I think you have the inputs right (more or less), and I respect your call-it-like-you-see-it approach. But I think you get the net result wrong. Monika is a historically efficient, volume low post scorer. Barring a collapse this year, she will finish as the all-time Big Ten leader in field goal percentage (with a chance to lead the nation in FG percentage three times). She runs the court well, gets great offensive position, has truly great hands (she catches Caitlin’s missiles far better than any of her teammates), and has great shooting touch. She also improved last year to shoot nearly 85% at the line.
Modern analytics are certainly not the be all and end all, but they strongly support the notion that Monika, on net, is much better than mediocre. Win Shares is an advanced statistic that approximates the total number of wins that a player produces for his or her team through play on both the offensive and defensive ends of the court. It probably under weights defensive contributions or deficiencies, even though Win Shares is the combination of offensive and defensive Win Shares. Still, Monika’s Win Shares rank last season was # 24 in the country. In Big Ten play, Monika’s Win Shares rank was # 2. Similarly, PER (Player Efficiency Rating) is a modern stat that estimates the per minute value of a player from box score stats. Monika was 17th in PER in the country, and # 1 in Big Ten play. Finally, Monika's Offensive Player Rating was # 2 in the country, while she was at the 28th percentile for her Defensive Player Rating. I'm not going to defend the modern analytics as precisely accurate, and the defensive shortcomings in the modern analytics surely inflate Monika's value. But you don't get to be # 1 in PER in Big Ten play or # 2 in Win Shares Big Ten play by being mediocre. Mediocre players also don’t make First Team All Big Ten twice (even a 10-player team), and the All Big Ten Tournament Team twice. Likewise, a mediocre player doesn't hold the scoring record for a single Big Ten Tournament with 107 points, while shooting 77.4% (48/62).
I think this take conflates having a high downside with a high upside. You don’t get to be a great player just by having a high downside. You still need to be great at something. Based on their play to date, Addy and Sharon may have much higher downsides than Monika, but I don’t see any areas of greatness. Hope they prove me wrong.