
People scoffed at the notion that Aliyah Boston for South Carolina was a generational player - although I don't recall that Dawn Staley ever called Boston that: members of the Gamecock fanbase did call her that however. But unlike Bueckers, Boston DOES own a championship ring.... |
We appear to be talking about two different things here. I am talking about talent, not accomplishments. Paige has spent a lot of time out due to injuries so not shocking that her accomplishments aren't great, but her on court talent is generational IMO. A lot goes into winning beyond talent and the same with putting up record breaking numbers. Both of those things require being healthy.. |
So your argument for including Bueckers as a generational player is due to some talent that she has, that the others do not have?
And that this talent has not yet been fully realized due to an injury-filled career, but if those injuries had not happened, that surely that talent would have shone completely?
So therefore, your definition of a generational player, concerning Bueckers at least, is due to POTENTIAL of what she could do if she had been healthier than she has? Is that enough to rate being a generational player in your mind? Sheer potential of talent, and above actual production and achievements at the highest level?
So then, what "potential" have Fulwiley, Hildago, Watkins, et al NOT shown thus far in your mind, that excludes them from this club of elitism? These players are talent-less I guess?
Bueckers has played in three (3) NCAA tournaments. This season is supposed to be her healthiest since her freshman season, but she played in over 39 minutes as a sophomore in the national championship game versus South Carolina - more than anyone else on her team for that game. Was she injured then? |
Huh? She was displaying that talent on the court this season. Were you not paying attention? Sure her team got stopped in the final 4, but they were dealing with injuries to half their rotation. She displayed that talent as a freshman as well, but as you might expect from a freshman she failed to carry her team all the way to a championship. Her sophomore year she was out for 2.5 months and came back right before the tournament and was working her way back into form at that point. Not crazy that she didn't have her best stuff in that tournament. Then of course missed her entire junior season. This was her first season actually being healthy since she was a freshman.
|
|
Ex-Ref
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 8949
Back to top |
|
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15741
Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/24 9:50 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Definition of "Generational Player" is gonna be subjective. I remember, after their game in Paris, Dawn said Fulwiley IS a "Generational Player". Despite her verb tense, I took it to mean that she'll get there by the end of her career (however long that may be).
That said, I think one can create a list of which "Generational Players" they perceive, and that provides a context to what Dawn said.
For me, it's women* like:
[*working from now, back through time, and NOT a complete list]
Clark, Bueckers, Fulwiley, Hidalgo, Ionescu, A. Wilson, Griner, Moore, Stewart, C. Paris, Plum, Taurasi, Stiles, etc., etc.
Yeah, Hannah, Paige, and Milaysia, haven't quite nailed that title down yet. Clark has. If she doesn't play one more minute, her records alone establish that, as well as her PR impact on the game.
Many of these have done it more quickly than others, some take an entire career to see that. VERY subjective, but Dawn's seen a lot....and she's seen a LOT more of Milaysia than any of us has, so I'm happy to take her word on that. 
_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
|
|
boogiezen
Joined: 29 Nov 2004
Posts: 977
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/24 9:55 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Generational players are those players that elevate the game.
For active players:
Pros:
Taurasi
Parker
Griner
EDD
College:
Clark
_________________
Queen Yuna!
"Kim Yu-Na. A living, breathing work of art from Korea" - Cam Cole, Vancouver Sun
|
|
readyAIMfire53
Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 7373
Location: Durham, NC
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/07/24 9:56 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| jmh1982 wrote: |
| Conway Gamecock wrote: |
| jmh1982 wrote: |
| Conway Gamecock wrote: |
| jmh1982 wrote: |
Not all great players are "generational players". Of that List I would probably say Caitlin and Paige are the only two. Hannah and Juju could be there by the end of their college careers, but need to gain a good amount of efficiency to be on the level of Paige and CC.
Milaysia certainly has some generational ballhandling skills, but will have to round out her game a bit to get to that level. |
Based on the thought processes being offered here, why would Paige Bueckers be considered a generational player? What has she accomplished for Connecticut, during the current generation of Connecticut women's basketball, that hasn't been accomplished before her time?
At least with Clark, she has accomplished scoring more points in a career than any other WCBB player has accomplished.
For that matter, Juju and Hannah fall in the same argument. Fulwiley too, although at least she has accomplished a major career achievement during her time in college that none of the others have done, or done yet.
But going back to Bueckers: besides the team achievements, does she own any career records for Connecticut as a WBB player?
People scoffed at the notion that Aliyah Boston for South Carolina was a generational player - although I don't recall that Dawn Staley ever called Boston that: members of the Gamecock fanbase did call her that however. But unlike Bueckers, Boston DOES own a championship ring.... |
We appear to be talking about two different things here. I am talking about talent, not accomplishments. Paige has spent a lot of time out due to injuries so not shocking that her accomplishments aren't great, but her on court talent is generational IMO. A lot goes into winning beyond talent and the same with putting up record breaking numbers. Both of those things require being healthy.. |
So your argument for including Bueckers as a generational player is due to some talent that she has, that the others do not have?
And that this talent has not yet been fully realized due to an injury-filled career, but if those injuries had not happened, that surely that talent would have shone completely?
So therefore, your definition of a generational player, concerning Bueckers at least, is due to POTENTIAL of what she could do if she had been healthier than she has? Is that enough to rate being a generational player in your mind? Sheer potential of talent, and above actual production and achievements at the highest level?
So then, what "potential" have Fulwiley, Hildago, Watkins, et al NOT shown thus far in your mind, that excludes them from this club of elitism? These players are talent-less I guess?
Bueckers has played in three (3) NCAA tournaments. This season is supposed to be her healthiest since her freshman season, but she played in over 39 minutes as a sophomore in the national championship game versus South Carolina - more than anyone else on her team for that game. Was she injured then? |
Huh? She was displaying that talent on the court this season. Were you not paying attention? Sure her team got stopped in the final 4, but they were dealing with injuries to half their rotation. She displayed that talent as a freshman as well, but as you might expect from a freshman she failed to carry her team all the way to a championship. Her sophomore year she was out for 2.5 months and came back right before the tournament and was working her way back into form at that point. Not crazy that she didn't have her best stuff in that tournament. Then of course missed her entire junior season. This was her first season actually being healthy since she was a freshman. |
Injures are always part of a player's legacy, like it or not. We've only seen a fraction of what Azzi fudd can do, like Gemelos before her. Based on pure talent, you can say a player has generational talent, but until they've achieved success on the court (or record books), she's not a "generational player."
Caitlin is the only clear generational player. Several have the potential - certainly the two who made 1st team - Juju and Hannah - have to be included in that. Milaysia is an interesting case. She definitely has some superpower ball handling skills plus immediate energy when she comes in the game. It is awesome that Dawn insisted that she learn how to defend to earn minutes on the floor and that Milaysia was able to humble herself to become a key contributor to this NC team. Bueckers does have the distinction of being the first frosh to win NPOY.
Angel is not a generational talent, unless you consider all the other double double machines of past generations like Courtney Paris so, yeah, she's this generation's double double queen. Angel is certainly the #1 NIL winner for wcbb. future women can decide if they want to create drama as a way of upping their NIL income or focus more on improving their game. Angel is not going to be an immediate star in the WNBA due to limitations in her game, which some focused attention could have greatly improved (hello shooting gun).
_________________
Follow your passion and your life will be true down to your core.
~rAf
|
|
snlMINAJ
Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 1218
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/08/24 10:32 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| who has won NPOY as freshman?
|
|
jmh1982
Joined: 25 Dec 2012
Posts: 84
Location: Tucson, AZ
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/08/24 6:39 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| snlMINAJ wrote: |
| who has won NPOY as freshman? |
I only know of one and she then missed most of her next two season with injuries.
|
|
jmh1982
Joined: 25 Dec 2012
Posts: 84
Location: Tucson, AZ
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/08/24 6:43 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| readyAIMfire53 wrote: |
| jmh1982 wrote: |
| Conway Gamecock wrote: |
| jmh1982 wrote: |
| Conway Gamecock wrote: |
| jmh1982 wrote: |
Not all great players are "generational players". Of that List I would probably say Caitlin and Paige are the only two. Hannah and Juju could be there by the end of their college careers, but need to gain a good amount of efficiency to be on the level of Paige and CC.
Milaysia certainly has some generational ballhandling skills, but will have to round out her game a bit to get to that level. |
Based on the thought processes being offered here, why would Paige Bueckers be considered a generational player? What has she accomplished for Connecticut, during the current generation of Connecticut women's basketball, that hasn't been accomplished before her time?
At least with Clark, she has accomplished scoring more points in a career than any other WCBB player has accomplished.
For that matter, Juju and Hannah fall in the same argument. Fulwiley too, although at least she has accomplished a major career achievement during her time in college that none of the others have done, or done yet.
But going back to Bueckers: besides the team achievements, does she own any career records for Connecticut as a WBB player?
People scoffed at the notion that Aliyah Boston for South Carolina was a generational player - although I don't recall that Dawn Staley ever called Boston that: members of the Gamecock fanbase did call her that however. But unlike Bueckers, Boston DOES own a championship ring.... |
We appear to be talking about two different things here. I am talking about talent, not accomplishments. Paige has spent a lot of time out due to injuries so not shocking that her accomplishments aren't great, but her on court talent is generational IMO. A lot goes into winning beyond talent and the same with putting up record breaking numbers. Both of those things require being healthy.. |
So your argument for including Bueckers as a generational player is due to some talent that she has, that the others do not have?
And that this talent has not yet been fully realized due to an injury-filled career, but if those injuries had not happened, that surely that talent would have shone completely?
So therefore, your definition of a generational player, concerning Bueckers at least, is due to POTENTIAL of what she could do if she had been healthier than she has? Is that enough to rate being a generational player in your mind? Sheer potential of talent, and above actual production and achievements at the highest level?
So then, what "potential" have Fulwiley, Hildago, Watkins, et al NOT shown thus far in your mind, that excludes them from this club of elitism? These players are talent-less I guess?
Bueckers has played in three (3) NCAA tournaments. This season is supposed to be her healthiest since her freshman season, but she played in over 39 minutes as a sophomore in the national championship game versus South Carolina - more than anyone else on her team for that game. Was she injured then? |
Huh? She was displaying that talent on the court this season. Were you not paying attention? Sure her team got stopped in the final 4, but they were dealing with injuries to half their rotation. She displayed that talent as a freshman as well, but as you might expect from a freshman she failed to carry her team all the way to a championship. Her sophomore year she was out for 2.5 months and came back right before the tournament and was working her way back into form at that point. Not crazy that she didn't have her best stuff in that tournament. Then of course missed her entire junior season. This was her first season actually being healthy since she was a freshman. |
Injures are always part of a player's legacy, like it or not. We've only seen a fraction of what Azzi fudd can do, like Gemelos before her. Based on pure talent, you can say a player has generational talent, but until they've achieved success on the court (or record books), she's not a "generational player."
Caitlin is the only clear generational player. Several have the potential - certainly the two who made 1st team - Juju and Hannah - have to be included in that. Milaysia is an interesting case. She definitely has some superpower ball handling skills plus immediate energy when she comes in the game. It is awesome that Dawn insisted that she learn how to defend to earn minutes on the floor and that Milaysia was able to humble herself to become a key contributor to this NC team. Bueckers does have the distinction of being the first frosh to win NPOY.
Angel is not a generational talent, unless you consider all the other double double machines of past generations like Courtney Paris so, yeah, she's this generation's double double queen. Angel is certainly the #1 NIL winner for wcbb. future women can decide if they want to create drama as a way of upping their NIL income or focus more on improving their game. Angel is not going to be an immediate star in the WNBA due to limitations in her game, which some focused attention could have greatly improved (hello shooting gun). |
Only player ever to win NPOY as a freshman and that should have her in the discussion for this label. Of course she then missed most of the next two season with major injuries.
I may also be looking at this in a different view than you are. I am thinking of generational "talent" and their prospects to being great at the next level. I am not so much talking about generational "players" as in the accomplishments they have in college. I think as a WNBA prospect Paige is absolutely generational.
|
|
Ex-Ref
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 8949
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/08/24 7:51 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| jmh1982 wrote: |
| I think as a WNBA prospect Paige is absolutely generational. |
Only if she stays healthy.
_________________
"Women are judged on their success, men on their potential. It’s time we started believing in the potential of women." —Muffet McGraw
“Thank you for showing the fellas that you've got more balls than them,” Haley said, to cheers from the crowd.
|
|
ucbart
Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 2815
Location: New York
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/09/24 2:04 pm ::: Re: Generational Players |
Reply |
|
| Ex-Ref wrote: |
Just wondering...how many can there be, you know, in like, one generation???
They just said that Dawn called Fulwiley a generational player.
And Clark.
And Bueckers.
And Juju.
And Angel.
And Hannah.
And that's just this year's players!!!! |
Dawn is, always has been, and always will be, the ultimate opportunist. Wherever she can make herself the headline, she does, like this for instance. She will say whatever she has to; to make sure the focus is on her, in an effort to help with recruiting and building her image. I take very few things she says as genuine. She, like LeBron, always has an angle.
I mean, think about the # of dumb dumb media talking heads that react as if Dawn is the Dalai Lama giving some amazingly inspirational wisdom, every time she speaks. Dawn is treated like a religion in the WBB world.
Dawn- "Basketball is a great game."
Media- "Dawn Staley is so important. Representation matters.She just always gets it and will do anything to grow our game"
LOLOL
I mean, she was an absolute dick all season about Caitlin, but when she beat her, she kissed her ass. She's fake AF.
|
|
|
|
