1. Notre Dame Key players: Lindsay Allen, Brianna Turner, Arike Ogunbowale

The skinny: Last year, the Irish lost twice: to UConn by 10 and an NCAA Tournament upset at the hands of hot-shooting Stanford. But Coach Muffet McGraw returns three starters and adds two elite recruits, so the train will keep rolling. The fact that Lindsay Allen is a senior point guard who averaged 5.8 assists per game last season gives Notre Dame an edge that other title contenders can’t match.

2. Baylor Key players: Nina Davis, Alexis Jones

The skinny: The Bears have four starters back, but the missing piece is current WNBA player and former Baylor PG Niya Johnson. Alexis Jones will likely slide over from the 2, but even with Nina Davis’ scoring and rebounding, and plenty of elite talent, it’s unlikely the offense will run as smoothly as it did last year. Then again, if one (or more) of Baylor’s top-shelf recruits blossoms, Kim Mulkey may simply have too many weapons for even Notre Dame to handle

3. Ohio State Key players: Kelsey Mitchell, Shayla Cooper, Alexa Hart

The skinny: To paraphrase Geno Auriemma, Ohio State has Kelsey Mitchell and you don’t. The spectacular Mitchell averaged a B1G-best 26.1 ppg as a sophomore on 45.2 percent shooting (39.7 percent from beyond the arc), and though she is turnover-prone, she’s the most dynamic player in the country. Two other starters return, plus some big-time transfers, so look for Kevin McGuff’s team to make a serious run at the Final Four.

4. Maryland Key players: Shatori Walker-Kimbrough, Brionna Jones

The skinny: At the start of this season, Coach Brenda Frese’s suffering on the sidelines will be hard to miss. But by the time this crop of five-star recruits figures things out—February, say—smiles will outnumber frowns by a significant margin. And with seniors Shatori Walker-Kimbrough and Brionna Jones on hand from day one, even a flood of freshman mistakes can be dealt with.

5. Louisville Key players: Myisha Hines-Allen, Mariya Moore

The skinny: Five of The Ville’s eight losses last year came before December 11, and the other three were by a total of 11 points, so down the stretch, the Cardinals were as good as anyone. And with Hines-Allen and Moore to go along with plenty of returning firepower and some solid recruits, look for Louisville to resemble the team that went 23-3 to finish last season a lot more than the one that stumbled to a 3-5 start.

6. Connecticut Key players: Kia Nurse, Katie Lou Samuelson

The skinny: Hey, the Huskies’ cupboard isn’t exactly bare—and Auriemma is still the best coach in the game. But for the first time in four years, there’s uncertainty in Storrs. Unfamiliar faces will have to quickly establish themselves as high-caliber players and household names. UConn can count on Samuelson and Nurse, but after that, there are more questions than answers.

7. South Carolina Key players: A’ja Wilson, Alaina Coates

The skinny: Everyone knows three-pointers rule, and South Carolina lost almost all its firepower. Coach Dawn Staley, one of the steadiest PGs in women’s history, is going to have to mold Bianca Cuevas-Moore (who had more turnovers than assists as a junior) into a floor general. It could happen, but a step back is more likely.

8. Mississippi St. Key players: Victoria Vivians, Chinwe Okorie

The skinny: First, forget the 98-38 tourney hammering by UConn, replace it with the name Victoria Vivians and recall that Mississippi State’s top seven players are returning. Vivians is a 6-1 scorer with Olympic dreams, but the Bulldogs have to cut down on TOs if they want to leap into the top five.

9. Stanford Key players: Erica McCall, Karlie Samuelson

The skinny: Lili Thompson’s decision not to play her senior year was a blow, and perimeter defense and uncertainty at the point could be issues all season. But if forward Erica McCall continues improving and three-pointers continue to fall, Stanford will be the class of the Pac-12.

10. South Dakota St. Key players: Macy Miller, Ellie Thompson

The skinny: South Dakota State has been knocking on the door the past few years, and with five starters back and the superb coaching of Aaron Johnston, they are a team few Power Five conference schools would even consider playing.

Related:
SLAM’s 2016-17 NCAA Men’s Top 10
SLAM’s 2016-17 NCAA Men’s Players to Watch
Run It Back: Villanova’s Title Defense Starts Now

The post SLAM’s 2016-17 NCAA Women’s Top 10 appeared first on SLAM.

Back in 1996, there were those who believed “Macarena” had more legs than the WNBA, but you win a free game of Trivial Pursuit if you can name the band that did that song—meanwhile, 20 years later, the WNBA is still in business.

Sure, the league has gone through growing pains, but it’s carved out its own niche in the sporting world, and proven that 5,000-plus people will pay cold hard cash to watch women play basketball on hot summer evenings. There are 12 teams now, and while there are still issues (the Olympics interrupt the season every four years, for one) and transient franchises (the Tulsa Shock are now the Dallas Wings), the basketball is better than ever. Oh, and NBA followers should pay enough attention to see how the new Playoff format works: instead of four teams qualifying from each conference, it will just be the top eight teams by winning percentage moving on at season’s end. If it works as well as many hope, the odds will go up that the NBA will make the same move in the near future.

In honor of that new format, the teams are listed in predicted order of finish, from one to 12, with last year’s regular-season record and overall position in parentheses.

1. Phoenix Mercury (20-14, tied for 4th)

If it were 2006 instead of 2016, adding Diana Taurasi and Penny Taylor to a team that went 20-14 would basically concede the WNBA title to Phoenix—but even at 34 and 35, respectively, the Taurasi-Taylor one-two punch will be a formidable addition to an already strong team. If the Mercury’s many veterans perform even close to their capabilities, and Brittney Griner continues to be a force of nature in the paint, Phoenix will be very hard to beat.

2. Minnesota Lynx (22-12, 2nd)

For the Champion Lynx, age is just a number—but you have to wonder when all those 30-somethings on the Minnesota roster will start to break down. Seimone Augustus, the third youngest of the starters at 32, missed 18 games, but otherwise the Lynx stayed healthy. And healthy, they were clearly the best in the league. But can Lindsay Whalen (34), Rebekkah Brunson (34), Sylvia Fowles (30) and new reserve Jia Perkins (34) dodge time’s bullets one more summer?

3. Los Angeles Sparks (14-20, 10th)

The Sparks planned to solve their problems on the wing by trading for gunner Riquna Williams, but she then tore her Achilles tendon. Plan B was then instituted, trading for point guard Chelsea Gray, who will allow Kristi Toliver to play the 2, but Alana Beard is going to have to play heavy minutes at small forward—or Coach Brian Agler will have to go big with three post players (Candace Parker, Nneka Ogwumike and Jantel Lavender) in the game at the same time.

4. Chicago Sky (21-13, 3rd)

Elena Delle Donne is one of the best players in the world, and there was a time when Cappie Pondexter was in that conversation, too. Pondexter, though, is 33 now, and Brazil Olympian Erika de Souza is 34, and how much those two—who may recall that Los Del Rio recorded “Macarena”—have left will determine how far Chicago can go.

5. Washington Mystics (18-16, tied for 6th)

In an age of look-at-me middling talents, 23-year-old Emma Meesseman is an anomaly: She’s one of the best young players in the world, but critics complain she avoids the spotlight. At 6-4, Meesseman needs to be the star in Washington so the role players have room to play those roles—and maybe this will be the year she takes center stage. If not, it will be another early playoff exit for the Mystics.

6. New York Liberty (23-11, 1st)

With Epiphanny Prince out until after the Olympics—if she comes back at all—the Liberty need newcomers Shavonte Zellous and Lindsey Harding to step up. Tina Charles anchors the frontcourt, but coach Bill Laimbeer has to find some more offense until (or whether) Prince returns. If second-year players Brittany Boyd and Kiah Stokes score consistently, though, New York could be a dark-horse contender for the title.

7. Dallas Wings (18-16, tied for 6th)

Skylar Diggins returns from an ACL injury to join Odyssey Sims in one of the league’s most exciting backcourts, and Glory Johnson returns from a soap-opera relationship with Brittney Griner (with twins), so look for the relocated Tulsa Shock to give Dallas fans plenty to talk about in year one. But someone—rookie Aerial Powers, perhaps—needs to take charge at small forward.

8. Connecticut Sun (15-19, tied for 8th)

There’s justifiable optimism in out-of-the-way Uncasville, as a healthy Chiney Ogwumike and solid Kelsey Bone give the Sun a powerful presence in the paint. Connecticut sees Morgan Tuck as the WNBA version of Draymond Green, and if a shooter emerges on the wing, the Sun could be a menace.

9. Indiana Fever (20-14, tied for 4th)

The focus will be on Tamika Catchings’ final year, but along with keeping Catchings healthy, Indiana needs Erlana Larkins in peak form, too. Another big question is how well Briann January recovers from microfracture knee surgery—without her, it’s Shenise Johnson and lots of uncertainty in the Fever backcourt.

10. Atlanta Dream (15-19, tie for 8th)

It starts with the Angel everyone loves to hate, but after her, the drop-off is steep; there are too many unknowns for a return to the glory days of back-to-back trips to the WNBA Finals. McCoughtry is one of the elite, no doubt, but Shoni Schimmel needs to be in good enough shape to play 32 effective minutes every night and someone (first-round draft pick Bria Holmes?) needs to surprise.

11. Seattle Storm (10-24, 11th)

After four years of playing with the best at her level, Breanna Stewart will recall her days at Cicero North High, when she was pretty much the whole show. Sure, Crystal Langhorne is a solid player, and Jewell Loyd showed promise as a rookie, but Sue Bird is a shadow of the great player she was, and no one else can score. Put it all together, and Stewart will likely lose four times as many games (20, or more) in a 34-game summer as she did in her four years at UConn (five).

12. San Antonio Stars (8-26, 12th)

The Stars were the worst team in the league last year, and their best player, Danielle Robinson, will miss this season with a torn Achilles. Second-leading scorer Jia Perkins was inexplicably handed to Minnesota for some spare change, and third-leading scorer Sophia Young-Malcolm retired. Kayla McBride (38.2 percent from the field last year) and rookie Moriah Jefferson must carry the load in 2016, but they probably won’t be able to carry it very far.

—

Photo via Getty Images

The post For The Summer appeared first on SLAM.

1. Connecticut

Key Players: Moriah Jefferson, Kia Nurse, Breanna Stewart

The Skinny: Everyone knows Stewart is the WNBA tanking prize, but PG Jefferson is going to be a high pick, too. And sophomore Nurse just led Canada through an impressive international summer, but the main reason UConn ranks as the best of the very good is its depth. Injuries will sting but not wound, and with Geno Auriemma running practices, intensity will not lag.

2. Notre Dame

Key Players: Lindsay Allen, Taya Reimer, Brianna Turner

The Skinny: If Muffet McGraw didn’t work in the shadow of Auriemma, she would be considered one of the great basketball coaches, male or female, of this era. And since she’s managed to take down mighty UConn more than once, there’s history to support putting the Irish at No. 1—but Notre Dame turns the ball over a little too much, and the roster just isn’t quite as talented.

3. Baylor

Key Players: Nina Davis, Niya Johnson, Alexis Prince

The Skinny: Kim Mulkey can run a game pretty well, too, and with the unorthodox but amazingly effective Davis getting 21 and 8 every night, the Bears have a go-to player. There’s plenty of depth, but Baylor needs someone like Prince to emerge as a consistent double-figure scorer.

4. Texas

Key Players: Ariel Atkins, Imani Boyette (formerly McGee-Stafford), Kelsey Lang

The Skinny: Boyette is 6-7 worth of promise. If she lives up to it, she and the 6-5 Lang are worthy of being called Twin Towers, and watch for Atkins to bust out in her sophomore season.

5. South Carolina

Key Players: Alaina Coates, Tiffany Mitchell, A’ja Wilson

The Skinny: Some like the Gamecocks at No. 2, or even ahead of UConn, but it says here they’ll really miss Aleighsa Welch, and inconsistent play off the bench will catch up to Dawn Staley’s crew. If some youngsters develop, though, the potential is clearly there.

6. Florida State

Key Players: Adut Bulgak, Leticia Romero, Ivey Slaughter

The Skinny: Bulgak is a very good player (with a very cool name) but 15 assists and 67 turnovers won’t get it done. It wouldn’t hurt if Romero cut down on her turnovers, too, as otherwise the Seminoles seem to have all the pieces.

7. Ohio State

Key Players: Ameryst Alston, Alexa Hart, Kelsey Mitchell

The Skinny: If senior point guard Alston can help calm down the rest of this enormously talented but very young roster, Ohio State could be in the Final Four. But the wonderful Mitchell (24.9 ppg as a freshman) turned the ball over 142 times, and that just won’t play at the elite level.

8. Tennessee

Key Players:: Andraya Carter, Bashaara Graves, Mercedes Russell

The Skinny: If the 6-5 Russell can finally produce in the paint, and if PG Carter can get her the ball, and if power forward Graves can score, the Vols will be impossible to stop. But, they need some perimeter production to avoid seeing nothing but 2-3 zones.

9. Mississippi State

Key Players: Dominique Dillingham, Victoria Vivians, Morgan William

The Skinny: Vivians may have averaged only 14.9 ppg as a freshman, but don’t be surprised if she pushes the 20-a-game mark this year. And don’t be surprised if opposing point guards come up with a slight hamstring pull to avoid having to deal with Mississippi State’s in-your-nostrils defense (746 turnovers forced).

10. Arizona State

Key Players: Sophie Brunner, Elisha Davis, Katie Hempen

The Skinny: Charli Turner-Thorne substitutes as though she gets paid every time the horn sounds, but the formula has kept ASU in the top half of the Pac-12 for almost all of her 18 years in charge. Turnovers (on the court, not in the lineup) could be an issue, though.

—

image via Getty

The post Bre-Unit appeared first on SLAM.

Eastern Conference

1. Washington (16-18, tied for second): In a conference filled with questions, the Mystics may have the fewest. Emma Meesseman is an emerging star (just 22) at power forward, the backcourt is solid, Kia Vaughn is serviceable at center, and if either Armintie Herrington or Kalana Greene lay claim to the small forward spot, Mike Thibault has enough pieces to maneuver his way to a first-place finish.

2. Atlanta (19-15, first): Wisdom says the most important position is PG, and the Dream jettisoned theirs, Jasmine Thomas, who got most of the minutes last year. Word is Celine Dumerc will not return to the league. That leaves rooks Samantha Logic (is she quick enough?) and Brittany Hrynko (is she consistent enough?) to run things. The rest of the lineup, led by Angel McCoughtry, is quality, so a solid performance at point guard from Shoni Schimmel (pg. 62) should put the Dream back on top.

3. Indiana (16-18, tied for second): The Fever have a lot of players in their prime but the question is whether that prime is good enough to get Indiana back over .500. One reason for the uncertainty is that the team’s best player, Tamika Catchings, waved goodbye to her prime long ago, and this will be her last season as she turns 36 in July. Like ATL, though, the pieces could fall into place, and Indiana could surprise. Or not.

4. Chicago (15-19, tied for fourth): Will she or won’t she? It says here Sylvia Fowles won’t return (she supposedly wants a trade), and that pushes the Sky down a notch. With the 6-5 Olympian, Chicago would have been the heavy favorite in the East and had a good shot at a title. Elena Delle Donne is one of the best, Cappie Pondexter could be rejuvenated by a return home, and the rest of the roster has enough juice to give the stars room to work.

5. New York (15-19, tied for fourth): Bill Laimbeer got two first-round picks, but it’s unclear if either (Brittany Boyd and Kiah Stokes) will be difference-makers this year, or ever. Otherwise, the Liberty have Tina Charles, tremendous when motivated, Epiphanny Prince home (when she’s not fulfilling overseas obligations) and well, not much else.

6. Connecticut (13-21, sixth): If Chiney Ogwumike hadn’t hurt her knee in Europe, the Sun would be in the mix. Without her, though, they need to have Chelsea Gray make her delayed debut (she sat out last year with an injury) in grand style, and some pretty good players (Alyssa Thomas, Alex Bentley, etc.) figure out how to be very good. It could happen, but without Ogwumike and consistent outside shooting, the Sun could find it hard to rise.

Western Conference

1. San Antonio (16-18, tied for third): Dan Hughes always gets the most out of his teams, and this year, he has a lot of pieces in place for a surprise run. Kayla McBride, Danielle Robinson and Jia Perkins are very good; Jayne Appel, Danielle Adams and Sophia Young-Malcolm do their part up front; and if Alex Montgomery can again shoot better than 40 percent from three, the Stars could shine very brightly.

2. Los Angeles (16-18, tied for third): The big question is when Candace Parker will return—and forgive Sparks’ fans if they replace “when” with “if,” as CP3 doesn’t need the money, has a bad knee and like all the other elite players, knows she won’t get any time off in 2016, an Olympic year. Even without her, though, this is a very strong team, with solid Jantel Lavender and exceptional Nneka Ogwumike up front, good guards (Kristi Toliver, Erin Phillips and Temeka Johnson) and a vet in Alana Beard.

3. Minnesota (25-9, second): The Lynx have been blessed with incredible injury luck in recent years: Only once in the past three seasons has a starter played fewer than 29 games, but all those starters, except Maya Moore, are now 31 or older. Healthy, this is the best team here; but the law of averages says that the Lynx are due to be unhealthy in 2015.

4. Tulsa (12-22, tied for fifth): The Shock have been giving youngsters big minutes in recent years, and the growing pains are evident, but it looks like they’ll give that scenario another whirl by tossing No. 2 overall pick Amanda Zahui B. into the mix. Courtney Paris is fine at that spot but limited enough that the combination of Skylar Diggins, Odyssey Sims and Glory Johnson aren’t quite enough to challenge the league’s best. But if Zahui is indeed wowie, the Shock could live up to their name.

5. Phoenix (29-5, first): That thud you hear is the mighty Mercury coming back to earth. Taurasi is taking the summer off (with financial encouragement from her Euro team), Aussie vet Penny Taylor is doing the same and Erin Phillips is in L.A. Yes, Phoenix still has the very great Brittney Griner and the very good Candice Dupree, but unless 6-5 DeWanna Bonner can play all three perimeter positions, it’s going to be a long summer.

6. Seattle (12-22, tied for fifth): The basketball gods smiled on the Storm, gifting them Jewell Loyd with the No. 1 pick, but new coach Jenny Boucek still has little to work with. Sue Bird is 35 with bad knees, Lauren Jackson isn’t playing, Camille Little is gone, and only undersized Crystal Langhorne is a quality player in her prime. Then again, Breanna Stewart awaits the lottery winner next year, so maybe the skies aren’t completely dark.

The post 2015 WNBA Preview appeared first on SLAM.

We try to avoid the obvious, and last year we just had a feeling Baylor wouldn’t repeat. UConn, of course, won it all, just as we predicted, but once again, we refuse to follow the herd. Eventually we know we’ll get picked off by a lion, or a Husky, but an influx of talented freshmen and five legit title contenders will make for a most interesting season.

1. Notre Dame

Key Players: Natalie Achonwa, Jewell Loyd, Kayla McBride

The Skinny: Skylar Diggins got a lot of media love (if not lust), but she’s the only significant piece missing from last year’s 35-2 team—and coach Muffet McGraw has another slew of talented freshmen coming in. In short, Irish haters are in for another long season.

2. Connecticut

Key Players: Stefanie Dolson, Kaleena Mosqueda-Lewis, Breanna Stewart

The Skinny: It’s just too easy to pick UConn. Everyone but Kelly Faris is back from the national champs, which is why so many people are sure Connecticut will get another title. But it says here the Huskies are too thin up front to repeat.

3.Tennessee

Key Players: Bashaara Graves, Ariel Massengale, Meighan Simmons

The Skinny: Tennessee lost eight games last year, but the Volunteers have the same trio of key players back, and are one more year removed from the emotional Pat Summitt fallout. They also have a great freshman class, plus point guard Andraya Carter, who missed last year with injury.

4. Duke

Key Players: Chelsea Gray, Haley Peters, Elizabeth Williams

The Skinny: The Blue Devils lose no one of importance from a 33-3 team, and this could be the year that coach Joanne McCallie breaks through at the Final Four, but elite point guard Chelsea Gray needs to completely recover from her torn ACL sooner rather than later.

5. Maryland

Key Players: Laurin Mincy, Brene Moseley, Alyssa Thomas

The Skinny: Maryland loses just one key player from a very good team—but in addition, the Terps return two major talents from injury. If Moseley and Mincy are close to 100 percent, Maryland can be as good as anyone, assuming of course the injury bug doesn’t bite again.

6. Kentucky

Key Players: Bria Goss, DeNesha Stallworth, Samarie Walker

The Skinny: Just like Notre Dame, Kentucky lost its marquee player (A’dia Mathies) and no one else. And just like Notre Dame, the Wildcats have a great freshman class. The problem? Somebody has to make a jump shot.

7. Louisville

Key Players: Sara Hammond, Shoni Schimmel, Bria Smith

The Skinny: Last year’s Cinderella will be this year’s leading lady, as the Cardinals return pretty much the whole roster and are clearly one of the big dogs in the women’s game. The keys, though, will be Shoni Schimmel discovering consistency and sophomore Sara Hammond stepping into a starring role.

8. Penn State

Key Players: Candice Agee, Maggie Lucas, Dara Taylor

The Skinny: Do you believe in freshmen? If so, the Nittany Lions are the team to watch, as they need their talented youngsters to play well enough to allow vets Agee and Taylor to take major steps forward. It also doesn’t hurt that Penn State plays in the relatively weak Big Ten.

9. Dayton

Key Players: Amber Deane, Andrea Hoover, Ally Malott

The Skinny: If you want to take a flyer on a mid-major that might crack the top 10, Dayton is your best bet. The Flyers were 28-3 last year and if Jim Jabir can find a point guard, a similar record is not only possible, but likely.

10. Stanford

Key Players: Sara James, Chiney Ogwumike, Amber Orrange

The Skinny: What would a pre-season top 10 be without Stanford, the pride of the West Coast? This year, though, it’s a precarious ranking because the Cardinal don’t have much to go with Ogwumike, who’s the presumptive top pick in next spring’s WNBA draft.

The post Women’s NCAA Preview appeared first on SLAM.

This has been one of the best WNBA seasons ever when it comes to the product on the floor every night, and there’s no reason to expect the Finals to be any different. I don’t expect Minnesota to try to outslug the Dream as Connecticut and Indiana tried to do (and pretty much had to do).

Hopefully, both teams will focus on running and shooting, and we’ll get a high-scoring, highly entertaining conclusion to an outstanding WNBA summer. Set your DVRs now…

Point guard: Just looking at these two point guards, your first guess would be that they’re very different players—and though in a sense, they are, in more important ways they’re very similar (even aside from having the same first name).

Obviously, Lindsay Whalen is the bulkier guard, outweighing Lindsey Harding by at least 20 pounds, despite being only an inch taller. Not surprisingly, Harding is quicker and more athletic, but in terms of on-court effectiveness, it doesn’t seem to make much difference. Though Whalen’s offensive numbers are better, Harding’s defense is better and she’s faster.

Oddly, in a sport where outside shooting is pretty much the sine qua non for elite guards, neither Whalen nor Harding does much damage from three-point distance. Whalen had one of her best seasons, shooting 40.5%, but only took 42 threes during the regular season while Harding attempted just 33 threes, making 10 of them for 30.3%.

Whalen shoots a little more, but also has more assists, as she gets more touches than Harding, who often just watches as Angel McCoughtry or Armintie Price streak down court after a steal. In the end, there’s not much to choose, but I’ll give Minnesota the edge.

Shooting guard: We’ll call this pair Armintie Price and Seimone Augustus, anticipating the Atlanta matchup, but the four wings are all pretty much interchangeable. Price, an intelligent and athletic player who has worked hard to become a decent shooter to go along with a full basket of other skills, will probably draw Augustus, if only to keep McCoughtry out of foul trouble. She won’t test Augustus or Maya Moore at the other end as it’s safe to just drop in the lane and wait for Price to drive, but the assistant coach at Ole Miss is a fine passer and a very smart player who will take advantage of any mistakes.

Augustus, on the other hand, has been in the spotlight since she was in eighth grade, and after a couple injury-plagued seasons, has stepped up as one the world’s best. Against most teams, her size and skills present insoluble problems, but Price and McCoughtry have a better chance to slow her down than most. Still, advantage Minnesota.

Small forward: Angel McCoughtry might just be the best player in the WNBA, which is pretty much like saying she’s the best player in the world. She can score, rebound, defend and pass, though she does turn the ball over too much and is not a good three-point shooter. Nonetheless, her dramatic personality is perfectly suited to the big stage of the WNBA Finals, and if she stays out of foul trouble, put her down for 20 points a game—and at least three emotional outbursts.

Maya Moore is the anti-McCoughtry: Everybody’s darling who always says and does the right thing. She’s also a very good player, extremely smart, very competitive and very skilled. Unfortunately, she is way overmatched defensively trying to guard McCoughtry, so look for Augustus to draw that duty while Moore tries to stay in front of Price. That assignment, though, will tire Augustus a bit, and though she almost never fouls, no one who guards McCoughtry can seem to avoid sending her to the line.

But this advantage goes to Atlanta, regardless. McCoughtry can do things no other woman can (remember that spinning left-handed layup from behind the backboard, through contact, against Indiana?) and the only person who can stop Angel is Angel.

Power forward: This is one of the most intriguing matchups of the postseason, as both Rebekkah Brunson and Sancho Lyttle are long, athletic forwards who are capable of taking over games.

Brunson first: Even though she has a sometimes balky knee, she still might be the best jumper in the league. She’s athletic (John Whisenant originally envisioned her as a small forward) and has a nose for the ball—but really can’t shoot outside about six feet. Every once in a while, she’ll have a game in which she makes the elbow jumper, and when that happens, there’s not much the opposition can do to stop her.

Lyttle, on the other hand, doesn’t have that freakish leaping ability, but she’s a much better shooter – and is also a good rebounder. It’s no accident that when Lyttle was fully healthy, Atlanta started winning, and her five-game playoff stats (11.8 ppg, 8.0 rpg, 3.2 spg) are much more indicative of her ability than her regular season numbers.

Do you like pancakes or French toast? Even.

Center: Since Erika de Souza will be back in the States for four of the five games (after playing for Brazil in the Olympic qualifier), she gets the nod in this analysis—and that’s good for Atlanta. Taj McWilliams-Franklin is a cagy veteran, but de Souza has been around the block a couple times herself, and is 6-5 to McWilliams-Franklin’s 6-1.

McWilliams-Franklin is a better ballhandler and a better outside shooter, but de Souza’s presence in the paint will be a challenge for the Lynx. Nonetheless, she misses game one, so this one too is even.

Bench: When de Souza comes back, each team will run out three reserves on a regular basis. For Atlanta, that would be Iziane Castro Marques (who will start in game one), Alison Bales and Coco Miller. Castro Marques is the key, as she’s one of those players who makes big plays for both teams. Like McCoughtry, the only one who can stop Izzy is Izzy, and she does a pretty good job of it about half the time. Bales is a solid WNBA post, though at 6-7, she’s not nearly the inside presence you’d expect. Miller is the veteran guard off the bench but she needs to play better than she has in the first five postseason games (14.3% shooting, two assists in 43 minutes).

Minnesota will call on Jessica Adair (the Lynx’ only real inside presence), Candice Wiggins (emotional long-range shooter who attempted 124 three-pointers and 54 two-pointers during the season) and Monica Wright (another top pick who has yet to dazzle in the WNBA). The only real difference is that the Dream bench is more experienced, and all played in the Finals last year—so based on that, give the advantage to Atlanta.

Coaching: Both Cheryl Reeve and Marynell Meadors were roasted and toasted last year, and for some reason, a lot of Atlanta fans still don’t like Meadors, even though she’s taken the Dream to the WNBA Finals for two straight seasons. Both have done good jobs in all aspects of the job, so this too is even.

Intangibles: The presence of two college coaches—Price and Shalee Lehning—on the Atlanta roster, and Carol Ross on the bench, gives Atlanta a little more emotional ballast, which of course the Dream need with McCoughtry and Castro Marques around. Atlanta also reached the finals last year, and that counts for something, even though Minnesota’s individuals have plenty of playoff experience. Still, it says here that McCoughtry’s emotion, overall Dream leadership and last year’s trip to the Finals are enough to give Atlanta the edge.

In conclusion: The categories break down 3-2-3, which pretty much tells you all you need to know about this series. It should be close throughout, and though it’s possible one team will manage to win three close games (as happened last year in Seattle’s sweep), most likely this goes five games.

Of course, if Atlanta gets game one without de Souza, that might be enough to inspire the Dream to finish the series early. I’ll play it safe, though: Atlanta in five.

The post Breaking Down the WNBA Finals appeared first on SLAM.

So now that L.A. dissipated any real interest in the last weeks of the WNBA season by collapsing in the fourth quarter Tuesday, we’ve got a little time to look at some other aspects of the summer—such as who really is the best player.

There are a lot of candidates of MVP, but for the sake of discussion—OK, maybe even an argument—a look at the latest Player Efficiency Rankings list can add some actual data to the conversation.

First, what’s PER? It’s a complex formula developed by John Hollinger that attempts to rate players by assessing their statistical contributions. Unfortunately, there are a lot of assumptions built into the formula (such as how often a particular player handles the ball, the positive value of an assist as opposed to the negative value of a turnover, etc.) not to mention a fuzzy (at best) acknowledgment of defensive contributions, but it’s still a lot better than just referring to points and rebounds per game.

And all misgivings aside, PER is still a reasonable way to start any analysis of the top players in the game, though again it’s important to remember that defense isn’t really accounted for.

So who do the numbers love? CP3—and no, I’m not talking about Courtney Paris. Candace Parker can obviously score and rebound with the best of them, but she’s rewarded as well for her very low turnover percentage and her ability to draw fouls. Her PER is 27.58, which doesn’t mean much except that the average is artificially set to 15.0, and that a strong MVP candidate should be around 27.5.

We’re done here, right?

Well, not quite. For one thing, Parker missed 15 of L.A.’s 32 games, which brings up the persistent question of how many games does a player have to play to be eligible for an award? Sylvia Fowles hasn’t missed any games, and her PER is 26.27, so doesn’t she get credit for durability?

And that brings us to point two: Parker’s devotion to defense has never been all that fervent, while Fowles is a force at that end of the floor. Acknowledging that PER doesn’t really give defense its due would move Parker down and Fowles up—and they’re not that far apart to begin with.

Third and fourth on the list are Tamika Catchings and Penny Taylor, both of whom have the advantage of playing on playoff teams—neither Parker nor Fowles will be present in postseason, and there’s certainly an argument to be made that an MVP in a league in which eight of the 12 teams advance to postseason should be good enough to carry her team into the playoffs.

Catchings probably has the most convincing case of those two, as many will argue that Taylor isn’t even the best player on her own team—and sure enough, Diana Taurasi is sixth overall, just two spots behind Taylor. In between is the pouty Angel McCoughtry, probably the best defender of that trio, but also the most mercurial (even though she plays for the Dream).

Overall, though, the numbers suggest pretty strongly that Catchings is the logical choice for the MVP, especially considering that she’s one of the best defenders in the world, and is underserved by the PER formula.

And now, just for the fun of it, let’s see what PER has to say about the MUP, or Most Unvaluable Player—and that list begins with Andrea Riley. Riley has had an abysmal year, but she does have a pretty good excuse: She gave birth to daughter Tiana March 29, and has struggled with conditioning and recovery all summer.

Phoenix guard Ketia Swanier has no such excuse, though, but she is reputed to be a good defender, so maybe her score could be adjusted up from 4.90. The next four on the list are also considered strong on defense (Shyra Ely, Marie Ferdinand-Harris, Kerri Gardin and Scholanda Robinson), but Iziane Castro-Marques is not—and her PER of 8.08 is a big reason she dropped out of Atlanta’s starting lineup.

Two 2011 first-round draft picks also aren’t faring that well, as Courtney Vandersloot (9.32) and Jasmine Thomas (9.45) are well below average.

And speaking of average, who does PER says is closest to being just a regular, ordinary, run-of-the-mill player? Why, ageless Taj McWilliams-Franklin, who checks in at 14.91. Matee Ajavon and, surprisingly, Swin Cash are also close to the 15.0 middle mark, which pretty much completes a look at the PER spectrum.

Still, it hasn’t really solved the MVP quandary. Parker has the numbers, but she’s missed 15 games and doesn’t really defend; Catchings is a barely above average shooter (according to another advanced stat called efficient shooting percentage), and that’s one of the single most important factors in winning games. And Fowles couldn’t even get the Chicago Sky into the playoffs, so how good can she really be?

So in the end, as usual, it comes down as much to feel as analysis—and which player you’d rather have on your team.

The post What The Numbers Say About the WNBA MVP appeared first on SLAM.

The Man in the Moon has been waiting patiently for the other shoe to drop, but it just hasn’t happened yet – and trust me, we’d all hear it if it did. After all, the other shoe is 6-3 Cheryl Ford, Karl Malone’s daughter and a force of nature in the paint, and the widely held assumption is that she will sign with the New York Liberty.

If she does, that puts John Whisenant’s first draft as the man in charge in perspective, as the post-starved Liberty wound up with only a couple wings on Monday. And no, late-round picks and free agents won’t make a difference – just like the NBA, only the top few overall draftees have much of a chance to make an impact, and even the bottom of the first round is a roll of the dice.

But that said, let’s take a look at each team’s haul, and, in the grand tradition of throwing darts at a wall of possible outcomes, we’ll make some wild guesses about how it will all play out.

First, though, I’d like to introduce the concept of the Spencer Line, similar to the Mendoza Line in baseball. The Mendoza Line refers to batting average, and is set at .200 – players who are below the Mendoza line just aren’t going to make it. The Spencer Line is more subjective, as it’s a defensive measurement, named after Sidney Spencer, a sweet-shooting 6-3 wing from Tennessee who would have trouble staying in front of the Statue of Liberty. Spencer might have had a nice career, but even in a league with a lot of shaky defenders, she was so bad that she was, and is, basically unplayable.

Now, on to the guesswork …

Atlanta: The Dream took Ta’shia Phillips with the eighth overall pick, and then quickly flipped her to the Mystics for the unhappy Lindsey Harding. (Word is Harding is one of those people who, if you gave them a $10 bill, would complain because you didn’t give them two fives.) Harding, regardless of her smile quotient, is an above-average point guard in a league that doesn’t have many in that category, and since Atlanta played for the championship last year without her, that’s a pretty good get. The other two new faces (Felicia Chester from DePaul by way of the Lynx, and Kelsey Bolte) are training camp fodder.

Chicago: Speaking of rolling the dice, the Sky are gambling that Courtney Vandersloot won’t fall below the Spencer Line on defense, and will be strong enough and quick enough to fend off the better opposing defenders long enough to make the occasional three and get Sylvia Fowles the ball. Amber Harris was there at No. 3, but Vandersloot, if successful, has more value because she’s a point guard, and there just aren’t very many of those. Two of the other picks were slow posts, and Angie Bjorklund is a slow wing, so don’t look for any other rookies to make an impact.

Connecticut: The Sun traded the No. 16 pick, Sydney Colson, for Kalana Greene, a UConn product who could help. Unfortunately, Mike Thibault traded this year’s first-round pick (which would have been Amber Harris) for Kelsey Griffin, who didn’t dazzle in her rookie season last summer. They did wind up with Tahnee Robinson from Phoenix, and the first full-blooded Native American in the league will have every chance to make the roster of a team owned by an Native American tribe. Whether she’ll be a good player is another story, but if Marion Jones can stick, so can Robinson.

Indiana: The Fever went with Jeanette Pohlen, a two-guard whose quickness deficit was exposed by Texas A&M in the NCAA semis. That said, she’s a nice complement to Briann January, who is plenty quick but isn’t as good a decision-maker. Pohlen also can back up Katie Douglas, but there are questions about Pohlen’s ability to stay above the Spencer Line.

Los Angeles: Penny Toler drafted a player who wasn’t eligible to be drafted – which is an act of stupidity one would expect from the Los Angeles Clippers. But that was a third-round pick, of a European, so it really didn’t mean that much. The pick that did matter to the Sparks, though, wasn’t even theirs – it was Chicago’s. L.A. needs a point guard to back up aging Ticha Penicheiro and get the ball to Candace Parker, Tina Thompson, et al., and Courtney Vandersloot was that point guard. When Chicago took her, Toler defaulted to the best available player, which was steady Ohio State post Jantel Lavender. Since Jessica Davenport arrived from that same school with roughly the same stats, and disappointed, hopes are not high for Lavender’s chances of becoming a WNBA starter.

Minnesota: The biggest problem the Lynx had after the Draft was, and is, clearing enough roster space for all their talent. That’s why they dumped Jessica Breland for a future draft choice and Felicia Chester for an Australian (Rachel Jarry) who won’t play in the W this summer. I’m guessing they also try to get rid of Charde Houston to make room for No. 1 pick Maya Moore and No. 4 Amber Harris, both of whom play the same position as Houston. Moore is as much of a sure thing as there is in the drafting biz, but Harris is a question mark. There’s no doubt that she is extremely skilled for a 6-5 wing, but how will she react to the physicality of the league? And will she bring it every night? The luxury the Lynx have is that they really don’t care that much if she’s a star right away – they already have Monica Wright coming off the bench, and she had a fine rookie season in 2010.

New York: If Cheryl Ford signs, it all makes sense. Ford, Janell McCarville and Kia Vaughn make up a competent, if not spectacular front line, and then Whisenant slots in 6-3 Jessica Breland (a rookie picked up from Minnesota for spare change) when he wants more quickness. Alex Montgomery was a surprise choice at No. 10, but the word is that Whisenant liked Breland more, but figured Seattle would take Montgomery at No. 12, so he went for her first. Also, watch out for third-round pick Mekia Valentine, who could develop into a Yolanda Griffith knockoff. If Ford doesn’t play for New York, though, it’s going to be a long summer for Whisenant.

Phoenix: I’ll spare you a lame attempt at a Brittany Spears joke, but yes, the Mercury did draft the Colorado wing who shares a name with some singer who did a Pepsi commercial a while back. Spears might make the roster to save some cap money (taking the place of a more expensive veteran), but there’s no other reason to think she’ll help the club.

San Antonio: The Silver Stars had the No. 6 pick in a draft with five good players. Danielle Robinson is a poor-shooting, very athletic guard who might be able to play the point. Then again, she might not. Her length helps her, and she’s a nice fit with the fading Becky Hammon, but she’s unlikely to lift San Antonio into the postseason. Of the other two picks, Porsha Phillips, the third-rounder, probably has a better chance to make the roster than Danielle Adams, the second-rounder, but even on a team this weak, neither is a sure thing.

Seattle: Despite picking 12th and 24th, the Storm might actually have picked up two keepers. Jasmine Thomas, the last pick in the first round, is an athletic if erratic combo guard from Duke, and Ify Ibekwe is a long, late-blooming forward from Arizona who might be able to become a defensive specialist. But as long as Seattle has Sue and LJ, the rookies won’t matter much.

Tulsa: In most WNBA circles, Nolan Richardson is considered just above an inanimate object in terms of his knowledge of women’s basketball, but he did the right thing in the Draft. Liz Cambage (cam-beige is how it’s pronounced) is a very strong young 6-8 center who looked very good in the World Championships last year, and was a clear No. 2 overall pick. Kayla Pedersen is a steady 6-4 power forward who can shoot, and should be a nice complement to Cambage. How the two will fit with Richardson’s preferred uptempo style is a question, as is how the rest of the shoot-first, run-and-gun roster will deal with frontcourt players who will be better if the pace is slower.

Washington: Trudi Lacey is held in only slightly better regard than Richardson, but she did OK, given the fact she had to trade Harding for a rookie center whose chances of being a difference-maker are not that good. Ta’shia Phillips is a tall, solid center who didn’t do as much as Courtney Paris did in college –- and Paris is no longer in the league. Still, getting her was better than nothing, and by dealing for disgruntled Nicky Anosike before the Draft, Lacey has a veteran post to pair with Crystal Langhorne. Alana Beard is back from injury, which is a big bonus, but don’t expect No. 11 pick Victoria Dunlap to do much. Tweeners with her college profile do not have a good track record in the W.

The post Minnesota Feels The Draft appeared first on SLAM.

Think about the State Playoffs. The best teams are pretty much always there, having run the gantlet of postseason, and they are clearly the cream of the crop.

Well, except for one team: the officials.

Again, think about the state playoffs. When the boys play, how many female officials are there? When the girls play, how many female officials are there?

Now, let’s make it clear that women can be, and are, excellent officials. There is absolutely nothing wrong with having a woman run onto the court to call a state championship game—except for the fact that she isn’t going to be running on the court to call a boys’ game, and that’s just wrong.

First, it’s not fair to the female officials. After all, if they’re good enough to do a state championship game, why should they only be doing girls’ games? If they’re good enough to decide a state title for girls, why not for boys as well?

Which leads to point two: If they’re not good enough to do boys’ games, then why are they good enough to call girls’ games? If they’re just there because of some misguided nod to feminist affirmative action, that’s simply unfair to the players, coaches and fans of the girls’ teams, who certainly deserve the best officials possible in a state championship game.

There’s also another aspect to this issue: Many more men than women are officials, in any sport. (That’s probably because women have more sense than men and reasonably opt out of doing such a thankless job.)

This disparity in numbers wouldn’t be an issue if officials for postseason games were chosen by ranking and/or ability with no consideration for gender. In other words, if there are 10 state championship games (five for girls and five for boys) and three officials for each, and if the top 30 officials regardless of gender worked those games, there’d be no need to write this article. Presumably, then, if five women were in that list of top 30, they would be randomly assigned, and as likely to call a boys’ game as a girls’ game.

The reality is, though, that, to pick a number, the top ten officials are in the pool for a particular state title game. If there are 100 male officials, that means only those in the 90th percentile and above get the call. But if there are only 20 women (and usually the ratio isn’t that high), then the girls get officials in the 50th percentile and above. If you ranked all 120 officials in order, without regard to gender, the girls would be getting, at the worst, refs in the 83rd percentile and above, and boys would have females officiate their games.

So again, think about the state playoffs. When was the last time a woman did a boys’ title game?

Now some will huff and puff about the speed of the game, and how the women aren’t fast enough—but those are probably the same grey-haired, overweight guys who can’t keep up to boys’ games but do them anyway. And they also forget that three-person mechanics negates the need for raw speed in officiating.

In short, basketball is basketball and officiating is officiating. If a woman is good enough to decide who wins a state title—if a woman is good enough to help determine the outcome of a game that is the culmination of literally years of effort—then surely she’s good enough to do so for the boys as well as the girls.

And when that happens, when the likelihood of seeing a female official calling a boys’ game is just the same as the likelihood of seeing a female official calling a girls’ game, then we’ll all know that the best refs are getting assigned to the most important games.

But as long female officials only work the girls’ games, then it’s clear that state high school associations are more concerned with political correctness than giving the girls the same kind of experience that they give the boys, and that girls’ high school basketball is clearly considered second class by the people who run the sport.

The post Officially Screwed appeared first on SLAM.

CHICAGO — “They’re not ready,” said an NBA scout sitting at one end of the four courts at Attack Athletics somewhere in the wilds of Chicago. “But they have to go.”

“Greg Oden is the name you put on the story,” he said, “but if you go to school and blow out your knee, will the school president pay you $15 million? Will a booster?”

At this level, for the top 24 boys in the country (OK, maybe 24 of the top 50, given the vagaries of the process), it’s about the big bucks that are supposedly just around the corner. It’s about impressing not only NBA scouts, but NBA general managers (Larry Bird was in the house Monday), and impress them enough and literally millions of dollars will flow into a family’s bank account.

Of course, that same NBA scout said only eight-to-10 of the assembled high school superstars will wind up in the Association, but all the others, barring disaster, will be able to get a free education and make significant money playing basketball overseas if they so desire.

And therein lies the problem: The middle school stars around the country look at the McDonald’s game on TV, and see themselves five years from now. The truth is, though, that only 12 boys will get that far, and there are probably 12 million who think they will.

And at the game itself, only the most self-aware have accepted the fact that more than half of them will never put on an NBA uniform, and of those that do, the odds say only a couple will have an actual career.

The rest, at age 30 or so, will return to the real world with the rest of the guys they grew up with. If they’re smart, they got their degree (for free) along the way, and they can leverage that and their connections into a nice job and a shot at a good life. For many, though, they’ll have been trapped by the belief that the big bucks in basketball were inevitable, and they’ll find themselves looking for a job just like the nerds they used to stuff into lockers in high school—or worse, that nerd will be the one who decides whether they get the gig.

But for these few days, the dreams are all intact. The tall boys are shuffled from event to event, there are cameras, recorders and reporters, and they justifiably feel the world is opening up just for them.

On the court, they will look to show off a little, throw one down, or unleash a killer crossover, and hopefully enjoy every minute.

For a few of them (fewer than they think), the ride will continue. There will be the people taking care of every need, worrying about their health, knocking on the hotel door if they’re late, and the money will flow in.

But for most, the road will get bumpier, and this will mark the peak experience—and remember, these are the best seniors in the country. The tens of thousands of other high school players, and middle school ones too, should try to come to grips with the brutal mathematics and harsh reality of the athletic equation: The odds of making a living playing basketball (or any other sport) are worse than that of winning the lottery, and putting too much time and energy into that dream can leave a young man unprepared for the real world when it jumps up and slaps him in the face.

The boys in this game—and they are boys, no matter what they believe—aren’t ready for what‘s coming. And sadly, too many others who set aside school and everything else to chase the hoop dream are in the same spot: They’re not ready either.

The post Too Much, Too Soon? appeared first on SLAM.

The best post player in the Class of 2011 is Elizabeth Williams, bound for Duke. She’s known for her strength, her great footwork, her ability to finish with both hands and her toughness in the paint.

So what’s the first thing she does in the McDonald’s All-American Game, on the East’s first possession, no less? That’s right, she knocks down a three.

“No one had picked me up, and after seeing me shoot threes in practice yesterday, my coach told me that if no one was guarding me, I should shoot it.” Williams said.

Williams’ long-range shot made it 3-2 and the East never trailed again.

* * * * *

And speaking of coaching, it’s usually not an issue in these kinds of games, given the limited practice time, but Mary Coyle Klinger, the East coach, deserves some credit. Though the rosters were balanced, her team was more cohesive, more organized and dominated the game much more than the 78-66 final score indicates.

Of course, it’s in the blood. Coyle’s sister Patty coached the New York Liberty up until the 2009 season.

* * * * *

Though the crowd was the best ever for the game (20,019, standing room only), the start of the girls’ game was played in an oddly silent arena. The thrum of conversation not related to the game was louder than what was happening on the court — which was partially explained by the fact that the East was up by as much as 22 in the first 20 minutes.

* * * * *

Perhaps the most interesting back story on the girls’ side belongs to 6-4 Temi Fagbenle, who had her choice of three national teams. Her parents are Nigerian, but she was born in the United States and also claims English citizenship. Even though she went to high school in the US and will play for Harvard, she’s decided to represent England, and will undoubtedly be on the British Olympic team in 2012.

First, though, she’s going to change things in the Ivy League. She may not have scored Wednesday, but she blocked 2 shots in less than a minute and showed speed and coordination running the long floor at the United Center.

* * * * *

The two teams scrimmaged Tuesday afternoon, leading to a bit of woofing at the hotel Tuesday night. According to East players, the biggest talker was Kaleena Mosqueda-Lewis, the great shooter who will go to UConn.

After the game, Mosqueda-Lewis was in no mood to acknowledge that she may have fired up the East — she wanted to win, just like all the girls.

* * * * *

And wanting to win actually translated into an all-star team that was concerned about defense and rebounding. “We wanted to lock them down,” said East point guard Ariel Massengale (Tennessee), and that’s exactly what happened. The West hit two of its 14 shots and at one point was five for 29.

“We took too many outside shots,” said Brianna Banks, the West’s leading scorer, who will also go to Connecticut.

* * * * *

Kiah Stokes only had 1 point, and her team lost, but it was still a day to celebrate. It was her 18th birthday — and she had just spent a week at the McDonald’s All-American Game, which remains the gold standard for post-season high school all-star games.

“It was so much fun,” said Banks about the week, which started with a visit to the Ronald McDonald House, which gives parents of seriously ill children a place to stay while their child is getting medical treatment, and included four days of activities and events. And then, the second half, at least, was played before a large crowd the girls, in a glamorous arena, so in the end, it wasn’t as much about who won as it was about just enjoying the experience.

Which is as it should be.

The post Enjoying the Experience appeared first on SLAM.

The girls want to win.

The guys? “The guys just want to show…,” said one female McDonald’s All American, “what they can do.”

That strategic pause was because the unnamed player was about to say “show off.” In other words, the young males want to strut their stuff, throw down a dunk, break an ankle and look just as spiffy as possible on national TV.

The girls? Unanimously, they just want to win.

When I told a table full of girls’ players who I was from California and I wanted the West to win, Alexyz Vaioletama (from national champ Mater Dei, and bound for USC) stuck her hand across the table for me to high-five.

That said, it may not be the prettiest game, for few all-star games are, and there will be turnovers galore and plenty of missed shots. The reason for the latter is basically the girls’ lack of familiarity with playing in big arenas like the United Center in Chicago. There’s no background for the baskets, the rims are tight (mandated by the NBA) and the lighting doesn’t make the baskets jump out from the backboard, so the most exciting part of the girls’ game — the three-point shot — will not be in evidence. Well, unless Kaleena Mosqueda-Lewis is shooting.

Mosqueda-Lewis, the consensus Player of the Year (also from Mater Dei of Santa Ana, CA), is a 6-foot wing with great form, quick feet and a sure touch. Up until eighth grade, though, Mosqueda-Lewis was a post.

“I was playing with 17 year olds,” she says, “and I realized I wasn’t going to be a post.”

So she went down to the gym with her dad, and starting shooting. And shooting. And shooting. And then shooting some more.

A thousand shots a day. Every day. A thousand shots … but there are a thousand shots and there are a thousand shots.

As one NBA scout said, “You have to make the repetitions at game speed, and not many kids are willing to do that.” In other words, it’s easy enough to shoot a thousand leisurely shots with someone passing you the ball, and you casually jack up three after three. It’s quite another thing to make every one of those thousand shots with perfect footwork, a high release and at the pace that a game requires.

Thanks to her dad, Mosqueda-Lewis did just that, and the results are obvious. With her size and strength, she can step back and drill a three, pull up for a jumper, or as she did during a critical moment in the California state championship game, drop a defender with a Michael Jordan pushoff (think Byron Russell), and then calmly step back to drain the three.

Most girls at this level, and most boys too, don’t take the time to work on their shot. After all, they can get to the rack whenever they want thanks to their athletic gifts — and their coaches are more than happy to let them. The coaches want to win, and so do the parents, so why have a girl miss some 15-footers to improve her skills when she can win game after meaningless AAU game by attacking the basket?

Well, she could get better by figuring out how to make jumpers in a game, but sadly, the way the system works, there’s no premium on players getting better. The reward is for winning, and so that’s what everyone focuses on.

That will be obvious in the girls’ McDonald’s game, as there will be missed layups due to the presence of many tall posts in the paint, and also, on the positive side, a desire to beat those other all-stars.

And for the record, the West has won seven of the nine previous girls’ games. Alexyz, the other 11 girls on the West roster and I are all hoping to make it eight.

The post From Distance appeared first on SLAM.

So the Minnesota Lynx win the draft lottery — which should the occasion for shouts of joy and an outbreak of celebration. But for this perennially unlucky, and self-destructive, franchise, it is of course a mixed blessing.

The reason? The unquestioned prize of the Draft is one Maya Moore, a wing player whose pro position is uncertain. She’s too small to be a 4, maybe not quick enough to defend at the 3, but a wonderful player with a tremendous toolbox of skills. She’s also a hard-working winner who went from not having a jumpshot as a junior in high school to being a 41.7 percent shooter from beyond the arc as a junior in college. She’s the perfect fit for a lot of teams, two of which happened to be in the lottery with the Lynx.

But Tulsa and Chicago didn’t get the first pick, Minnesota did, and the Lynx already have a 3-4 combo player in Seimone Augustus, who is at the same level as Maya Moore. They also have Candice Wiggins, a 2-3 college All-American, and Monica Wright, the No. 3 overall pick from last year, who came on strong at the end of the season, also as wing player.

Sadly, Wiggins and Wright are both miscast as point guards, and even if they could play there, Minnesota just traded for hometown girl Lindsay Whalen, who can only play the 1.

So if Minnesota picks Moore, where do they play her? They already have a logjam on the wing, though a rotation of Augustus, Wiggins and Wright is acceptable, especially if Wiggins picks up a few minutes at the point. (If Wiggins plays 10 minutes for Whalen, that’s 90 minutes of time for the trio, which works out rather nicely.) But add Moore to the mix, and there’s a problem. Moore isn’t a WNBA power forward, and neither is Augustus, but even if each played 10 minutes a game there, that still wouldn’t give all four young, talented players enough court time.

In addition, the Lynx’ incumbent power forward is Rebekkah Brunson who, when healthy, is a rebounding demon and the perfect complement to the skilled perimeter players. So Brunson at the 5? Not really. She’s undersized at the 4, and besides Nicky Anosike isn’t that bad.

(Perceptive readers may wonder why, if Minnesota has all this talent, that the Lynx even had a lottery pick. In a word, injuries. Only Whalen and Wright were healthy the entire season, and Wiggins played only eight games. Augustus came back very quickly from major surgery in April and was never really 100 percent, and Brunson battled a balky knee early in the summer.)

But even with Brunson and Anosike, as both have knee issues, what Minnesota really needs is a big, strong post player — and there just happens to be one out there. Australian teenager Liz Cambage is 6-8, and was a revelation in the World Championships, showing strength, aggressiveness and just enough skill to look like one of the world’s best centers. So what’s the problem? Moore is a great American player; Cambage is a pretty good Australian. Moore could become Michael Jordan; Cambage could become Greg Oden, which would leave the Lynx looking like fools, a role they have too often played. (How about trading Katie Smith for Chandi Jones? Still the worst trade in WNBA history …)

OK, trade down to the No. 2 spot, let Tulsa take Moore and get Cambage. It still wouldn’t look great if Moore turns out to be an MVP, but Cambage and something else of value would be a deal that could be justified. The problem? Tulsa’s got nothing to offer that’s worth anything except a first-round draft choice in 2012, and even Nolan Richardson might be smart enough not to give up a lottery pick to move up one spot in the Draft. After all, Cambage or Amber Harris or whoever will help the Shock, who aren’t going to the Playoffs any time soon.

No, the Lynx need a big-time post player, and Chicago doesn’t have one to offer either. The Sky certainly isn’t giving up Sylvia Fowles, unless Minnesota threw Augustus into the mix, and hopefully, the Lynx front office is smart enough to see the stupidity of that move.

What Minnesota needs, simply, is Liz Cambage, who probably isn’t worth a first overall pick. Maya Moore clearly is, but the Lynx don’t need her.

Luckily, no decision needs to be made — or should be made — until next spring, so Minnesota’s brain trust can see how Moore does as a senior who must carry pretty much the entire load for UConn, and how Cambage develops, and if Amber Harris or someone else emerges as a viable alternative in the top spot.

Still, it would have been a lot easier for Minnesota if the ping-pong balls had bounced Tulsa’s way, or even Chicago’s. Then the Lynx’ choice would have been made for them.

The post When Luck is Unlucky appeared first on SLAM.

The New York Liberty is the most important franchise in the WNBA.

Californians like me hate to concede anything to the Right Coast, especially to New Yorkers who appear to believe their little island is the center of the universe, but the truth simply can’t be ignored: Without a successful franchise in New York, the WNBA’s ongoing battle for survival will be much more difficult.

Sadly, the Liberty are owned by James Dolan, who has now become the worst owner in the NBA with Chris Cohan’s departure from Golden State, and is in contention for the same title in the WNBA. His inexplicable devotion to clearly inadequate general manager Carol Blazejowski resulted in the gutting of a Liberty team that was once one of the best in the league. Her regime can be summed up with one signature trade: A first-round draft choice that turned into Rookie of the Year and National Team member Tina Charles for Sidney Spencer (2.6 ppg in 8.4 mpg last summer).

Dolan finally fired Blazejowski, but with typical randomness, did so after Blazejowski rebuilt the team around a gift-wrapped Cappie Pondexter and finally had created hope for the future. New York was 22-12, and even though the Liberty got thumped by upstart Atlanta in the Eastern Conference championships, it was still a great season.

Nonetheless, the firing was greeted with joy by many New York fans, though it was coupled with uncertainty about who might replace her and departed coach Anne Donovan (who took the job at Seton Hall). The hiring of 65-year-old John Whisenant, who won a WNBA title in Sacramento in 2005, to do both jobs is probably a good one, but it comes with some caveats.

First, Whisenant is a defensive coach, and his aggressive, unorthodox system leads to low-scoring, grind-it-out games that can be painful to watch. That system does lead to wins, with the right personnel, but it’s as yet unclear whether Liberty fans will embrace a style that is more likely to generate a 62-59 victory than an 87-83 one.

More important, though, is the fact that Whisenant will have to win over fans who will no longer be going to Madison Square Garden to watch games. Instead, the Liberty will be relocated to Newark while MSG is renovated, and that relocation will last for at least three summers.

This is bad news for the Liberty, as it’s hard to know how many fans will follow the team to New Jersey, and if there are a significant number of new season ticket holders who will emerge in the Garden State. The guess is that a) a lot of present fans will defect, and b) there won’t be a long line at the ticket windows to replace them.

Maybe Cappie Pondexter, a Rutgers’ alum and one of the most electrifying players in the women’s game, will manage to attract some fans, but then again, it’s hard to be a spectacular offensive player in a system that emphasizes defense, defense, defense and then some rebounding.

So the worst-case scenario is that the Liberty plays a dull, if marginally effective, style, in their new home in front of small crowds that lack the passion of the ones at Madison Square Garden. The team loses money, Dolan loses patience and conceivably New York no longer has a WNBA team.

Of course, the best-case scenario is that Whisenant wins a bunch of games, Pondexter scores a bunch of points, old fans make the trek to New Jersey, new fans flock to the games, and the Liberty emerge from their three-year exile stronger than when they left.

Neither extreme is all that likely, but the league – and women’s basketball – desperately need the outcome to be closer to the best case than the worst case. An irrelevant Liberty franchise will lower the profile of the league to national sponsors, and will make it that much harder for the WNBA to build on its 14 hardscrabble years of survival.

So everyone, even Californians, needs to root for Whisenant and the Liberty, and hope that Pondexter and company win lots of games. Even after 14 years, there’s no rock-solid guarantee that the league will survive to celebrate its 16th birthday, but there’s no question things will look a lot rosier if the New York Liberty are a success on the court and at the ticket window.

For more by Clay Kallam, and more on women’s basketball, go to Full Court Press.

The post Loss of Liberty appeared first on SLAM.

Carol Blazejowski was one of the best women’s basketball players ever – and was also one of the worst general managers in the WNBA.

But New York Liberty fans won’t have Blaze to kick around any more, as she was unceremoniously, and surprisingly, fired on Tuesday. OK, technically her contract wasn’t renewed, but given her interviews and actions recently, she was focused on the 2011 version of the Liberty, not an imminent job search.

The list of Blazejowski’s personnel blunders is long, capped by trading a draft pick that turned into Rookie of the Year Tina Charles for Sidney Spencer. Casual fans might have heard of Charles, but only the Tennessee faithful – and a horde of disgruntled New York fans – know that Spencer is a 6-3 three-point shooter who is a borderline WNBA player. It’s really not necessary to go through the entire painful list of Blazejowski errata (Olga Firsova in the first round?), but it is also only fair to point out that she had a good year in 2010.

Some will claim that Cappie Pondexter’s demand to be traded to New York so she could get into the fashion business was just good luck, but Blazejowski did fine-tune the deal to make it work for all concerned. She also signed Taj McWilliams-Franklin as a free agent, an excellent decision, and was more than happy to take Plenette Pierson out of Nolan Richardson’s clueless hands in midseason.

The result was a second-place finish in the East, and if not for Janel McCarville twisting her ankle in the shootaround before game one of the Atlanta series, New York might have made it all the way to the WNBA Finals. So 2010 was a much better season than 2009, which leads one to wonder why Blazejowski was fired now instead of earlier.

There are no obvious answers, except for the fact that the Liberty are without a coach (Anne Donovan is off to Seton Hall), and will be playing in Newark for the next three summers thanks to renovation of Madison Square Garden. Perhaps ownership wants to bring in a combination coach/GM with some serious name recognition (though who that would be is a mystery) to fire up the fan base and get them to cross over to New Jersey on a regular basis, or maybe somebody finally recognized that Blazejowski had all but ruined one of the potentially strongest franchises in the league.

Whatever the reason, count this as good news for the WNBA. Sure, it’s possible the bumbling Dolan management team will bring in someone worse than Blazejowski (Isiah Thomas?), but most likely it will be a step up – and the New York franchise is absolutely critical for the long-term success of the league. NYC is a basketball hotbed and a media center, so what happens there will have much more impact than what happens in Tulsa, or San Antonio.

And if nothing else, booting Blazejowski will bring back a significant number of Liberty fans who were so disgusted with her performance that they had given up on the team, and even worse, given up buying tickets.

* * * * *

Speaking of New York, Cappie Pondexter ducked out of the World Championships, and apparently hoped no one would notice. Pondexter, one of the four or five best players in the world, has played with USA Basketball consistently throughout her career, but decided not to play in this year’s World Championships in France.

She wanted to rest her body between the Liberty season and the start of her big-money gig in Russia, which is somewhat understandable – though I think she should have played for the US and delayed her start in Russia. Regardless, it’s her choice, and that’s fine, but she definitely owed women’s basketball fans some kind of explanation.

Instead, she left National Team coach Geno Auriemma hanging, forcing him to make up something about an injury, which just made everything worse. If Pondexter had simply said “I’ve played for USA Basketball since I was 16, I have professional obligations in Russia and I need a break,” it would have been much better. As it is, she just looks like she’s trying to duck taking responsibility for her actions, and as a result, cost herself some fans.

* * * * *

Blazejowski wasn’t the only one getting the ax: Steven Key of Chicago was fired, opening up a coaching/general manager spot in the midwest.

Key, like Blazejowski, was vilified by his fan base, so perhaps owner Michael Alter is hoping a new face will draw some paying customers. If not, the Sky may be moving west in 2012, as a change in the ownership of the Golden State Warriors has finally opened the door to the possibility of a Bay Area franchise.

New operating owner Joe Lacob ran the San Jose Lasers of the ABL, but since his group hasn’t officially taken the Warriors over yet, there really isn’t time to put a WNBA team in place for 2011. If Lacob waits a year, he can either drum up support for the Warriors to run a team, or find other investors for what should be a successful franchise. The East Bay, where the Warriors play, is a tremendous area for basketball, and the lesbian population is substantial – a combination that bodes well for the WNBA.

So if the Sky (or the Shock) are looking for a new home in 2012, Oracle Arena will most likely be available – and will most likely be the home for one of the better WNBA franchises.

The post Strange Timing appeared first on SLAM.

Seattle and Phoenix are clearly the class of the West, and now that Nolan Richardson extended his largesse to the Mercury, Phoenix has a much better chance to knock off the Storm in the Western Conference finals. But like Seattle, the Mercury have almost no depth and cannot afford an injury to any of their key players, so staying healthy is really job one.

For the rest of the West, it’s as much about Maya Moore, the prize of the 2011 Draft, as it is about losing in the first round of the Playoffs. One thing to remember, though: Just one playoff game can generate significant income, and a team that makes it to the conference finals can turn red ink to black with just those two or three extra games. So even though fans may be thinking, “What’s the use? We can’t beat Seattle anyway,” the accountants are a lot more concerned with this year’s bottom line.

Seattle (21-2, first): The Storm are the class of the league – so far, and so healthy. Their fragile stars (Swin Cash, Lauren Jackson and Sue Bird) have all battled injuries in their careers, and so Brian Agler’s biggest concern has to be balancing their minutes. After all, all are 29 or 30, and all have played year-round for most of their careers. So does Agler cut back on their minutes (they all average 32.2 mpg or more) and go to his non-existent bench this last month, or does he try to keep the momentum of the brilliant start going? There’s really only crucial game, against Phoenix, and that’s on August 20, the second-to-last day of the season. Presumably Agler could focus on managing minutes and set the rotation up so that the big three are all ready to play 33 minutes a game on that date, and in the Playoffs – or he could just play to win every game from here on out and hope everyone stays healthy. It’s a tough call, and there’s no necessarily right answer: If Bird, say, twists her ankle and is 75 percent for the Playoffs, a 30-4 record won’t mean that much. But if Seattle backs off, finishes 26-8 and goes into the Playoffs with a loss to Phoenix, that’s not a good answer either.

Phoenix (10-13, second): If Temeka Johnson and/or Tangela Smith start shooting well, the Mercury’s offense could get better – that’s a frightening thought, but neither Johnson or Smith are shooting as well as they have in the past. Add Kara Braxton, a huge upgrade over Nicole Ohlde despite her inconsistency and erratic ballhandling, and Phoenix isn’t that far behind Seattle and Indiana. In short, the Mercury are still a serious threat for a WNBA title, and any team that underestimates the core of Diana Taurasi, Penny Taylor, Candice Dupree and DeWanna Bonner could find itself giving up 110 and losing by 20. Of course, should any of that quartet get hurt, the Phoenix bandwagon will fall apart very quickly. Thanks to salary cap issues, there’s just not much behind the big four.

San Antonio (8-15, third): The two most important games on the Silver Stars’ schedule are this Friday, and Friday, August 13. Those are the two San Antonio games left against Tulsa, and Silver Stars simply must win both of those games. They also have two against Minnesota, and they must win one to get the head-to-head advantage against the Lynx. That would be three wins, which would put San Antonio with 11 victories – and in the West, only a couple more should take the Silver Stars out of the Maya Moore sweepstakes. Maybe Washington (on the schedule twice)? Phoenix (three games, but one is the last game of the season, which probably won’t matter to the Mercury)? It says here they get it done – and are rewarded with a third-place finish.

Los Angeles (8-16, fourth): Two wins against Tulsa, and one against Minnesota, and the Sparks are sitting pretty. The latter would give them the tiebreaker against the Lynx, the first two would put the pressure on Minnesota to beat two teams from the East. And you know, it might not be a bad idea for L.A. to finish fourth rather than third, as the Sparks appear to match up better against Seattle than Phoenix, especially now that Kara Braxton is in the desert. Of course, there are those who say fifth would be even better, as the friendly ping-pong balls might well deliver Maya Moore to Los Angeles, especially if New York makes the Playoffs in the East. (The WNBA would be far better served with Moore in L.A. or NYC than in Tulsa or Minneapolis.) Then again, the Sparks might as well go as far as they can this year, because their aging roster, with or without Moore and Candace Parker, isn’t built for the future.

Minnesota (7-15, fifth): Here’s the problem: The Lynx have already played Tulsa five times. That’s four of Minnesota’s wins, and the Lynx don’t get to play the Shock any more. Instead, they’ve got two against Seattle, and one each against Connecticut, Washington and Indiana. So what that means is that the Lynx must simply sweep both games against San Antonio and both games against Los Angeles. Otherwise, they will lose the tiebreaker against both, which would make a difficult task that much harder. Minnesota also needs to find a couple more wins (New York at home August 8?) or a season that began with such promise will end as it always does in the Land of Ten Thousand Lakes: Hoping for some luck in the lottery.

Tulsa (4-20, sixth): It’s just too easy to bash the Shock and its franchise-killing general manager/coach, so let’s shift the focus to a couple of players who have managed to thrive despite Nolan Richardson’s erratic leadership. Given minutes, second-year post Chanté Black has shot well (52.4 percent), rebounded well (7.3 rpg, 12.8 rebounds per 40 minutes of court time) and blocked shots (1.8 bpg). Now why Scholanda Robinson has taken nearly twice as many shots despite shooting just 41.7 percent is another question, but Black has certainly shown she can play in the league. Veteran guard Kiesha Brown, now 31, has also shown well (46.6 percent shooting, 1.6 A/TO), but otherwise the Shock roster has pretty much played (down) to expectations. A bigger concern, of course, is where win number five will come from, and home games Friday against San Antonio and August 14 against L.A. look like the best bets. The problem, though, is that every team but Seattle is locked into a Playoff hunt, and cannot afford to take Tulsa lightly. But it says here that the Shock, somehow, manage two more wins to finish a gaudy 6-28.

The post Shining a Light on the West appeared first on SLAM.

So I’m talking to a guy who runs a scouting service for college coaches looking for high school girls to recruit–and he says he never watches the WNBA.

I didn’t pursue the reasons why, because he looked like one of those purists who hates the NBA, and thinks the college game is the pinnacle of the sport. I don’t need to go into that argument, and try to convince someone that just playing hard doesn’t necessarily equate to good basketball–after all, the girls on my high school team play pretty hard, but I still wouldn’t recommend that a random basketball fan pay $5 to watch us play.

But regardless of his reasons, it is simply foolish for anyone associated with women’s basketball to not pay attention the WNBA–and here a few reasons why:

1) It’s the best women’s basketball league in the world. The Euroleague, which brings together the top club teams from all the European countries, has some pretty good players, but they’re spread across a lot of teams, and the limitations on the number of Americans on each roster definitely dilutes the talent.

And though the WNBA doesn’t have all the top Euros, due to its relatively low salaries, there’s no doubt that the 11-woman rosters in the W are deeper and better than their counterparts in Europe, or anywhere else.

Which means, simply, that anyone who wants to know about what the best women’s basketball looks like needs to watch the WNBA. (It is true, however, that the coaching isn’t the best in the world–the best coaches, for the most part, follow the money and thus are in the NCAA.) A professional or semi-professional worker bee in women’s basketball, regardless of level, must be familiar with the WNBA.

There is one problem: On TV, the WNBA doesn’t look nearly as good as it actually is. To truly appreciate the level of play, it’s almost a necessity to be in the first few rows of a WNBA game–and then the strength, size, skill and physicality of the players becomes impossible to ignore.

Unfortunately, not many people can do that, and so when, for example, a talent evaluator used to watching high school players from the second row of the bleachers sees a WNBA game on TV, or from 40 rows up, it’s very hard for him to grasp how good the players really are.

2) It sets the standard. Those young players with serious ambitions in the sport absolutely must watch the WNBA, because there they’ll see what they must do to compete at the highest level. A 5-11 high school power forward may be all that in 3-D in summer basketball, but it won’t take many viewings of the WNBA to realize that there’s a very limited future for 5-11 power forwards–and that transitioning to the three sooner rather than later is an excellent idea.

More lessons: Smaller guards (anyone 5-9 or smaller) clearly must make three-pointers, and post players (6-3 or taller) must learn to love contact, and preferably initiate it.

A perceptive reader will note that most girls won’t make the WNBA – but first, who’s to say what 14-year-old will and what 14-year-old won’t. Angel McCoughtry was barely recruited out of high school, and was the top overall pick in the 2009 draft. Equally important, the best college players are preparing for the WNBA, and those are the players that young hopefuls will be playing against throughout their high school years.

So knowing the WNBA means knowing the competition, and that’s very valuable information, especially to someone who’s trying to evaluate high school talent.

3) It is crucial for the future of the sport. Because the WNBA is by far the most visible American professional team sport for women, it attracts young athletes into the game. Why would any great young female athlete choose lacrosse as her top sport? Sure, there are scholarships here and there, but there’s no money in it after college, and no fame or glory.

With the WNBA on TV most Tuesday nights in the summer, it’s pretty clear that there’s a future in women’s basketball, and a future that includes not only a salary, but national TV exposure. But should the WNBA disappear, all of a sudden that motivation disappears, and no longer is basketball more attractive than volleyball, softball, soccer, lacrosse or water polo.

So anyone who cares about women’s and girls’ basketball needs to pay attention, acknowledge and promote the WNBA, if only for the good of the game.

And what they’ll find, as they watch the league more and more, is that it can stand on its own as quality basketball, worth watching for its own sake–and played at a much higher level than NCAA teams can ever dream of.

The post Don’t sleep on the WNBA appeared first on SLAM.

Once you get past the glitz, the overblown pregame shows and endless chatter, the NBA Finals are simply riveting basketball – and one reason is the sheer magnificence of the athleticism.

Now, “magnificence” is not a word I throw around a lot, but NBA players are simply a breed apart. With all the World Cup ads blanketing ESPN and ABC, it’s hard not to wonder how good a soccer team the US would have if all the NBA players had grown up kicking a ball rather than dribbling it.

So what does this have to do with the WNBA? Simply put, it means the entertainment value of the women’s game will never match that of the NBA because of the athletic abilities of the players are so different. Even a boring NBA game will feature two or three jaw-dropping displays of pure athleticism that are worth watching regardless of the setting.

In the WNBA, though, there’s just not the same potential for consistent explosive plays that beg to be seen over and over again. Sure, there are brilliant passes, and all-out hustle plays, and skilled footwork and shots – but the jaw seldom drops in amazement. (And in a bad WNBA game, the jaw will drop, but usually it’s the beginning of a yawn.)

So does this mean the WNBA isn’t worth watching? Of course not, because the WNBA, especially with just 12 teams, offers up quality basketball played by professionals, and played by professionals who have much more reason to play hard all the time than their male counterparts.

One of those reasons is, oddly, the low level of pay in the WNBA compared to Europe. The WNBA maximum salary is around $90,000 while a max player will easily make double that in Europe – but paradoxically, pay level in Europe is in great part determined by performance in the WNBA. So the American rookie making $43,000 at home knows full well that if she plays great in the US she’ll make a bunch more money in Europe, where she won’t have to play as hard.

So there’s always something at stake in the WNBA, and there’s also a sense that the league won’t make it if the players aren’t totally committed to it. The women are on a kind of a mission, and it shows in how intense they are. (It’s also easier to be intense when the bodies are smaller – the potential for injury is the same regardless of the size of the athlete who receives a blow, so a 6-8 player is not necessarily any less likely to get hurt than a 6-1 player, male or female. But a 6-8 player is going to deliver a lot more punishment than a 6-1 player, especially over 82 games, so even aside from the money, there are reasons why women can, and do, play harder.)

But you know, kids play really hard in high school, and that doesn’t necessarily mean anyone is going to pay $25 to watch them. In the end, professional sports’ teams are competing for the entertainment dollar, and part of the value is athleticism on display. The WNBA and NBA may be equal in some of the skills of the players (shooting and ballhandling, say) but they are not when it comes to spectacular plays.

In fact, they aren’t even close, and though it’s not like the Lakers and Celtics are going to deliver seven games’ worth of highlight reels, fans can count on several “did-you-see-that?” moments every time out. In short, expecting great in the NBA Finals is a given – but for the WNBA to lead fans to believe the same will happen in a San Antonio-Indiana game in mid-July is simply foolish.

The WNBA can and should succeed because it’s the best women’s basketball league in the world, and it can offer (if expansion dreams are held in check) a high-quality, professional product built around legitimate stars.

But it’s not the NBA, and shouldn’t pretend to be. Even the most ardent fan of the women’s game couldn’t watch the NBA Finals without being forced to admit the men do things that, at this point at least, the women can’t even imagine doing – and that’s one reason NBA players earn a lot more money, and get so much more media coverage.

The post If You ‘Expect Great,’ Watch the NBA Finals appeared first on SLAM.

* You can’t ask for more. It looks like UConn will try to tie or break UCLA’s record 88-game winning streak at Stanford next December. The way the schedule maps out, the Huskies will have won 87 or 88 games (barring an upset of epic proportions) when they arrive at Maples Pavilion.

Both teams, of course, will look considerably different than they did in the NCAA Finals, but each will reload with quality freshmen. Stanford gets 6-3 post Chiney Ogwumike (yes, Nneka’s sister), most services’ player of the year, and UConn adds spectacular guard Bria Hartley, so there will still be plenty of starpower.

A bit of advice: Get your tickets early.

* First Washington, now Oregon State. Tia Jackson was plagued by transfers and allegations of being too tough on players in Seattle, and now the same scenario is being played out in Corvallis. LaVonda Wagner has had five players transfer out this year (14 in her time there) and one assistant coach leave — and Kate Lanz, a player who’s leaving, said “It wasn’t a positive environment.” It was clear she wasn’t talking about wins and losses.

This is bad news for the Pac-10, as Wagner has three years left on her contact, and it’s unlikely Oregon State will buy her out – after all, Washington didn’t want to pay two years of Jackson’s deal, so it looks like she’s there for a while too. The result will be two teams that won’t be nearly as competitive as they should be, which means seven of the 10 teams (Washington State has almost no chance) won’t be anywhere close to as good as the West Coast Conference’s Gonzaga, and probably not as good as the Big West’s UC Davis or UC Santa Barbara.

Now, I’ve always gotten along with Wagner, and Washington has treated me well despite my criticisms, and I have no idea what’s actually happening at these schools. Maybe it’s spoiled players, maybe it’s frustration because the kids aren’t as good as they thought they were – but the bottom line is that we have losing programs shedding players in a league that desperately needs all the help it can get.

The business end of college sports starts with winning, and then with fans in the seats, and Washington especially is a school that has the pieces in place to do both. The Pac-10 can live with a couple teams struggling, but if Arizona (which didn’t want to pay much money to replace Joan Bonvincini) and USC (Michael Cooper?) are added to the trio of existing underachievers, things are going to get worse in the Pac-10 before they get better.

* More West Coast confusion. USF (which has always stood for the University of San Francisco and not some upstart in Florida) just hired Jennifer Azzi instead of Mark Trakh, who had been at USC and was unreasonably fired by athletic director Mike Garrett despite a series of devastating injuries. Debi Gell-Mann, who came from Stanford, opted to go with Azzi, who played at Stanford way back when, and once was a well-known figure in the game.

But Azzi has never coached at any level, and is a complete unknown to potential recruits – in fact, I’d be surprised if many coaches had ever seen her play. She has been doing motivational speeches, and maybe she can revitalize USF (when South Florida has alumni to match Bill Russell and KC Jones, then the Bulls can lay claim to the acronym) – but the cupboard is bare and the Bay Area isn’t swimming in kids who can vault the Dons past Gonzaga and St. Mary’s, which is just 30 miles away from USF.

I don’t know what Gell-Mann was thinking, but she has not made herself popular at USF, and this is yet another controversial decision. For her sake, the Azzi hire had better work out, or it could be the tipping point.

The post Set Your Cable Box Right Now… appeared first on SLAM.

Before we get down to it, a little geography lesson:

The San Francisco Bay Area consists of several more or less distinct geographic regions, and there are no cities with large populations. (San Francisco itself only has bout 750,000 residents.)

The South Bay is San Jose, the Silicon Valley and assorted suburbs. The North Bay is the least populated and is the best example of Northern California’s easy living and great weather. The West Bay isn’t really called the West Bay, as it’s San Francisco itself and a peninsula of land that includes Stanford and some very rich suburbs. The East Bay has the most people, with the western side of a range of hills consisting of cities (think Berkeley and Oakland), and the eastern side full of suburbs.

There are two large arenas in the entire Bay Area, HP Pavilion in San Jose (where the Sharks play) and Oracle Arena in Oakland (where the Warriors play). The two primary college arenas are Maples Pavilion at Stanford, fairly small and difficult to get to from the East Bay and North Bay, and Haas Pavilion on the UC Berkeley campus, which has absolutely no parking and is traffic hell to get to if it’s sold out.

With that in mind, consider the WNBA’s Bay Area expansion options. It must place the franchise where it will a) have a good place to play, and b) be easy to get to for the two main support groups for WNBA teams: The gay-lesbian population and families with young daughters who play basketball.

Back to geography. The South Bay is volleyball country. Usually one of its high schools is in contention for the national championship, and so most young girls who fit the athletic profile for basketball wind up playing volleyball. There are a couple powerhouse high school basketball teams, but there’s not a real girls’ basketball market for the WNBA to draw from.

The South Bay is also far removed from the gay-lesbian centers of San Francisco, Berkeley and Oakland. The Bay Area’s transit system doesn’t reach San Jose, and it’s a long, nasty drive from the East Bay or San Francisco to HP Pavilion.

The combination of those two factors makes HP Pavilion a bad location for a WNBA team – especially since the folks who run HP want no part of a WNBA franchise.

There are no places to play in San Francisco or the North Bay, so cross those two areas off the list of potential homes for a WNBA team – which means we’re down to Stanford (Maples), Cal (Haas) and Oracle.

The two college sites won’t work: Both are too hard to get to, and there’s no parking in Berkeley. (Mass transit isn’t really an option, for a variety of reasons I won’t go into.)

That leaves us with Oracle Arena, right off the freeway, with a mass transit stop (for what that’s worth), in the heart of the East Bay, which is big on girls’ basketball, and basketball of every kind. It’s also easily accessible from the gay-lesbian centers in Berkeley and Oakland, and not that hard to get to from San Francisco (though not that easy, either).

So why hasn’t the WNBA put a franchise at Oracle already? Isn’t it a natural site for a team, given the size of the media market and the good location? Two words: Chris Cohan.

Cohan, who has owned the Warriors far too long, is a nasty, litigious, borderline incompetent businessman who sued his best friend from junior high. He has run the Warriors into the ground, and done a terrible job managing Oracle Arena (as part of the Warriors’ ownership, he books all the events into Oracle). Not only didn’t he want a WNBA franchise to partner with the Warriors, he has made it impossible, either through conscious effort or simple poor management, for anyone else to work out an arena deal for a WNBA team.

Which has meant no WNBA team in one of its most compatible markets.

But that is going to change, and hopefully sooner rather than later. Cohan owes the IRS $150 million or so (not to mention long-suffering Warrior fans a well-run operation), and has put the team on the market. Larry Ellison, who owns Oracle, is one of the suitors, but whoever buys the team has to be a better fit for the WNBA than the hard-to-get-along-with Cohan.

Which means David Stern, Donna Orender and friends will be pressuring prospective Warrior purchasers to make it easy for the WNBA to play at Oracle in 2011 – and that will be no hardship. If any WNBA team is positioned to turn a profit, it’s an East Bay franchise, and if the new owner doesn’t want the team for himself, then he can still fill 17 dates at Oracle by playing nice with prospective WNBA investors.

So yes, the sale of the Warriors is not only good news for Bay Area NBA fans, it’s also good news for Bay Area WNBA fans, and the league itself. There has never really been anywhere to play but Oracle, and as long as Cohan was there, it wasn’t going to happen. He will be gone (not a moment too soon, whenever it occurs), and a WNBA team will arrive.

And that too, won’t be a moment too soon.

The post The WNBA’s New Home appeared first on SLAM.

The Man in the Moon was eclipsed for a few days, digesting the results of the first round of the Big Polka … and for fans of teams like, say, Ohio State, that digestion required some serious help from Pepto-Bismol, or perhaps a margarita or five.

But now we’re into the Sweet 16, the land where Cinderellas go to die, so the big kids on the block don’t have to worry about the little sisters any more. Or do they?

SACRAMENTO

The first game Saturday night matches two of the perennials in the women’s game, Georgia and Stanford – but the stories are a bit different.

Stanford and Tara VanDerveer have adjusted quite nicely to life in the latter half of the first decade of the 21st century, and their 34-game schedule is blemished only by a loss to some team from Connecticut. With Jayne Appel hampered by injuries, the likely No. 2 overall pick in the WNBA Draft is just the third best player on her team, behind power forward Nneka Ogwumike and 6-4 “small” forward Kayla Pedersen.

Georgia, on the other hand, has been on the decline, as Andy Landers hasn’t really changed too much over the years. His plan has always been to recruit like crazy, scream at his kids during games and win on sheer talent. Lately, though, he hasn’t had the talent advantage he had in the past and after a blistering start, the Bulldogs went 5-7 down the stretch before beating 12 seed Tulane by five and knocking off the Oklahoma State Rileys in overtime.

Allison Hightower is the real deal, but it’s hard to see Stanford losing this one – not only are the Cardinal the better team, they are a mere 100 miles from home and should have a few thousand fans in otherwise empty Arco Arena.

The late game is a rematch from last year’s tournament, when Gonzaga upset Xavier in the first round. This time, they meet in the Sweet 16, and once again, Gonzaga is the underdog. But the seventh-seeded Bulldogs have played two of the most exciting games in the tournament so far, slipping past North Carolina and No. 2 seed Texas A&M to get to the Sweet 16. They rely on the sterling point guard play of Courtney Vandersloot and a bevy of long, skilled and not necessarily blindingly quick wings – oh, and there’s that three-point shooter, Tiffanie Shives.

Xavier has Ta’Shia Phillips on the inside and Amber Harris wherever she wants, a combination that’s almost impossible to guard. The 29-3 Musketeers are the No. 3 seed, and should be favored, except for the fact that they’re on the West Coast and playing at 11:30 p.m. East Coast time. The Zags are hoping for a quadruple overtime in the first game so that Xavier will wind up playing at 3 a.m. body-clock time, and thus fall prey to Gonzaga’s uptempo style.

It says here that the late night does in the X-Women, Stanford thumps Georgia, and then, in the Elite Eight, Gonzaga goes back to Spokane on a pumpkin.

KANSAS CITY

Up in orbit, it looked like Nebraska would be vulnerable to UCLA, but the Cornhuskers rolled into Sunday’s late game after a relatively easy win. Kentucky, their opponent, also had an easy time, as the Wildcats got to play a Big 10 team – which is almost like drawing a bye. Liberty made Kentucky work a lot harder than Michigan State did, and Nebraska will be the biggest challenge the Wildcats have faced since playing Tennessee – and they lost to them by 16 and 18.

Nebraska, though, didn’t have the toughest Big 12 schedule, and there more than a few who thought Big Red should have been the fourth-best No. 1 seed instead of third. The semi-home court may help, though it may also be hard for local fans to bring themselves to root for Nebraska to do anything but crash and burn.

Oklahoma will present the same quandary for Missouri ticketbuyers, but the biggest problem for the Sooners will be Notre Dame. Irish coach Muffet McGraw is known for her postseason magic, and she’s got freshman sensation Skylar Diggins to lead her 29-5 team.

It’s no accident Oklahoma has twice as many losses, and the Sooners will be 25-11 after this one – and then the Irish will take down Nebraska and move on to the Final Four.

MEMPHIS

This is not the Tennessee of myth and legend, as the Volunteers don’t have a point guard and don’t have overwhelming talent. They are also very young, but then again Pat Summit has won 106 NCAA tournament games – yes, that’s right, 106 tournament games – so she has an idea of what to do at this level.

Tennessee also got eliminated in the first round last year, a whip that Summit has not been shy about applying to her sometimes struggling charges. Still, there are only two losses on the season, and the Volunteers won their first two tourney games by a total 61 points, so they’re playing pretty well right now.

Baylor didn’t play at all well in Berkeley, really, especially a brutally ugly 49-33 win over hapless Georgetown. In a way, though, that’s good news, because a team will always have a bad game in the tournament, and the trick is to win it. Well, thanks to Brittney Griner blocking 13 shots in the second half (yes, the second half), the Bears survived to play again.

Now they get Tennessee, a team they lost to in the first game of the season, and Griner has had a full season of college basketball. Call this an upset special, as the MitM fairly glows with the thought of Baylor in Indianapolis.

Of course, even after beating Tennessee, Baylor will have to get by the winner of Duke and San Diego State – and the Bears will have to battle to beat the Blue Devils. Yes, San Diego State has been impressive, but they’ve only beaten two decent but unspectacular BCS teams (underachieving Texas and play-no-one West Virginia) to get this far. Duke will shut down the Aztecs on defense, and get more than enough offense to roll into Monday’s final against Baylor.

Once there, though, the long arms of Brittney Griner will change everything, and Baylor will win close and late.

Dayton

Oh, excuse me, I drifted off there for a second …

Isn’t UConn in this bracket? So is there a reason to pay attention?

In a word, no. Iowa State barely got by Green Bay, and would have to make 80 percent of its threes to hang with the Huskies, who are better in every department.

So much for the early game Sunday. The late game will pit Florida State and Mississippi State in a battle that features two players fighting for first-round recognition in the WNBA draft: FSU’s Jacinta Monroe and MSU’s Alexis Rack. Florida State will probably win, but watch out for Mississippi State’s Congo connection – and of course, Rack, who could explode for 30 with hardly any provocation.

Then, of course, the winner advances to play UConn on Tuesday, and … sorry, my eyes sort of glazed over then.

What were we talking about?

INDIANAPOLIS

Wait ‘till next week, and the MitM will be Dead Wrong in Public once more. Until then, wake me when Connecticut isn’t playing.

To read more from Clay Kallam, and more about women’s basketball, go to Full Court Press.

The post The Man in the Moon Sees All appeared first on SLAM.

It’s been too long. Way too long.

And sadly, it will never be what it might have been.

Jacki Gemelos, the number one recruit in the country when she graduated from St. Mary’s of Stockton (Calif.) in 2006, will take the court Thursday for USC against the University of California in Berkeley.

Why is this news? Because this will be the first game Gemelos has played since February 23, 2006, when her high school career ended with a torn ACL. At the time, she was averaging 39 points a game, and was simply the most spectacular prep offensive player since Diana Taurasi. Then-USC coach Mark Trakh could look forward to playing a 6-0 guard who could do everything, and do it well. Gemelos could pass as well as shoot, bomb long threes as well as penetrate, and do everything with a flair and passion that marked her as one of those special players who are destined to take a place in the game’s history books.

But Gemelos loved to play, and I remember seeing her at the Portland airport in a wheelchair. Her knee was hurting, she said, but it was nothing really serious. She’d be out for a while, she thought, but there wasn’t any structural damage. I later heard she got off the plane in Atlanta and played five games the next weekend.

The next winter she tore her ACL. She slowly rehabbed at USC – and tore her ACL prior to the start of the ’07-08 season, according to some reports because she loved to play so much she got back on the court too soon. Again, the rehab. Again, the slow climb back. Just before the ’08-09 season began, Gemelos tore another ACL. Then in May 2009, the fourth operation.

And now, on February 4, 2010, Gemelos is finally ready to play her first college game.

Only those who have been through ACL rehab know how painful and difficult it is. And only those who have had operations on their knees can grasp how the pain of the injury and the grueling recovery sap confidence and aggression. But no one can appreciate what Jacki Gemelos has been through – four times she’s gone into surgery, and four times she has come out with the promise that this time it will work, this time she’ll be healed, this time she’ll be good to go, at least after a year of so of time spent with trainers, off the court, patiently working knee against machine, testing the pain threshold that has been tested so many times before.

I would love to believe that we’ll finally see the Jacki Gemelos we saw back in 2006 – but I’ve been around too long. Most young basketball players can bounce back almost completely from an ACL tear, though it sometimes takes 18 months instead of just of a year. A few players have returned from two such injuries – none, however, from three, and I don’t know of anyone who’s even tried to come back after four major surgeries, much less succeeded, and much less looked like anything but a shadow of the player she once was.

No, the victory for Gemelos is merely that she finally gets to play, and will take the court just 90 minutes from her hometown, where fans, teammates and opponents understood how good she was, and how good she could have been.

But even so, the depth of the loss cannot be overestimated. Even if Gemelos had been an ordinary college player, her love for the game is apparent in her willingness to go through so much pain and suffering to get back on the court. For her to lose the chance to play would be tragic enough, but she has also lost the opportunity to live up to her enormous potential. She can never know how good she might have been, never know if she would have been an all-American, a lottery pick in the WNBA draft, an Olympian. It’s all gone, disappeared in the twists of her knee, the tangle of torn ligaments.

Those who saw her were pretty much unanimous: Jacki Gemelos was a superstar in the making, a once-in-a-decade combination of talent and charisma, skill and love for the game. Of course, she would have had a huge impact on USC (I’m betting Trakh is still coaching there if she’s healthy) and the Pac-10. She would have gone a long way towards getting Southern California, the school and the region, excited about women’s basketball. She would have attracted casual fans and TV cameras, she would have been with USA Basketball, she would have been a WNBA lottery choice.

The game needed her, and more like her, because women’s basketball suffers from a lack of offensive superstars, which is just what Gemelos was. The cost to Gemelos, of course, is immeasurable, but the cost to USC, the Pac-10 and an entire sport has been huge as well.

It will be hard to set all the what-might-have-beens aside on Thursday, but it will still be a joyous day for the Gemelos family. There’s a lot of loose talk about long roads to recovery, but what Jacki Gemelos has gone through to play the game she loves puts all the rest in perspective.

And who knows? Maybe this is the first step to a story that will rival that of Kurt Warner’s, and maybe a few years from now, we’ll look back and say “We never thought she had a chance to be what she was – and how wrong we were.”

Of course, it would have been an even better story if the acronym “ACL” had never been in it, if Jacki Gemelos had taken the court, as planned, back in the fall of 2006. That was the story we wanted, that was the story we needed – sadly, though, this is the story we have.

The post Jacki Gemelos: A Dream Denied appeared first on SLAM.

“I fight authority, and authority always wins.”
— John Mellencamp

Nobody likes bosses. Nobody likes being told what to do, and, especially, nobody likes being told that what they did was wrong.

But that, of course, is exactly what basketball refs do. They are the bosses on the court, and they tell players, coaches and sometimes even fans precisely how to behave. They determine what is acceptable behavior and what is not, and they define the nature of a foul – which of course changes from game to game, quarter to quarter and minute to minute.

Naturally, this does not make them popular. They are authority, and they always win. They can send players to the bench with fouls, they can send coaches to the locker room with technicals, they can even send spectators to the parking lot. They are, in that way, sadly reminiscent of the boss at work, the bureaucrat in the IRS office, and the cop who just pulled over some poor sap who was going eight miles an hour above the speed limit.

So it’s not surprising that everyone delights in booing calls that go against the home team. And of course, those refs always favor the other side – for evidence, just ask fans of any sport if their teams get more calls than their opponents. In short, even though the refs are biased, the bias never balances out. Whoever a fan is rooting for always gets fewer whistles blown in her favor, and whoever the fan is rooting against always gets the breaks.

It does not take a genius to realize this is mathematically impossible. If UConn is playing Tennessee, both teams can’t be getting hammered by bad calls; and if Arizona State goes through the Pac-10 season with officials conspiring against them, those same officials can’t be meeting before the game to make sure that Washington never gets a call either.

A moment’s consideration makes it clear the refs aren’t really out to get anyone. They are busy trying to do their job as best they can, trying to please their supervisors so they can get more and better games, and they honestly don’t care about the outcome. (As Skip Caray, an old-time announcer once pointed out when he went from broadcasting Atlanta Hawks’ games to NBA teams he didn’t follow regularly: “It’s amazing how much better the officiating is when you don’t care who wins.”)

But still, fans, players and coaches gnash their teeth and whine about the refs. They are all convinced the officials are out to get them, sometimes personally, and they know the other team gets all the calls. So they yell. They gesticulate. They scream. They pound their feet on the floor. They put on a show, presumably hoping that will result in more calls going their way.

There is no evidence, though, that all the histrionics – and there are some very impressive displays, Oscar-worthy even – make any difference. In fact, the constant abuse heaped on officials actually only makes things worse. Consider: Everyone complains about the state of officiating, and wishes there were more good refs. But how many people want to deal with the abuse for very low pay? Not many. And every time one good official is driven out of the avocation by the mindless screaming of people who’ve never read a rule book, the quality of officiating goes down.

If fans, players and coaches really want better officiating, then the best move would be to scream less and encourage more, just as they do with the players on their team. Which leads to another point: Officials are part of the game, part of the athletic experience, and they, like players and coaches, make mistakes. At the high school, the players aren’t very good, in absolute terms, and the coaches aren’t either. The fans are unsophisticated, for the most part, and many have only a rudimentary grasp of the rules of the game. So why would anyone expect the officials to be working at a higher level than those around them? Of course, high school refs aren’t that good, which is why they’re working games with players and coaches who aren’t that good.

And that leads to the next question: Why, if mistakes by players and coaches are accepted as part of the flow of the game, can’t mistakes by the officials be accepted as well? Why are refs supposed to start out perfect, and then improve, when the apple of some fan’s eye, who just missed her fifth straight wideopen layup, is told to hang in there and keep working hard?

Another point: How many fans have read a rulebook cover to cover? How many players? How many coaches? How many of any group understand the positioning of refs on the court, and what each official is looking for at a given moment? How many have looked at a tape just to watch the officials, with a ref who understands the process?

In short, the guy 500 feet from the play whose knowledge of the rule book comes only from TV announcers who are hired for looks and a mellifluous voice probably doesn’t quite have the same perspective on a particular play as the trained official who’s standing five feet away.

So, again in short, shut up already. And that goes for players and coaches too. Screaming at the refs accomplishes nothing, except to drive good people away from the avocation, and occasionally to rattle weaker officials who will respond by making more bad calls than before.

After all, what good does it do? As John Mellencamp pointed out, authority’s always going to win anyway.

For more from Clay Kallam, and more about women’s basketball, go to Full Court Press.

The post Are Refs Really Villains? appeared first on SLAM.

Connect the dots.

• The Maloof family, which owns the Sacramento Kings and Monarchs, has rightfully claimed that it cannot compete in the 21st century NBA without a new arena.

• Even if they wanted to, the Maloofs do not have enough money on their own to build the kind of arena they need – which means that they must get some kind of financial help from the City of Sacramento.

• Though the politicians have been willing to come up with some money, the voters have not, so for the Maloofs to merely survive, much less thrive, in one of the smallest NBA markets, they must develop enough community support to pass some kind of ballot measure authorizing funds for a new arena.

• The Monarchs won the WNBA championship in 2005, and have a small but passionate group of fans who could be counted on to support the Maloofs’ drive to keep the Kings and Monarchs in Sacramento.

• The Monarchs were a solid franchise, and most likely turned a small profit when the team was good and 6,000 or more fans regularly came to ARCO Arena on summer nights. The team, though, was just 12-22 this past season, and crowds had thinned into the 4,500 range.

• The Kings were a solid franchise, and most likely turned a significant profit when the team was good and a ticket to sold-out ARCO was a precious commodity. But the Kings are now terrible, and since the announced crowds have dwindled into the 11,000 range, the actual number of fans in the seats is most likely around 7,500.

• A struggling NBA team can lose $30 million a year.

• The Maloofs’ primary businesses are located in Las Vegas, which is in many ways ground zero for the nation’s economic collapse. Not only has the Strip suffered, housing prices in the area have plummeted by 33 percent, the worst in the nation.

• There are persistent rumors that the Maloofs had money invested with Bernie Madoff, and we can all guess how that turned out.

• The only hope for the Maloofs and the Kings is to get the voters to support a new arena, but they cannot afford to alienate any possible interest group that might help them, especially female voters and Monarchs’ fans.

• The Maloofs just shut down the Monarchs.

If you carefully connect all those dots, the picture that emerges is a canary in a gold mine, struggling to breathe. And no, the gold mine is not the WNBA, which is hardly that, and not even the NBA, but rather the whole idea that owning sports franchises was a relatively easy way to get rich while having a good time. The trick wasn’t necessarily to make money every year, though that would be nice, but instead to sit back and watch the value of the team grow, so when it came time to sell, tens of millions of dollars would magically come rolling in from the next round of investors in the athletic Ponzi scheme.

But the disappearance of the Monarchs, though no more than a blip on the radar to sports fans, could well be the first sign of a serious change in the weather for the guys in the big offices.

What it says about the Maloofs and the Kings is pretty obvious: Sacramento can wave bye-bye to its only major league sports franchise come next summer. Clearly, by folding the Monarchs, the Maloofs have given up on ever passing a measure in support of a new arena, and without a new arena, even in the best of the times, they simply will not have the resources to make it the NBA. (The fact that the Kings are horrid, and will continue to be horrid for the near future, is another factor, but not nearly as important as the thousands of empty seats 41 times a year.)

In the past, the next step would have been pretty obvious. David Stern and the other owners sift through the list of big-money, big-ego types eager to get some NBA action, squeeze a new arena out of some politicians and developers, and move the Kings somewhere else. But right now, somewhere else looks a lot like nowhere, as there are no obvious candidates, either individual or civic, to take on the moribund franchise.

In short, what we may have is contraction. The Kings’ roster, such as it is, may simply be tossed into a dispersal draft (the WNBA knows just how to handle these, having administered many during its existence), and the ’10-11 NBA may have one fewer team. The NHL has also been talking about contraction, for the same reasons, and there is a certain historical inevitability that the meteoric rise of professional sports in the United States must be followed by some kind of a fall.

As for the Monarchs, the league is hoping to slide them 80 miles to the southwest, into the Bay Area, where another struggling NBA franchise, the Golden State Warriors, may decide to be a little more cooperative about renting out Oracle Arena than in the past. As for the Kings, the canary is singing the fat lady’s song, and Sacramento fans should try to enjoy what they can of this last go-round.

And as for the NBA, it’s time to retrench and rethink. The hard times are real, and probably won’t go away any time soon. There’s still gold in the mine, but it’s going to take more work for owners to turn a profit, and relying on the sale of the franchise to turn red to black at the end of the run is far from a sure thing any more.

Connect the dots – and it’s not a pretty picture.

The post Flight of the Monarchs appeared first on SLAM.

By Clay Kallam

The summer run on the first court at UCLA’s John Wooden Center isn’t for pretenders. Paul Pierce and Chauncey Billups have been known to show up, as well as current Bruin studs like Arron Afflalo. At 6-3, 300 pounds, Marvin Hamlin sticks on that main court all the time, and though he’s not a college-level player, he makes plays even when the big boys drop by. Hamlin is also a practice player for the UCLA women’s team, so he’s gone up against Nikki Blue (backup guard for the Washington Mystics) and Lisa Willis (backup guard for the Los Angeles Sparks) on a daily basis. And he’s faced Noelle Quinn (fourth overall pick by Minnesota in the WNBA’s April Draft) for two years.

Sometimes he brings one or more of the trio down to the Wooden Center—and he knows what to expect, even if the other guys don’t. “A lot of times the guys don’t know who they are,” says Hamlin, and there’s the usual banter about who has to guard the girl. Hamlin tries to warn them. If somebody draws Blue, who’s just 5-7, he’ll say, “Watch for the crossover—if you’re not ready for it, it’ll be bad.”

If they get the 6-0 Quinn, “Don’t fall for anything. You never know when the pass is coming, but don’t give away the jumper.”

The 5-11 Willis? “That guy’s going to have the biggest problem. She can guard anybody—she’s not going to let you get a shot.”

Remember, this isn’t the freshman dorm league—these are good, been-there-and-done-that players. “The whole (UCLA) team came down and played one time,” recalls Hamlin. “The guys thought they had it, but the girls are very, very athletic. The guys got more physical, and they still lost. I’ve never seen men get so frustrated over basketball. Some women came on the court and beat them. They’re not guys, they’re not dunking, but you see athleticism—and you start to understand basketball better when you watch the women’s game.”

A lot of people don’t watch the WNBA. After all, even the best team in that league couldn’t beat a decent men’s D1 team, so why bother, right? (Then again, the Grizzlies would win the NCAA Tournament without a sweat, so by that logic, why bother with the college men?)

The WNBA celebrated its 10-year anniversary last season, and like it, tolerate it or hate it, it’s become part of the American sporting scene. It’s the best women’s basketball league in the world, featuring size (7-2 Margo Dydek, who can shoot as well as any 7-0 guy you can name), athleticism (Deanna Nolan is a 6-0 blur) and skill (the likes of Seimone Augustus, Lisa Leslie and Diana Taurasi can flat-out play ball).

Back in ’96, when two women’s professional basketball leagues (the ABL was the other) tried to elbow their way into the SportsCenter highlights, most people, even those in women’s basketball, thought an American pro league would never make it. There wasn’t enough talent, and there wasn’t enough interest.

“We just had a business plan that David Stern put together,” says Kelly Krauskopf, now chief operating officer and GM of the Indiana Fever. And the basketball? Well, to describe it as ragged would probably be too complimentary—but that was then. “We’re better,” says Krauskopf, and not just on the court. Originally, the NBA owned every franchise and all the player contracts. Now each team takes care of its own business, and several of the 13 are out from under the NBA umbrella entirely. “We’re selling franchises,” says Krauskopf, referring most recently to the Sparks and Houston Comets. “We have value.”

That value is supposedly $10 million a franchise, but no one’s ever gotten a look at the books of a WNBA team. In fact, there’s been a lot of debate over whether any WNBA team can make money, but the fact that the league has been around for more than 10 years says that something is working. Tom Wilson, the president and CEO of Palace Sports and Entertainment, which owns and operates both the Detroit Pistons and the Detroit Shock, acknowledges that the Shock have lost six figures in some seasons and doesn’t make that much back in the good years. But it’s still well worth it. “You add up all the positives,” he says, referring to Detroit’s WNBA title in ’06 and the free promotion of pro basketball and the Palace, “and ask, ‘Would I spend $300,000 or $400,000 for this kind of publicity and promotion?’ Yes. We’re not in this to make money. I’m promoting the mothership [the Pistons], and it’s helping.”

Joe Maloof, the co-owner of the Sacramento Kings and Monarchs, goes even further. “It’s been great,” he says of the Monarchs, who won the title in ’05. “We make money at it.”

“How can you not call it a success story?” says ESPN analyst Doris Burke. “It’s 10 years in, and it’s not going away.”

But that doesn’t mean it can’t get better, and the ups and downs of the league show improvement is mandatory. Last year, the league expanded into Chicago, and a shortage of talent caused the newly formed Sky to fall, going 5-29 in front of small (but devoted) crowds. Then, in the offseason, Bobcats’ owner Bob Johnson pulled the plug on the poorly attended Charlotte Sting franchise, forcing the league to contract one year after it expanded.

Krauskopf didn’t think that was the best thing that ever happened to the league, but to her, it was just another bump in the road. “Closing down one team and opening another,” she says, “that’s just the nature of business today.”

The nature of business today is also that if you’re not getting better, you’re getting worse, and WNBA president Donna Orender is well aware that the league has more work to do. “We absolutely have to increase the volume of our public relations initiatives,” she says. “It’s more about coverage, the buzz—broadening out to a wider terrain.”

Wider terrain means more sponsorships, more marketing targeted to women. Remember, most in-home spending decisions are made by women, so companies have a reason to affiliate with the WNBA. (Oddly enough, however, half the TV audience is male; 70 percent of the attendance, on the other hand, is female.) “Sponsorship is a very critical component of any sports league,” says Orender. “We’re not a league with significant TV revenue, so sponsorship is even more important to us.”

Ah yes, TV. “Consistency on TV in any sport is really important,” says Carol Stiff, a senior director of programming and acquisitions for ESPN. So this year, the WNBA will play every Tuesday on ESPN2 during its May to September season, and though the ratings should be higher than ice hockey’s, they are still barely a blip on the Nielsen radar. “It fits a void in our programming,” says Stiff. “It’s a good brand of basketball for us.”

But is it good basketball? John Wooden was famously quoted as saying that the women’s game is more fundamental than the men’s—but as this year’s McDonald’s Games showed, that may not be as true as it once was. “I think that’s changing,” says Jenny Boucek, the new coach of the Sacramento Monarchs and formerly an advance scout for the Seattle Sonics. “I think the fundamentals have suffered in high school, because they’re just playing all year round. They’re not taking the time to work on the fundamentals.”

Helen Darling, a guard for the San Antonio Silver Stars, doesn’t wholly agree. “I think there are more women in the league who are fundamental than there are men in the NBA,” she says, “but there are a lot of guys in the NBA who are fundamental.

“Guys just use their athletic ability,” counters Bridget Pettis, who played in the W for eight years. “Overall, the fundamental part of the women’s game is more developed.”

That, however, doesn’t necessarily mean more people want to see it. “Yeah, it’s more team-oriented, but even my good players didn’t watch the NCAA championship game,” says Lana Lozano, a coach at San Jose City College. “I don’t ever get into a conversation with my players about the WNBA. Girls’ nature of watching sports is different than guys. When you talk to girls, they’re just not into it.”

League officials concede that they attract lots of 10- to 12-year-old girls, but once they get in their teens, they lose interest. One limiting factor is talent. When the WNBA expanded to 16 teams in the late ’90s, the quality of play faded faster than the UNC men coughed up that lead against Georgetown. “Are there enough high-quality players to produce a high quality of play?” asks Ohio State coach Jim Foster. “Is the game good enough to draw more fans?”

Foster is also skeptical of the WNBA’s shift to a 24-second clock (last summer, down from 30) and to the eight-second backcourt rule (this season). “If the best athletes in the world are playing with a 24-second clock and an eight-second clock, can athletes who aren’t as big, aren’t as strong and aren’t as quick, play at that level? The clock, to me, is a huge issue,” Foster says.

Others disagree, citing the higher scores and increased tempo as positives. “I think they’re making all the right moves,” says Burke. “They’re differentiating it from the college game.”

But Burke is as concerned as Foster about expansion—which would be great for sponsorships and TV. “They should not expand anymore at this point,” she adds, though the league would like to get back at least one more for ’08.

The clash between a drive to put more teams in more cities, which would attract more sponsors and increase TV ratings, and the inevitable dilution of talent that would follow is going to be a critical factor in the league’s direction in its second decade, but few can argue its impact so far.

“The WNBA has influenced women’s basketball at every level. The whole cycle has been enriched,” says Orender.

“The extent that our children are influenced by the media culture is enormous,” says Donna Lopiano, CEO of the Women’s Sports Foundation. She notes the cultural impact of the WNBA’s longevity, adding, “It’s tremendously important that the WNBA has survived.”

“Kids can see a future in this,” says Olympian Katie Smith, who won the title with the Shock last season. “They have role models.”

Boucek buttresses this point, noting the cross-gender benefits. “The next generation of boys have grown up admiring female basketball players,” she says. “They’ve been watching 10 years, and they have a much healthier view and respect for women.”

So, the WNBA is about more than just basketball. Adds Burke: “For women, the focus is sharper. The WNBA represents something to me and the next generation. It represents opportunity.”

But philosophy is for junior year; basketball’s about getting on the court, and once you’re between the lines, it doesn’t matter if you’re male or female. “At first, it’s a girl and they don’t know how to handle it,” is how 6-5 Nicole Ohlde of the Minnesota Lynx describes playing pickup ball. “I made a move and a guy said, ‘That’s NBA right there.’ They are definitely surprised. We’re not going to play against guys who played D1—but you get guys who played in high school, that’s when it’s great for us.”

“Guys take you lightly at first,” says 5-6 Helen Darling of the Silver Stars, “but then the next time you come, it’s, ‘You’re on my team.’ They don’t realize you can play, and it’s so much fun to get that respect. Not only do we make them a believer, we make them a fan.”

Says Smith, “Though some guys will never give credit where credit is due, when you score a bunch, then they’re denying and playing hard. You spread the word one pickup game at a time.”

“People underestimate the talent in the WNBA, the size and the strength,” says Boucek. “TV doesn’t do it justice.”

In the end, good basketball is just good basketball—no matter who’s playing or how many people are watching on TV.

The post They Still Got Next appeared first on SLAM.