| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
eyevolley4
Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Posts: 4638
Back to top |
 Posted: 07/31/07 11:57 pm ::: |
Reply  |
|
I like the comparisons of Tasha Humphrey to Tina Thompson.
Humphrey is the player I am most excited about entering the league (unless Parker goes to the Lynx or Comets).
Humphrey has shown some great stuff everywhere on the court through her first three years of school including defensively. She wouldn't be on the court much for Georgia if she didn't possess defensive abilities. She also showed leadership in owning up to her faults and handling her suspension. While her mother being an assistant coach may have impacted the entire situation, it is what it is, and I like her taking responsibility.
Back to her game, Humphrey is a player to be very excited about. I see her as the absolute prime candidate for the rookie to be drafted by an expansion team to essentially build the team around her a la Candice Dupree.
Humphrey will give whatever team she is drafted by an impact scorer right away. Don't let her size fool you either, this is a player who can move. Since her freshman year, she has looked in great shape, and she has a history of playing full games for a program that loves to push the ball in the open court.
Humphrey will likely need to trim down a tad more to be honest, though her size is what keeps her very imposing on the inside. If she were to become a full time post, I wouldn't mind her muscle, but I think the wing is where she will be able to create some tough mismatches in a way that even Swin Cash and Plennette Pierson can't do.
Humphrey is really about 6'2 (according to my judgement watching her on TV) which aids the TT comparison. I am only hoping that Humphrey is willing to give us the young TT version, the version that had no fear of bumping in the post, for longer than TT would allow us to have her.
Beware the Bulldawgs this upcoming season.
Whittington is my sleeper Cheryl Ford redux. Look at her body next time you see her play. Absolutely cut with great hops, good instincts, long long arms, and a nose for the ball all the while playing with Catchings' intensity.
_________________
Some days are meant to be remembered.
|
|
eyevolley4
Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Posts: 4638
Back to top |
| Posted: 07/31/07 11:59 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| CamrnCrz1974 wrote: |
| The notion Langhorne doesn't get love is ridiculous at best and stupid at worst. |
When WCBB games were on last season, halftime shows almost always included the standard and overdone POY debates. Langhorne was a staple on those lists. If Langhorne needed more love, she'd have to become Mormon.
_________________
Some days are meant to be remembered.
|
|
bballfan2005
Joined: 22 Aug 2005
Posts: 25315
Location: Somewhere here and there
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/01/07 12:37 pm ::: Re: Announcing to the nation-underrated players who deserve |
Reply |
|
| Bigorange123 wrote: |
| I definitely agree with you re: Langhorne- she led the nation among post players in fg% last year, and to be frank was just as clutch if not more so than many of her peers. Crystal Langhorne is incredible. |
"Clutch" means being able to hit big shots (jumpers or FTs) at the end of games to seal the victory for your team. Langhorne didn't do too much of that in 2006-07. Her FG percentage is ridiculous, but she doesn't get enough touches and fails to post impressive scoring numbers. While that's not her fault (coaches and PG should make more of a concerted effort to get a 70% FG shooter the ball), one still can't overlook the lack of numbers.
| Quote: |
| Whittington gets no love either; regardless of how many points she scores, if the whistle hasn't blown her azz is all about hustle, defense and making plays for her team- in that way she reminds me of Catch. |
Oh please! That big mouth on FSN South (Debbie Antonelli) talks up Whittington as if she's the female version of LeBron James. 
Whittington's talent level is always overstated on here because very few people actually get to see her play more than once or twice a season. While it's true that she hustles and comes up with a different way to injure herself on every play, the fact remains that she has little basketball talent (weak handle, no range on jumper, among others) despite being undersized in the post IN COLLEGE! "Hustle" does not equal "skill", folks. She's not underrated. She's just not as talented as Langhorne, Larkins, or Littles (who IS underrated, BTW).
| Quote: |
| I've watched Kim Beck play a lot as well and she's so gutsy and a better point guard than she gets credit for... |
You gotta be kidding!  Kim Beck is a fugging Lieberman Award finalist (not that it means much, but still--it's a NATIONAL HONOR for crying out loud!) despite not being the best PG in her class by a mile. How much more credit does she need?
_________________
Avatar: The King has his ring!
Mathies to LA 2013
|
|
eyevolley4
Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Posts: 4638
Back to top |
|
bballfan2005
Joined: 22 Aug 2005
Posts: 25315
Location: Somewhere here and there
Back to top |
|
PalaceAthena
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 1084
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/01/07 3:41 pm ::: Re: Announcing to the nation-underrated players who deserve |
Reply |
|
| bballfan2005 wrote: |
| eyevolley4 wrote: |
That's debatable. 
So go ahead... debate! |
I'll let the results of 2007-08 (regular season, conference tournaments, March (and April) Madness results, and draft positions) do most of the talking this time around, but I will say this one thing. If Beck played in the SEC or ACC, her name would never be brought up during discussions of top PGs. That's not a slight at the A-10. I've ID-ed players from that league who have and will go on to make a splash in the WNBA. But it's a little different being guarded by the Sabrina Gregorys and Fatima Maddoxes of the world than it is to be checked by the Alexis Hornbuckles, Ashley Keys, the Lindsey Hardings, and the Armintie Prices of the WCBB world. |
But Kimberly Beck has played against Tennessee every year of her career at GW. In Dec. 2006 she registered 7 assists and 1 turnover against the LVs, In Dec. 2005, she had 9 assists and 5 TOs.
Against Georgia in 2006, she had 18 points, 5 assists and 1 turnover. Against Maryland, even though GW got their asses kicked, Beck had 17 points, 5 assists and 4 TOs. And Beck played against Price and Ole Miss as a freshman in th 2005 NCAA tournament. She had 9 points, 4 assists, and 4 TOs and GW beat Ole Miss.
UNC made her look silly in the NCAA tourney this past year, forcing a lot of turnovers, but that's what UNC does, forces turnovers so it won't matter how many they commit.
In any case, I'd say Beck has faced her share of top tier teams and has acquitted herself nicely if not spectacularly.
|
|
bballfan2005
Joined: 22 Aug 2005
Posts: 25315
Location: Somewhere here and there
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/01/07 4:33 pm ::: Re: Announcing to the nation-underrated players who deserve |
Reply |
|
| PalaceAthena wrote: |
But Kimberly Beck has played against Tennessee every year of her career at GW. In Dec. 2006 she registered 7 assists and 1 turnover against the LVs, In Dec. 2005, she had 9 assists and 5 TOs.
Against Georgia in 2006, she had 18 points, 5 assists and 1 turnover. Against Maryland, even though GW got their asses kicked, Beck had 17 points, 5 assists and 4 TOs. And Beck played against Price and Ole Miss as a freshman in th 2005 NCAA tournament. She had 9 points, 4 assists, and 4 TOs and GW beat Ole Miss.
UNC made her look silly in the NCAA tourney this past year, forcing a lot of turnovers, but that's what UNC does, forces turnovers so it won't matter how many they commit.
In any case, I'd say Beck has faced her share of top tier teams and has acquitted herself nicely if not spectacularly. |
No offense PA, but playing AGAINST a few top ACC and SEC teams a year is not close to playing IN the SEC or ACC. Adam Morrison proved this. It's not difficult to "get up" for big-named OOC games. My contention WRT Beck is that the level of athleticism one faces when playing teams in the ACC/SEC is, on average, a LOT higher than that one faces in the A-10. For me, it takes more than one or two games a year against this level of athleticism to favor a mid-major player over one who plays in one of the high-end major conferences. There are notable exceptions, however. For example, Kamesha Hairston faced five ACC teams in 2006-07 alone--and managed to average almost 25 points against those teams. All five teams participated in the postseason; four played in the NCAA tournament (3 Sweet 16 teams). Few people would walk away not impressed by that kind of performance against that level of athleticism.
Having said that, Beck is, IMO, a great point guard. Few will contend with that notion. But she's playing the bulk of her games in a league that is chock full of mediocre athletes. It's no big deal, though. I've become less and less impressed with Candice Wiggins, and she plays for a BCS conference.
_________________
Avatar: The King has his ring!
Mathies to LA 2013
|
|
eyevolley4
Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Posts: 4638
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/01/07 5:00 pm ::: Re: Announcing to the nation-underrated players who deserve |
Reply |
|
| bballfan2005 wrote: |
| PalaceAthena wrote: |
But Kimberly Beck has played against Tennessee every year of her career at GW. In Dec. 2006 she registered 7 assists and 1 turnover against the LVs, In Dec. 2005, she had 9 assists and 5 TOs.
Against Georgia in 2006, she had 18 points, 5 assists and 1 turnover. Against Maryland, even though GW got their asses kicked, Beck had 17 points, 5 assists and 4 TOs. And Beck played against Price and Ole Miss as a freshman in th 2005 NCAA tournament. She had 9 points, 4 assists, and 4 TOs and GW beat Ole Miss.
UNC made her look silly in the NCAA tourney this past year, forcing a lot of turnovers, but that's what UNC does, forces turnovers so it won't matter how many they commit.
In any case, I'd say Beck has faced her share of top tier teams and has acquitted herself nicely if not spectacularly. |
No offense PA, but playing AGAINST a few top ACC and SEC teams a year is not close to playing IN the SEC or ACC. Adam Morrison proved this. It's not difficult to "get up" for big-named OOC games. My contention WRT Beck is that the level of athleticism one faces when playing teams in the ACC/SEC is, on average, a LOT higher than that one faces in the A-10. For me, it takes more than one or two games a year against this level of athleticism to favor a mid-major player over one who plays in one of the high-end major conferences. There are notable exceptions, however. For example, Kamesha Hairston faced five ACC teams in 2006-07 alone--and managed to average almost 25 points against those teams. All five teams participated in the postseason; four played in the NCAA tournament (3 Sweet 16 teams). Few people would walk away not impressed by that kind of performance against that level of athleticism.
Having said that, Beck is, IMO, a great point guard. Few will contend with that notion. But she's playing the bulk of her games in a league that is chock full of mediocre athletes. It's no big deal, though. I've become less and less impressed with Candice Wiggins, and she plays for a BCS conference. |
First, I can't wait until Wiggins gets in the WNBA. Something about her being a more well-rounded and more clearly a shooting guard Sidney Spencer-type her first season sounds right to me.
You may regret bringing up Wiggins, because that is like a dagger to my heart.
Wiggins is a battler who is capable of taking over a game regardless of the pressure put on her by the other team. Does she do it every single game? No. But she does it most, and is lights out from deep - Becky Hammon deep. She is long, has great body control, and is money from the free throw line. She has come up in the clutch for Stanford many times (watch games against ASU) and she defends.
Watching Wiggins makes me excited.
Kim Beck -- I'd like to see more of. Considering the state of PGs in our league, I am fully aware that I have absolutely no prediction skills with regards to PGs coming out of college, so I won't even touch it. I'll just say I like what I have seen.
_________________
Some days are meant to be remembered.
|
|
bballfan2005
Joined: 22 Aug 2005
Posts: 25315
Location: Somewhere here and there
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/01/07 5:11 pm ::: Re: Announcing to the nation-underrated players who deserve |
Reply |
|
| eyevolley4 wrote: |
First, I can't wait until Wiggins gets in the WNBA. Something about her being a more well-rounded and more clearly a shooting guard Sidney Spencer-type her first season sounds right to me.
You may regret bringing up Wiggins, because that is like a dagger to my heart.
Wiggins is a battler who is capable of taking over a game regardless of the pressure put on her by the other team. Does she do it every single game? No. But she does it most, and is lights out from deep - Becky Hammon deep. She is long, has great body control, and is money from the free throw line. She has come up in the clutch for Stanford many times (watch games against ASU) and she defends.
Watching Wiggins makes me excited. |
Meh. When Monica Wright develops a more reliable three-point shot, people will forget all about Candice Wiggins.
_________________
Avatar: The King has his ring!
Mathies to LA 2013
|
|
eyevolley4
Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Posts: 4638
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/01/07 5:24 pm ::: Re: Announcing to the nation-underrated players who deserve |
Reply |
|
| bballfan2005 wrote: |
| eyevolley4 wrote: |
First, I can't wait until Wiggins gets in the WNBA. Something about her being a more well-rounded and more clearly a shooting guard Sidney Spencer-type her first season sounds right to me.
You may regret bringing up Wiggins, because that is like a dagger to my heart.
Wiggins is a battler who is capable of taking over a game regardless of the pressure put on her by the other team. Does she do it every single game? No. But she does it most, and is lights out from deep - Becky Hammon deep. She is long, has great body control, and is money from the free throw line. She has come up in the clutch for Stanford many times (watch games against ASU) and she defends.
Watching Wiggins makes me excited. |
Meh. When Monica Wright develops a more reliable three-point shot, people will forget all about Candice Wiggins. |
Because having multiple talented guards having successful careers in the WNBA is a problem none of us can wrap our minds around.
_________________
Some days are meant to be remembered.
|
|
bballfan2005
Joined: 22 Aug 2005
Posts: 25315
Location: Somewhere here and there
Back to top |
|
PalaceAthena
Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 1084
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/01/07 6:52 pm ::: Re: Announcing to the nation-underrated players who deserve |
Reply |
|
| bballfan2005 wrote: |
No offense PA, but playing AGAINST a few top ACC and SEC teams a year is not close to playing IN the SEC or ACC. Adam Morrison proved this. It's not difficult to "get up" for big-named OOC games. My contention WRT Beck is that the level of athleticism one faces when playing teams in the ACC/SEC is, on average, a LOT higher than that one faces in the A-10. For me, it takes more than one or two games a year against this level of athleticism to favor a mid-major player over one who plays in one of the high-end major conferences. There are notable exceptions, however. For example, Kamesha Hairston faced five ACC teams in 2006-07 alone--and managed to average almost 25 points against those teams. All five teams participated in the postseason; four played in the NCAA tournament (3 Sweet 16 teams). Few people would walk away not impressed by that kind of performance against that level of athleticism.
Having said that, Beck is, IMO, a great point guard. Few will contend with that notion. But she's playing the bulk of her games in a league that is chock full of mediocre athletes. It's no big deal, though. I've become less and less impressed with Candice Wiggins, and she plays for a BCS conference. |
You make some good points, and really none that I can argue with. Except, Beck obviously cannot control which teams she plays. She can only play who's on the schedule. When GW has faced top teams -- and their shedule is usually one of the strongest for a non-BCS school year in and year out -- Beck has acquitted herself well. Does that mean her numbers would be the same if she played in the ACC or SEC? I admit, I don't know. But you can't say for sure that she wouldn't put up similar numbers playing in a tougher conference.
But, of course, the thing is, neither of us will ever know.
|
|
ThreeBall25
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 2792
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/01/07 9:08 pm ::: Re: Announcing to the nation-underrated players who deserve |
Reply |
|
| eyevolley4 wrote: |
| bballfan2005 wrote: |
| PalaceAthena wrote: |
But Kimberly Beck has played against Tennessee every year of her career at GW. In Dec. 2006 she registered 7 assists and 1 turnover against the LVs, In Dec. 2005, she had 9 assists and 5 TOs.
Against Georgia in 2006, she had 18 points, 5 assists and 1 turnover. Against Maryland, even though GW got their asses kicked, Beck had 17 points, 5 assists and 4 TOs. And Beck played against Price and Ole Miss as a freshman in th 2005 NCAA tournament. She had 9 points, 4 assists, and 4 TOs and GW beat Ole Miss.
UNC made her look silly in the NCAA tourney this past year, forcing a lot of turnovers, but that's what UNC does, forces turnovers so it won't matter how many they commit.
In any case, I'd say Beck has faced her share of top tier teams and has acquitted herself nicely if not spectacularly. |
No offense PA, but playing AGAINST a few top ACC and SEC teams a year is not close to playing IN the SEC or ACC. Adam Morrison proved this. It's not difficult to "get up" for big-named OOC games. My contention WRT Beck is that the level of athleticism one faces when playing teams in the ACC/SEC is, on average, a LOT higher than that one faces in the A-10. For me, it takes more than one or two games a year against this level of athleticism to favor a mid-major player over one who plays in one of the high-end major conferences. There are notable exceptions, however. For example, Kamesha Hairston faced five ACC teams in 2006-07 alone--and managed to average almost 25 points against those teams. All five teams participated in the postseason; four played in the NCAA tournament (3 Sweet 16 teams). Few people would walk away not impressed by that kind of performance against that level of athleticism.
Having said that, Beck is, IMO, a great point guard. Few will contend with that notion. But she's playing the bulk of her games in a league that is chock full of mediocre athletes. It's no big deal, though. I've become less and less impressed with Candice Wiggins, and she plays for a BCS conference. |
First, I can't wait until Wiggins gets in the WNBA. Something about her being a more well-rounded and more clearly a shooting guard Sidney Spencer-type her first season sounds right to me.
You may regret bringing up Wiggins, because that is like a dagger to my heart.
Wiggins is a battler who is capable of taking over a game regardless of the pressure put on her by the other team. Does she do it every single game? No. But she does it most, and is lights out from deep - Becky Hammon deep. She is long, has great body control, and is money from the free throw line. She has come up in the clutch for Stanford many times (watch games against ASU) and she defends.
Watching Wiggins makes me excited.
Kim Beck -- I'd like to see more of. Considering the state of PGs in our league, I am fully aware that I have absolutely no prediction skills with regards to PGs coming out of college, so I won't even touch it. I'll just say I like what I have seen. |
I'm not sold on Wiggins yet. Weren't people talking up Powell's versatility coming into her draft? At best, she's been an above average 3 Point Specialist in the league. I think Tara makes her star players look better than they really are - ala Brooke Smith who didn't even last in the league.
|
|
Bigorange123
Joined: 01 Aug 2005
Posts: 304
Location: DC
Back to top |
|
eyevolley4
Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Posts: 4638
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/01/07 10:44 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
ThreeBall, you have officially hit a nerve.
First and foremost, Powell and Wiggins are in no way comparable players except for their ability to hit the three.
Second, to classify Powell as a glorified three-point specialist has to be one of the most grossly distorted perceptions of a player's role I have heard in a while. You don't even want me to start on a Nicole Powell rant, but it's too late for that. But I'll try to stay on topic, and for those interested in the Powell rant, they can see the bottom of the post.
Third, Tara did not make Brooke look so good, though it didn't hurt. Brooke looked good because she was a great college player. She was crafty enough to eat apart younger posts with a couple moves she had down pat and she was mobile enough to guard most posts. In the WNBA, she was not strong enough or great enough at anything to carve out a role. There may be a spot for her one day given improvements in the area of strength, agility, and balance. That's a lot to work on though.
Finally, because perhaps it isn't clear how Wiggins and Powell are different, I will start by saying Powell is:
--taller (6'2)
--stronger
--a better rebounder
--can legitimately play the 3 (and does)
--dribbles with her head down though she sure can see the court somehow and zing a pass with the best of them
--perhaps one of the top five most capable players in the league of achieving a triple double any given night, though it will never happen on a team like Sacramento - with Phoenix, she'd threaten nightly
Wiggins is:
--shorter (5'11)
--more slender
--a better ball handler
--a straight up shooting guard
--dribbles with her head up but is more prone to trying to make passes that won't work than Powell, though they may work more at the next level
--an absolutely prolific scorer who reads passes well with some quick hands and feet, turning defense into offense in a way Powell never did
Here is how they are similar:
--both had to play point in college though it wasn't their best position
--both square their shoulders incredibly well and have very quick releases which help make them very dangerous from the outside
--great three point shots with quick releases
--have solid passing skills
--played at Stanford and were the cornerstone of the team
Most of the similarities are in a way contrived and take reading into their stories a bit. Their games are not that similar at all. It would be neat to see them play side by side in Sacramento. Welcome to my new fantasy! Well, if they change their offensive scheme that is.
***
Powell averages 13.5 points per game and 6 rebounds. Anyone who averages 6 rebounds should not be labeled a three point specialist. Thinking about Powell's three point shot gives recognition to the skill she likely stands out the most in, but it ignores the fact that because of her strength, she does a good job getting shots off with contact in the mid-range area. She doesn't miss as many chippies as many other players because she really goes at the rim when she's down low, and we need more of that in this league. Her offensive skills are not even being displayed to the degree they could be because of her offensively inept team. Essentially, Nicole Powell is a lesser version of Penny Taylor, and her recent play shows that she may be developing that instinct that allowed her to really control games in college. She is really on the upswing, and will likely just get better. The Monarchs are finally her team, at least on offense, and she is the go-to player. The Monarchs will find more success in close games if they show a true reliance on Powell instead of jerking things around by giving the trigger-happy Lawson the ball. Just because she loves to take the big shot doesn't mean she should be the one doing it. God I could say so much more...
_________________
Some days are meant to be remembered.
|
|
eyevolley4
Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Posts: 4638
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/01/07 11:02 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Bigorange123 wrote: |
| CamrnCrz1974 wrote: |
| The notion Langhorne doesn't get love is ridiculous at best and stupid at worst. |
IMO when you compare the "ink" given to, and the "talk" about Paris, Parker and Fowles vs Langhorne- it's not ridiculous to arrive at that "notion", nor is it stupid. |
I don't know what it is about this thread...
No, Langhorne does not get the love that Paris, Parker, and Fowles get. But in no way does she deserve it! Not getting the same amount of love that the big, and I mean literally, BIG THREE ballers in WCBB does not amount to being underrated.
Look at Paris, Parker, Fowles, and Langhorne separately.
Paris is not only the go-to at Oklahoma, but she literally tells the whole team to hop on her back and ride her to any and every victory possible. Yes, other players in the Oklahoma program step up from time to time, but look at her monstrous numbers. Simplified, 20 and 10 is studly, and that's what she does day in and day out.
Parker can handle, can dunk, can dish, and can defend. She also can lead her team to a National Championship. She was more than just the go-to, much in the way Paris was so much more to her team. She was an emotional leader with so much pressure on her shoulders and a hype machine behind her unrivaled in women's basketball today. She took the pressure and upped her game. The MOP of the Final Four the last two seasons have been Candace Parker and Laura Harper - not Candace Parker and Crystal Langhorne.
Fowles is a player that has dealt with adversity and stepped out bigger and better from it. It was well versed how big of a leader Big Syl was for the LSU squad during the remainder of a tumultuous late season and playoff run. Fowles is an imposing presence that is matched to Lisa Leslie looking to the future. Her body is carved and WNBA ready, and she often gives the appearance of being a BFG*, which can win fans over of any team - even the opponents. Fowles has dealt with adversity Langhorne could never imagine, or if she can imagine it, has never had to deal with it. Fowles was ridden game in and game out, more to the degree of Parker and Paris than Langhorne, and thus, should stand out more.
*BFG=Big Friendly Giant
Now to Miss Langhorne specifically, and there is a lot to cover here as well. Crystal stepped onto the scene as a freshman and helped juggernaut the Maryland program to a title in two years helping finish a mission Brenda Frese and Shay Doron started. Langhorne's efficiency with her touches, ruthlessness in the paint, and speed down low help her to create matchup problems often. She sticks to her bread and butter, and rarely makes a miscue because she has a strong understanding of what she does well. She also rebounds well and can really crash the glass. With being the top player on a recent National Championship team, Langhorne deserves every accolade and promotion she receives.
All of their stories are compelling, and trust me, we all see you Crystal Langhorne. But seriously, when you break it down, the "underdog" story just doesn't compete with Paris's larger than the state of Texas game, Parker's dunking and flare, or Fowles' hard road through an adverse 2005-2006 season.
Let me reiterate, I have more than enough love for Crystal Langhorne, and she is actually my favorite player of the four mentioned in this thread, but asking for more press than these absolute bonafide super stars is asking a bit too much, and not recognizing the difference between these players is being downright silly.
If someone could just grab each players statistics for the season last year, Langhorne would likely be last in every category except FG% and FT% as another measure.
_________________
Some days are meant to be remembered.
|
|
CamrnCrz1974
Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 18371
Location: Phoenix
Back to top |
|
ZuG102
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 3386
Location: Bay Area
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/02/07 2:08 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| eyevolley4 wrote: |
ThreeBall, you have officially hit a nerve.
First and foremost, Powell and Wiggins are in no way comparable players except for their ability to hit the three.
Second, to classify Powell as a glorified three-point specialist has to be one of the most grossly distorted perceptions of a player's role I have heard in a while. You don't even want me to start on a Nicole Powell rant, but it's too late for that. But I'll try to stay on topic, and for those interested in the Powell rant, they can see the bottom of the post.
Third, Tara did not make Brooke look so good, though it didn't hurt. Brooke looked good because she was a great college player. She was crafty enough to eat apart younger posts with a couple moves she had down pat and she was mobile enough to guard most posts. In the WNBA, she was not strong enough or great enough at anything to carve out a role. There may be a spot for her one day given improvements in the area of strength, agility, and balance. That's a lot to work on though.
Finally, because perhaps it isn't clear how Wiggins and Powell are different, I will start by saying Powell is:
--taller (6'2)
--stronger
--a better rebounder
--can legitimately play the 3 (and does)
--dribbles with her head down though she sure can see the court somehow and zing a pass with the best of them
--perhaps one of the top five most capable players in the league of achieving a triple double any given night, though it will never happen on a team like Sacramento - with Phoenix, she'd threaten nightly
Wiggins is:
--shorter (5'11)
--more slender
--a better ball handler
--a straight up shooting guard
--dribbles with her head up but is more prone to trying to make passes that won't work than Powell, though they may work more at the next level
--an absolutely prolific scorer who reads passes well with some quick hands and feet, turning defense into offense in a way Powell never did
Here is how they are similar:
--both had to play point in college though it wasn't their best position
--both square their shoulders incredibly well and have very quick releases which help make them very dangerous from the outside
--great three point shots with quick releases
--have solid passing skills
--played at Stanford and were the cornerstone of the team
Most of the similarities are in a way contrived and take reading into their stories a bit. Their games are not that similar at all. It would be neat to see them play side by side in Sacramento. Welcome to my new fantasy! Well, if they change their offensive scheme that is.
***
Powell averages 13.5 points per game and 6 rebounds. Anyone who averages 6 rebounds should not be labeled a three point specialist. Thinking about Powell's three point shot gives recognition to the skill she likely stands out the most in, but it ignores the fact that because of her strength, she does a good job getting shots off with contact in the mid-range area. She doesn't miss as many chippies as many other players because she really goes at the rim when she's down low, and we need more of that in this league. Her offensive skills are not even being displayed to the degree they could be because of her offensively inept team. Essentially, Nicole Powell is a lesser version of Penny Taylor, and her recent play shows that she may be developing that instinct that allowed her to really control games in college. She is really on the upswing, and will likely just get better. The Monarchs are finally her team, at least on offense, and she is the go-to player. The Monarchs will find more success in close games if they show a true reliance on Powell instead of jerking things around by giving the trigger-happy Lawson the ball. Just because she loves to take the big shot doesn't mean she should be the one doing it. God I could say so much more... |
You bring up some good points.
A reason why a lot of people aren't sold in Wiggins is because many people only actually knew who she was or started paying attention to her during the 2006 Tournament. And then there was last season where she came off summer surgery and then had several different injuries throughout the season. A lot of people didn't get a glimpse of how she really plays. Also having two point guards injured put her in the position where she needed to play point and at the same time score a lot.
Just wait until next season...
|
|
ThreeBall25
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 2792
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/02/07 12:49 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Oh, I paid attention to Wiggins. I watched most of the Pac 10 tourney on FSN, and the girl can ball. I'm just saying most of Tara's players don't really stand out in the W, although Powell is having a nice carrear.
Eyevolley, I agree with you re: Powell, but when announcers are talking about her, they always mention her as a long distance threat. They don't talk about her pull up j, taking someone off the bounce, or her rebounding stats. That is what I was trying to get across.
|
|
bballfan2005
Joined: 22 Aug 2005
Posts: 25315
Location: Somewhere here and there
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/02/07 1:49 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ZuG102 wrote: |
| A reason why a lot of people aren't sold in Wiggins is because many people only actually knew who she was or started paying attention to her during the 2006 Tournament. |
Uh, no. A lot of people have known about Candice Wiggins since she was a senior in high school. These same people have followed her career since then and have noticed that she's not all what the media makes her out to be. People have noticed the frail frame, which makes her susceptible to nagging injuries. People have noticed the lack of ability to handle with the left hand, which makes her predictable. People have noticed Wiggins' frustration when her shots aren't falling, which makes her a poor candidate for PG. Why is it such a crime on this board to see past the hype, especially with regard to a 2008 player?
| Quote: |
| And then there was last season where she came off summer surgery and then had several different injuries throughout the season. A lot of people didn't get a glimpse of how she really plays. Also having two point guards injured put her in the position where she needed to play point and at the same time score a lot. |
Yadda, yadda, yadda. All players experience injury (injuries) at some point in their careers and many teams endure some form of adversity. Unfortunately, it's part of the game. What I don't like, however, is that certain players on here get a free pass for their subpar performances and are given excuse after excuse while others on here have to face the scrutiny of folks who only get to see them play maybe once a year anyway. Basically, Superstar X is allowed a year's worth of relative suck just because we know about her while Lesser star Y geets ripped to shreds because we don't see her all that often. THAT shit's not fair.
_________________
Avatar: The King has his ring!
Mathies to LA 2013
|
|
bballfan2005
Joined: 22 Aug 2005
Posts: 25315
Location: Somewhere here and there
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/02/07 2:01 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| CamrnCrz1974 wrote: |
| If Langhorne were in either Parker's class or Paris' class or Fowles' class, she would have that ink. She isn't. She is a stellar one-on-one player in the post. Let me know when she gets a jumper, a handle, and plays defense. |
Thank you! A post player has to do the following to get the Paris/Parker/Fowles "love":
1. Score 17+ ppg
2. Grab 10+ rpg
3. Dominate or semi-dominate on defense
4. Play for a legit Top 25 team
_________________
Avatar: The King has his ring!
Mathies to LA 2013
|
|
CamrnCrz1974
Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 18371
Location: Phoenix
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/02/07 2:13 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Bball, it should also be noted Fowles, Parker, and Paris are all at least 6-4. Langhorne is 6-1/6-2.
|
|
bballfan2005
Joined: 22 Aug 2005
Posts: 25315
Location: Somewhere here and there
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/02/07 2:15 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| CamrnCrz1974 wrote: |
| Bball, it should also be noted Fowles, Parker, and Paris are all at least 6-4. Langhorne is 6-1/6-2. |
That's true, except that Paris isn't 6-4.
_________________
Avatar: The King has his ring!
Mathies to LA 2013
|
|
Joey Nations
Joined: 03 Jan 2006
Posts: 457
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/02/07 4:33 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| bballfan2005 wrote: |
| CamrnCrz1974 wrote: |
| If Langhorne were in either Parker's class or Paris' class or Fowles' class, she would have that ink. She isn't. She is a stellar one-on-one player in the post. Let me know when she gets a jumper, a handle, and plays defense. |
Thank you! A post player has to do the following to get the Paris/Parker/Fowles "love":
1. Score 17+ ppg
2. Grab 10+ rpg
3. Dominate or semi-dominate on defense
4. Play for a legit Top 25 team |
Langhorne averages 16.5 ppg and 9 rpg. parker averages 18.4 and 9.1 rpg. Does that just mean it's the Paris and Fowles club? Parker has never averaged a double-double, Langhorne has._________________ "People kept saying why are you looking at Maryland, why are you even talking to them? Well, look at us now!" - Crystal Langhorne, NCAA Champion
http://www.terpswomenshoops.blogspot.com |
|
fancy_daniel
Joined: 12 Oct 2005
Posts: 4489
Location: Los Angeles
Back to top |
| Posted: 08/02/07 5:16 pm ::: Re: Announcing to the nation-underrated players who deserve |
Reply |
|
| ThreeBall25 wrote: |
I'm not sold on Wiggins yet. Weren't people talking up Powell's versatility coming into her draft? At best, she's been an above average 3 Point Specialist in the league. I think Tara makes her star players look better than they really are - ala Brooke Smith who didn't even last in the league. |
Maybe because I've seen a plethora of Pac-10 games, but I so disagree with this assessment of Wiggins. She is easily among the top 3 players that have ever played for Tara Vanderveer and that includes players like Val Whiting and Kate Starbird.
Nicole Powell has a great basketball IQ and benefits from being a big guard with a great range, but is not at the ability of a Wiggins. I even thought that when she was at Stanford and was their go to player. Most lacking for her I think is pure speed and athleticism which Wiggins has.
Wiggins can take over games and has the ability both to go off the dribble against almost anyone in the country and shoot the three from NBA range. I predict her game will thrive in the W.
|
|
|
|
Maybe, but I think the league's been there before (during the CC14, RB6, and MJ25 days).