Washington State WBB game thread - 12pm Dec 19

I have a friend who goes to the same church as SR and he told me that SR was totally blindsided by Destiny's decision to transfer....He never saw it coming. He totally expected her back this season for her Sr. year.....and he had her replacement Talia coming next year. That being said I do agree that it would have been nice to have the future pg here this year even if Destiny had stayed.....so that she could have backed up Destiny as a freshman and then take over the pt. as a soph.  Next year Talia will just have to do what Paopao is doing for Or. this year as a freshman pt. guard....it can be done if you are good enough....I hope Talia will be up to the task.

side note: WSU messing with the ucks , had them by 8 at one point in the 2nd, up 37 -32 at the half, just sayin'

Looks like Oregon will pull this one out.

I don’t think Wazzu is “crappy” as others on here do. They’re scrappy and play with heart and hustle. Super impressive given their two major losses.

So another pac-12 team is improving but it is stagnant here. What can Scott do to get back in the game. WSU is tough.

What can Scott do to get us back in the game? I think he should recruit players like Taylor, Kennedy, Jelena, Sasha, Savannah, Greta, Talia, Raegan, and Adlee. If healthy, that would be a great start.

As for this season, this team needs to learn to do what all SR teams do...rebound and play D. Add a little production from the forward positions and that would make a huge difference. Forward offensive production has been absent so far.

I don't consider evaluating a players strengths and weaknesses bashing a player. Slocum has many strengths but you and others have spent plenty of time focusing on those. I am only focusing on areas that you ignore. Every player has strengths and weaknesses. Their value to a team is dependent on the impact either has on any specific team. It appeared to me that you value a certain type of player and devalue other types. As You focus purely on the strengths of your favorite type of player you also focus on the weaknesses of those who don't fit your criteria ignoring what advantages they bring to a team. It is all a matter of tradeoff. Do the advantages out weight the disadvantages. In Slocums case I feel it did not come out in her favor. Not all of it can be put on her. Some of it was just circumstance and the players she found herself on the court with. 

I wonder who you considered to be a generational player. Oregon St did not have a generational player on their team last season. You must be referring to Slocum, because you did not consider Pivec good enough to make a WNBA roster. Slocum is not a generational player. The areas of her strength will not carry over to the next level. The fact that you considered her as such speaks to you evaluational abilities in that respect. There recently was a discussion on the Boneyard in respect if Sabrina qualified as a generational player. The standards for that label are pretty high. 

You in a past post gave the fact that you were both a player and a coach as being your qualifications. I also played the game and coached ( but not basketball ). About 15 years ago I sort of fell into videographing girls high school games. This put me in contact with many elite high school programs, coaches, players and parents. In the process I ended up following those players to the college and then often the professional levels. I got a bit of insight to which skills would translate and which would not. I got pretty good at predicting players level of success at the next programs. Coaches are often not that good at doing that. Parents and fans are the worst at predicting players levels because they often are not objective. My evaluations of some of the Oregon St girls were in respect to how well their skills would translate at the next level. Often players do not consider areas they can improve in if they have next level aspirations. 

I have seen to many instances on players development being retarded by fans and parents reinforcing players to rely on skills that work on the level they are at and don't develop their underdeveloped areas. Some times it is not developing a physical skill but purely a change of perspective on the importance of how to integrate their individual skills into the the team whole. Geno said it best when he commented on his evaluation on the Older Sabally. He said most players when they come into college have the skills and know what to do . They know how they just need to learn when. 

This brings me to my response to your last statement using Ruth and Marie. Generally speaking posts still have much of their ceilings left when the get to college. More often than not they never face other quality posts at their level. They also develop slower physically. They are an exception. Points also run into the same problem but for a different reason. What they need to develop is between their ears not necessarily skills.  Marie especially did not get to face any competition playing on a German Travil team. What applies to american posts applies double for foriegn players. 

There has been a huge change in the players coming out of high school in even the last five years. People that just follow college programs have no idea how much the level of competition and skill level of players even entering high school programs has risen. Most players on the better teams have individual trainers and have been playing year round ball. Not only are their skills more highly developed, but unless they have a real passion for the game, become burned out with skill devopment. It is understandable. They just want to enjoy playing the game. This is another reason that there are so many transfers. I suspect this played a part in Stevens and probably Slocums descisions. It is understandable considering the amount of time it takes out of a persons life to commit starting at a very young age. Young people also want a life.