As for NaLyssa Smith, she is a truly awful defender one-on-one. Anyone can drive by her and she doesn't seem able to stop them. Is this fixable? That's the question. It may be she's just never really tried, or it may be she just can't do it. If her defense can move from abysmal to below average, she's a great get. If not, she's pretty much unplayable for a contending team.
Draft choices? I just don't see the value in anything but a lottery pick, and then you have to be lucky. Usually, there are only one or two semi-sure things in any draft, and the good players that inevitably show up later on can't really be identified -- or they'd go early.
It's like college: You wait 'til someone proves themselves and then go after them.
On the picks, that need for luck is a central part of why you want more of them. You give yourselves more shots to get lucky, whether from hitting the right player lower down, or a team you got the pick from being unexpectedly bad to improve the pick. Also they're just asset plays. Any first-round pick becomes as asset to make other moves with, not necessarily just selecting a player.
I think Smith is probably still in the "I'm the coach that can fix her" stage of her career, where everyone thinks they're the one who can get her to buy in and improve on D. Whether she actually can remains to be seen. But you know as well as I do that people often acquire talent based on offensive skills, and then it's up to the coach to make that collection of talent play defense.
Thank you for writing the first article I’ve seen in awhile that recognizes the Fever would be foolish to not protect NaLyssa, instead of saying it would be good for everyone if the Valks got NaLyssa in the expansion draft.
Great stuff, as always.
As for NaLyssa Smith, she is a truly awful defender one-on-one. Anyone can drive by her and she doesn't seem able to stop them. Is this fixable? That's the question. It may be she's just never really tried, or it may be she just can't do it. If her defense can move from abysmal to below average, she's a great get. If not, she's pretty much unplayable for a contending team.
Draft choices? I just don't see the value in anything but a lottery pick, and then you have to be lucky. Usually, there are only one or two semi-sure things in any draft, and the good players that inevitably show up later on can't really be identified -- or they'd go early.
It's like college: You wait 'til someone proves themselves and then go after them.
On the picks, that need for luck is a central part of why you want more of them. You give yourselves more shots to get lucky, whether from hitting the right player lower down, or a team you got the pick from being unexpectedly bad to improve the pick. Also they're just asset plays. Any first-round pick becomes as asset to make other moves with, not necessarily just selecting a player.
That's a great point. But in a sense, it's not a tangible asset -- it's a chance to roll the dice, and the odds are you'll come up empty.
I think Smith is probably still in the "I'm the coach that can fix her" stage of her career, where everyone thinks they're the one who can get her to buy in and improve on D. Whether she actually can remains to be seen. But you know as well as I do that people often acquire talent based on offensive skills, and then it's up to the coach to make that collection of talent play defense.
True. And for the Valkyries, why not? She'll make losing more entertaining ...
Thank you for writing the first article I’ve seen in awhile that recognizes the Fever would be foolish to not protect NaLyssa, instead of saying it would be good for everyone if the Valks got NaLyssa in the expansion draft.
I said it on Wednesday in my protected lists article too, so there's been at least one before this ;).
This is gonna be crazy. Though that assumes we’ll be privy to all the interworkings. Do we know if or how this will be announced/reported/covered?
Also - starting a franchise built around 2024 EDD feels super ballsy