OFFICIAL Game thread: Sweet 16 game vs. Louisville

Thickhead suggested we'd have a top-5 program. He didn't say we had the athleticism of a current top-5 team, as you seem to have interpreted him. I agree with you... and I think most would... that our team does not have athletes on a par with Louisville. However, Rueck has made us a top-10 program with lesser talent and excellent coaching. It is not unreasonable, or funny, to suggest that his coaching with an upgrade in our front-line might take us to the top 5. 

I was going to answer some of this, but I'll make it short and sweet. STFU about Destiny and her "fitness"!

Sorry Dad... but, NO

I love how BB1111  has found the idea that we have the top 5 talent laughable ("funny").  In basketball, some aspects of "talent" are:  height, strength, reach.  Otherwise, you have to regard virtually all female players taller than 6'8" as less talented than thickhead, since even the 20-year-old thickhead had better quickness, speed, and ball-handling skill than virtually all of them.  So does Louisville really have players with better talent?  They may have players who run faster, jump higher, and shoot better, but is that enough?  There's no doubt they are better athletes, but in basketball the metrics we use to measure "basketball talent" can go beyond simple athleticism.  In basketball, we give special credit to height and reach.  Grymek, I'm sure we'd agree, had negligible athleticism:  Any average person you find on the street could catch a ball better and anticipate better than she could, and yet she somehow found her way onto a basketball court and, in Rueck's eyes at least, provided real benefit to the team.  So now just look at next year:  We have two 6'9" players (if Aquino is actually allowed contact and Mitrovic actually signs) who not only have better height and reach than Grymek, but who have at least average to better than average athleticism.  That combination of height and (even average) athleticism makes both Aquino and Mitrovic top-flight "talent" in the college basketball world.  They can catch a lob pass, get a clean shot off, and rebound at a high level for no other reason than that they possess that "talent".

BB+1s has stated in no uncertain terms that a prediction that we should be final 4 bound (even though that's not exactly what I said) is "funny".  That is, implicitly, a very bold prediction about next year.  This year we were rated as high a 7th or 8th when we had Kat Tudor on the floor.  While that rating might have been too high, it still shows that we were top-10 or close to top-10 material.  We beat Oregon and SCar and were competitive with Notre Dame.  Assuming we get a healthy Kat back next season and the 4 new players can all play, is it really "laughable" that to say we might be the top 5 nationally?  Brown comes in as a McDonald's All-American.  She is an upgrade on Katie McWilliams, as she has better athletic skills and is 4" taller.  Our biggest deficiency this season was an inside presence:  Grymek lacked athleticism and MW was too short and couldn't jump more than about 6" (or so it seemed).  Aquino and Mitrovic are drop-in upgrades for Grymek, almost from the word "go", and probably Jones, with her 7'2" wingspan could out-rebound and out-shoot Grymek.  BB1 at this point better be hopeful that OSU is not a top 5 team next year, because otherwise he'll have to apologize to thickhead, or at least admit he was wrong.  And there's nothing worse in the known universe than having to admit that a thickhead got it right and you didn't.

SR seems to put more emphasis on ability to be part of a disciplined system than athletic ability.

I view next year with even more uncertainty than ever. Firstly, the team has to rediscover outside shooting. Otherwise, the defense can sag and clog up the middle in which case driving to the basket also becomes difficult. Secondly, we will have little experience under the basket except for Maddie and Jenessa who understandably have difficulty against taller posts. Trish is familiar with the system but has very little on court experience. Some believe that tall players have more difficulty transitioning to college than guards. In any event, it is not clear to me that the problem under the basket will be solved next year, even though personally I thought Trish looked really promising and the incoming freshman have pretty good credentials.

If we do not make good progress on these two issues, I think we will have difficulty in the PAC12 where so many teams are very competitive and nobody can be overlooked, even Washington. If we make good progress in these two areas, I think we will surprise many. In any event, next year will be very interesting.

I'll just comment...

Physical attributes aren't "talents"... a player can have all the physical attributes you name and very little "talent". Athletic abilities can be enhanced by physical attributes, but they are not the same. Hence, the usage of the word "raw", as in untapped, undeveloped, and potential to improve. Not only in athletic abilities, but strength, conditioning, acclimating to D1 play, learning a complex system and scheme. Physical attributes again are just that... they don't necessarily portend the talent to be a good, very good, elite D1 player.

No need for her to play in Italy. Enjoy the trip, keep doing rehab, go through practice drills, but don't risk re-injury in meaningless games.

You may be "physically" recovered and cleared to play in 7-9 months after ACL reconstruction, but I think the total recovery - full strength, trust in the knee, etc. - is about an 18-month process. At least that has been my experience talking to players who have undergone this surgery.