Maybe you could explain to Heiden and Hayes why its for the best? The sooner Hannah adapts to shooting jumpshots the better. Otherwise we're in the same situation with a lot of length getting benchtime. If Hannah doesn't expand her shooting abilities she will have no future in the WNBA.
Oh, they're rounded up alright. To the point of being meaningless. I highly doubt Heiden is playing 10 minutes a game. Not sure that K Johnson played more then 3 minutes the ENTIRE season. Same with Levin.
When these stats show minutes per game, it actually means minutes per game played. Ava has not played in 4 games. And, she's played 2 minutes or less in 3 games. 6 of the 7 games that she essentially did not play have occurred in the last 10 games. In the last 4 games she has played 2 minutes.
CM, he never said that Jensen made a complete change in offense. He was stating that Hannah/AOG at the 4 and 5 was slower tempo and that Hannah/AH at the 4 and 5 would be faster tempo (for next year).
Agree. I could see the smaller lineup working if Deal can be a great facilitator like CC and Olson, and I think she can/will. If not, McCabe and Stuelke will struggle because they have glaring weaknesses. I also hate the thought of going smaller lineup because that means you have 2 great athletic bigs coming off the bench. I'm hoping they go bigger lineup and hope that either Stuelke or Heiden develop a nice jump shot.
Ya I don't see him saying that is a change in offensive philosophy there. I see him saying that playing AH instead of AOG would have been more up tempo. Quit being weird.
Take a chill pill CM. You go bonkers for the simplest of reasons. I'm on your side more often than not, particularly in the football forum. But you wouldn't know that because I say something you disagree with and now I'm the hated enemy to your opinions. No need to be so combative. I think the players and coaches have made mistakes but are also learning. Proud of them for that.
Hannah HAS to develop a mid range shot.
My ass she is. I can do math just fine. Try reading pablows post right below yours. Its ridiculous to say she's "averaging 10 minutes a game" when that stat only includes the games in which she's played since she had 3 or 4 games where she never got off the bench. She is NOT averaging 10 minutes a game. Now you could say she's averaged almost 10 minutes in the games she has PLAYED in. That would be accurate. The other is pure nonsense. Kenise Johnson's makes that really clear. Saying she's averaging 3 minutes/gm last season when she only appeared in one game for 3 minutes shows just how silly it is to use that metric.
And boy is that evident ... I was at the Nebraska game. O'Grady runs down the court like she's a grandma compared to Hannah and Ava. Given O'Grady's height, I've been surprised at how poor her rebounding has been too. Of course, that all said ... through the first part of the season, she was worlds better than she ever had been before.
What are the odds that Fuerbach sticks around? I've been under the impression that she had been intending on moving on after the season. NIL or something starting to make her change her mind or something?
There was a Chad Leistikow piece on Kylie in the DMR a week or so ago that said her return for next year was TBD. Before that everything I had seen was that this would be her last year. He didn't quote anyone. Did he just pull this out of his ass?
Sorry, but its not apples to apples, so it makes zero sense. Think about it. In the same chart where you have a Clark or an Olsen and it says they play 34 minutes /gm. it says Heiden plays 10 minutes /gm. That makes zero sense when your going to put players who play EVERY game and so their min/gm are a factual representation of the min/gm they play, and on the same chart you put players who do NOT play every game, (if at all) (Kenise Johnson at 3 min/gm when she only played 3 min in 39 games), totally makes it a false representation of the actual time played.
Leistikow might just be remarking upon the fact that Kylie is eligible to have another year - and she hasn't publicly stated what she will definitively do yet. Thus, I don't think he's pulling anything out of ass ... I just don't think that there is anything to pull out in this instance (nothing of substance ... that is .... <enter feces joke here>).
I took the stats available to me to make a chart. Feel free to make your own chart.
Tough call although McCabe is also a pretty tough defender. TS might have a better overall game, but TM has a better shot. The PT distribution will be interesting at guard.
I’d be pleasantly surprised if she comes back. She turns 24 in May and she appears to be ready to move on with life. She has a boyfriend who has a shot at the NBA, and certainly will be playing basketball somewhere next season. I don’t know if they are planning a life together, but if they are, she might head off to support him in his professional basketball life. I’d love to have her on the team one more year, but it seems unlikely.
Honestly it was not trying to be critical of you making that info available. Obviously there are others like ichawk24 who think those numbers make sense. I just disagree. This may very well be how those numbers get posted. I'm just saying if your actually going to start plugging players into that formula ad then using numbers like Ava played 10 minutes/gm and KJ played 3 min/gm and then relate that into a minutes/gm for the roster you'd end up with 225-230 minutes per/gm out of 200 possible minutes because several of those players don't actually play that number of minutes per actual game.
The caveat with the points that both of you are mentioning is that it doesn't account for whether the players are physically available or not.
| Player | MP | MPG | Player | MP | MPG | ||
| 1 | Caitlin Clark | 1359 | 34.8 | Lucy Olsen | 782 | 31.3 | |
| 5 | Gabbie Marshall | 1135 | 29.1 | Sydney Affolter | 693 | 27.7 | |
| 2 | Kate Martin | 1122 | 28.8 | Hannah Stuelke | 649 | 26.0 | |
| 4 | Sydney Affolter | 969 | 24.8 | Kylie Feuerbach | 594 | 23.8 | |
| 3 | Hannah Stuelke | 858 | 22.0 | Taylor McCabe | 555 | 22.2 | |
| 6 | Molly Davis | 729 | 18.7 | Addison O'Grady | 518 | 20.7 | |
| 10 | Kylie Feuerbach | 541 | 13.9 | Taylor Stremlow | 397 | 15.9 | |
| 7 | Addison O'Grady | 335 | 8.6 | Aaliyah Guyton | 317 | 12.7 | |
| 8 | Sharon Goodman | 300 | 7.7 | Teagan Mallegni | 230 | 9.2 | |
| 9 | Taylor McCabe | 270 | 6.9 | Ava Heiden | 202 | 8.1 | |
| 11 | AJ Ediger | 108 | 2.8 | AJ Ediger | 34 | 1.4 | |
| 12 | Jada Gyamfi | 82 | 2.1 | Jada Gyamfi | 31 | 1.2 | |
| 13 | Kennise Johnson | 43 | 1.1 | Callie Levin | 23 | 0.9 |
He was replying to me saying that the earlier graph showed players whose minutes played were based off of only the games in which they played. Ex: KJ shown as 3 minutes/gm, when she only played in one game for 3 minutes last season. It had Heiden at 10 min/gm, but made no allowance for her not playing at all in 4 games, so her actual minutes are more like 8 min/gm. This is in reference to the poster who was plotting next seasons minutes available, but I thought that was not a true reference to minutes played per game, because if you added the minutes up they came up to well over the 200 available minutes. Of course thats because as an ex: you be crediting KJ with 3 minutes per game when she really only played on average about 5 seconds per game if your using this to plot available minutes vs those who played. Hence the "true minutes".
