Now that would interesting to find out. I'm not sure.

 

I agree with Clyde that some of the top teams in the state would beat a WNBA team. Where that cutoff is? No clue.

 

I think there would be more than a few high school teams that would win, maybe the top 20 or 30 teams. Again, my group of college hacks (although we were D1 baseball players) who were just ok to pretty good in high school handled a top 25 D2 team easily. We couldn't have even won a district here in Kentucky. So I'd say most regional qualifiers here in KY could probably beat most D1 girls teams, and the top 20 or teams in the state could take out a WNBA team. I do think it would be close though at times.

If anybody's wondering, it was the "Caption the Nuns Basketball Game" thread that steered my mind to obsess over this thought.

 

While I'm thinking about that, while in the 6th grade at good ol St. Al's, we had a Nun that could swat a softball sized whiffle ball a Catholic schoolyard mile, and in her white gymmers in full habit, run the bases with the best of us, and even an eventual CovCath MVP Baseball player that went on to play at NKU, and was an Invitee to the Cincinnati Reds Try Out Camp.

 

Man!... she was awesome!!!

 

Just ask Mark Whery... He'd vouch for me.

Using just the 9th Region as an example, I'd say that the St. Henry/Newport/Highlands level from the 2014 season could create a competitive game perhaps. Maybe even a bit higher.

 

As they say, it's all about match ups.

This is fun.

 

Make sure you watch the ending.

 

After seeing many of the women in the WNBA, how would you tell the difference in which team was which?

This is fun.

 

Make sure you watch the ending.

 

 

:lol2: :lol2:

 

Great video.

Why is it assumed that women have better fundamentals?

The ladies better shoot well from the perimeter since they have no shot of finishing in the paint.

The ladies better shoot well from the perimeter since they have no shot of finishing in the paint.

 

And with the length of a male defender getting good looks will be few and far between.

A team made up of the top 10 HS boys players in the US would destroy the WNBA all star team, not even close.

Different game. An average boys team would beat the WNBA all stars.

Why is it assumed that women have better fundamentals?

 

Because they do.

 

I think that whereas boys (this is not absolute, because some girls do too) start mostly playing ball on the streets, or in their driveway, and think they know everything about the game, and it takes a while for coaches to get their attention long enough to teach them the fundamentals, a lot of girls learn from the get-go the fundamentals and grow up with being taught the fundamentals from the very beginning.

 

Many may lack the athletic abilities of boys (and some boys tend to think that they can carry themselves on natural ability alone), so to make the most of what they can do on the court, girls need to perform the fundamentals better and always, for if they didn't, them trying to wing it as some guys do, would be futile, so fundaments for girls are absolutely instrumental and necessary which help them in the smarts category, even when perhaps their ability takes a back seat. Of course a lot of girls eventually get their smarts and abilities to be both riding in the front seat together. Some guys never get their smarts together at all.

 

Example: Elijah Pittman... I've never seen him play smartly ever, but his natural abilities have carried him now all the way to the NBA Development League.

 

Aside from that, because he didn't absorb what college ball had to teach him, I don't think it will matter much for him in the professional ranks, because from my observation, the pros end up going back to playing street ball anyhow, whereas in college, players are playing at the top level of fundamental sound ball.

 

Pittman will do fine and is now in his element.

 

I could be wrong, but I doubt that one Woman in the WNBA is there by ability alone. The environment that they came up through in High School and College showed them intense learning of the fundamentals.

A team made up of the top 10 HS boys players in the US would destroy the WNBA all star team, not even close.

 

Agreed, they would be lucky to get more than 1 basket in the paint. Imagine them trying to score inside against the Noels and Randles of the world even in HS.

Because they do.

 

I think that whereas boys (this is not absolute, because some girls do too) start mostly playing ball on the streets, or in their driveway, and think they know everything about the game, and it takes a while for coaches to get their attention long enough to teach them the fundamentals, a lot of girls learn from the get-go the fundamentals and grow up with being taught the fundamentals from the very beginning.

 

Many may lack the athletic abilities of boys (and some boys tend to think that they can carry themselves on natural ability alone), so to make the most of what they can do on the court, girls need to perform the fundamentals better and always, for if they didn't, them trying to wing it as some guys do, would be futile, so fundaments for girls are absolutely instrumental and necessary which help them in the smarts category, even when perhaps their ability takes a back seat. Of course a lot of girls eventually get their smarts and abilities to be both riding in the front seat together. Some guys never get their smarts together at all.

 

Example: Elijah Pittman... I've never seen him play smartly ever, but his natural abilities have carried him now all the way to the NBA Development League.

 

I could be wrong, but I doubt that one Woman in the WNBA is there by ability alone. The environment that they came up through in High School and College showed them intense learning of the fundamentals.

 

That's a pretty broad brush your painting with. Not all guys grow up playing in the street, and I would say most are playing some sort of organized ball with coaching at a pretty young age. Just look at all the youth leagues and opportunities to play that are out there. Boys are playing at 4 and 5 years old in organized leagues, well before street ball becomes a normal activity. And boys in the burbs (or in the country) aren't playing a ton of streetball anyway. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that boys have more opportunities and access to organized ball and at least decent coaching at an earlier age. And I think boys are more likely to specialize earlier, or at worst at least play in multiple leagues, gathering more organized court time and a chance to hone the "fundamentals".

 

I often hear how much better fundamentally people think girls are at sports, and personally I think it's a myth. To think that NBA (or any other male professional athlete) can make it strictly on athletic ability and not be at least somewhat fundamentally sound is laughable. No way can you get to higher levels of basketball or any other sport without being at least somewhat fundamentally sound. Can you really say women are better ball handlers, shooters, rebounders etc than guys?? Or that women pro basketball players are "smarter" than NBA players (and I'm not saying one is any smarter than the other)?? In fact I'd say because the quality of play and athleticism is higher in the men's game, fundamentals are even more important in order to be successful. I'd say a super athletic girl with exceptional size and athleticism can dominate a womens game without being as fundamentally sound (Brittany Griner comes to mind), much more than a guy with the same skill/physical characteristics)

That's a pretty broad brush your painting with. Not all guys grow up playing in the street, and I would say most are playing some sort of organized ball with coaching at a pretty young age. Just look at all the youth leagues and opportunities to play that are out there. Boys are playing at 4 and 5 years old in organized leagues, well before street ball becomes a normal activity. And boys in the burbs (or in the country) aren't playing a ton of streetball anyway. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that boys have more opportunities and access to organized ball and at least decent coaching at an earlier age. And I think boys are more likely to specialize earlier, or at worst at least play in multiple leagues, gathering more organized court time and a chance to hone the "fundamentals".

 

I often hear how much better fundamentally people think girls are at sports, and personally I think it's a myth. To think that NBA (or any other male professional athlete) can make it strictly on athletic ability and not be at least somewhat fundamentally sound is laughable. No way can you get to higher levels of basketball or any other sport without being at least somewhat fundamentally sound. Can you really say women are better ball handlers, shooters, rebounders etc than guys?? Or that women pro basketball players are "smarter" than NBA players (and I'm not saying one is any smarter than the other)?? In fact I'd say because the quality of play and athleticism is higher in the men's game, fundamentals are even more important in order to be successful. I'd say a super athletic girl with exceptional size and athleticism can dominate a womens game without being as fundamentally sound (Brittany Griner comes to mind), much more than a guy with the same skill/physical characteristics)

 

To avoid writing 17 paragraphs like I normally do, I put in parenthesis (this is not absolute because some girls do too) with the implied notion, and I can see how it got missed, to try to avoid a broad brush with everything that I was saying.

 

This was pretty much commentary on my part, in general, why girls are more fundamentally sound.

 

I agree that boys have much better instruction early on in today's world than when I was a kid. Still think that in some ways boys tend to think that basketball is their game, and that girls are just playing it too, so in their sense of entitlement, they can at times think that they are above the need to listen as closely to the coach then girls might, and follow instruction as closely as girls might (Again the possibility for me to earn the "Broad Brush Award).

 

It appears that quite often boys can tend to get ate up with trying to be the best 3 point shooters around that they don't have time to mess with free throws etc... The coach can have a harder time with "know-it-alls". Not sure that lots of little girls learning the game approach it with the same "know-it-all" attitude.

 

In my example of Elijah Pittman. Tall dude that needed to spend more time in the paint typically spent most of his time jacking or trying to jack up threes, and lots of times at ill-advised times in a game as if he didn't understand the time for one, and the time not for one, and obviously looked like practicing free throws was beneath him. Nothing against big guys with shooting capabilities, for I really dig seeing the well rounded big guy.

 

Ultimately I'm stating generalities in my defense that "In general" girls tend to be more fundamental. This is not to say that boys can't be, or are not.

 

And in the case of the "Burbs" kid, I included them in my initial comment about this by saying "Driveway"