women's thread

[RUBillsFan]

13 minutes ago, cgeldmacher said:

Question:  Does anyone know if Kemph is WNBA material?  Not that I follow the WNBA at all, but it would be cool if she made it to the League.

I don't know anything about the WNBA either, but some basic observations and minor googling make it seem very unlikely that Kemph will ever play in the WBA.

• Salaries in the WNBA are very low (minimum ~$36,000, max ~$100,000).  The article mentions that Kemph is studying to be a CPA.  As a CPA, she'd likely start in the middle of that WNBA range and have potential to go way above the max.  She's not going to play in the WNBA.  Full stop.

Now, if the question is whether or not she is talented even to play in the WNBA, that is more difficult to answer and someone who knows more about the WNBA could answer it better.  I'm still going to guess "no" and I'll throw a couple of things out there as reasons why:

• Kemph is listed at 5-7.  That is on the short end of most of the WNBA players based on skimming some rosters.
• There are only 12 teams in the WNBA, so it is potentially a lot more selective than even the NBA in terms of players who can make it.  13 roster spots * 12 means that there are only 156 total spots.  Assuming players careers average 10 years (no idea if this is a good assumption), you'd have to be a top 15 or 20 player in your class to have potential to make it.
• Again just skimming rosters, it looks like there are only a handful of players that didn't go to power conference schools.  This makes sense after my previous bullet point

Not trying to take anything away from her.  Kemph is likely the best player SLU has ever had and is a great college player.

[brianstl]

38 minutes ago, RUBillsFan said:

I don't know anything about the WNBA either, but some basic observations and minor googling make it seem very unlikely that Kemph will ever play in the WBA.

• Salaries in the WNBA are very low (minimum ~$36,000, max ~$100,000).  The article mentions that Kemph is studying to be a CPA.  As a CPA, she'd likely start in the middle of that WNBA range and have potential to go way above the max.  She's not going to play in the WNBA.  Full stop.

Now, if the question is whether or not she is talented even to play in the WNBA, that is more difficult to answer and someone who knows more about the WNBA could answer it better.  I'm still going to guess "no" and I'll throw a couple of things out there as reasons why:

• Kemph is listed at 5-7.  That is on the short end of most of the WNBA players based on skimming some rosters.
• There are only 12 teams in the WNBA, so it is potentially a lot more selective than even the NBA in terms of players who can make it.  13 roster spots * 12 means that there are only 156 total spots.  Assuming players careers average 10 years (no idea if this is a good assumption), you'd have to be a top 15 or 20 player in your class to have potential to make it.
• Again just skimming rosters, it looks like there are only a handful of players that didn't go to power conference schools.  This makes sense after my previous bullet point

Not trying to take anything away from her.  Kemph is likely the best player SLU has ever had and is a great college player.

WNBA players make their big bucks overseas in the WNBA off season.  If Kemph is good enough to play in the WNBA, the pay won't stop her. The WNBA pay is just supplemental income for the majority of professional female basketball players in this country.

[White Pelican]

The women beat George Mason tonight 89-50 to avenge last year's home OT loss. Bills are 2-0 in the A-10, Mason is now 2-1.

[slufanskip]

The ladies have made at least 10 3's in 4 straight games while shooting 46.9% during the stretch. Seriously 46.9 as a team over 96 attempts.  They have also won their last 3 games by at least 37 points. Those are just crazy stats. They also shoot 75% from the line as a team. Maybe they could be guest instructors to the guys. Assign each lady a guy to tutor, whichever lady gets the most improvement from her pupil wins a prize

[brianstl]

7 minutes ago, slufanskip said:

The ladies have made at least 10 3's in 4 straight games while shooting 46.9% during the stretch. Seriously 46.9 as a team over 96 attempts.  They have also won their last 3 games by at least 37 points. Those are just crazy stats. They also shoot 75% from the line as a team. Maybe they could be guest instructors to the guys. Assign each lady a guy to tutor, whichever lady gets the most improvement from her pupil wins a prize

It is crazy that after beating Mason last night by 39 that the women'e RPI is at 145 and still 38 spots behind Mason's.  That OOC schedule is killing the women's team's RPI.

Sagarin's ranking has the women's team at 75.

[slufanskip]

1 hour ago, brianstl said:

It is crazy that after beating Mason last night by 39 that the women'e RPI is at 145 and still 38 spots behind Mason's.  That OOC schedule is killing the women's team's RPI.

Sagarin's ranking has the women's team at 75.

+1. I don't understand that.

[SShoe]

2 hours ago, brianstl said:

It is crazy that after beating Mason last night by 39 that the women'e RPI is at 145 and still 38 spots behind Mason's.  That OOC schedule is killing the women's team's RPI.

Sagarin's ranking has the women's team at 75.

That's some very poor scheduling then. 

[kwyjibo]

1 hour ago, SShoe said:

That's some very poor scheduling then. 

Exactly.  It was completely avoidable.  That said, there does seem to be some NCAA at-large selections on the men's side that are mostly rooted in good Pomeroy/Sagarin/BPI/Dolphin rather than RPI in the last two years.  But those seem to be bigger conferences and/or "name teams" rather than a general principle.  The use of non-RPI measures seems to be wholly used to give bigger programs a second chance.  Hopefully, if SLU keeps winning and by big margins those other metrics will make SLU a compelling choice (but they need a decent enough RPI to get them considered).

[Pistol]

Their SOS is currently rated 331. Woof. You pretty much have to run the table when you schedule like that out of conference. Losses were to 73 UALR, 140 Indiana State, and 176 Tulsa. Best wins are 49 Mizzou and 63 Washington State.

So they didn't do themselves any favor by losing those games. They're not brutal losses to teams that will be 200+ in the final RPI, but they don't have enough strength elsewhere to absorb them.

Sagarin is a far superior rating system, and 75 makes much more sense for them than 145; RPI's ranking is 75% based on other teams' performance, so it's a deeply flawed, skewed system at best. Sagarin shows them kind of as what they are: a bubble team with plenty of work left to do.

[Pistol]

The good news is their SOS will improve in conference. The bad news is it won't improve enough. They don't have much margin for error left. The A10 is all between 85 and 269 in RPI currently. GW, Fordham, and Duquesne are the only teams with double-digit ratings.

[waldo027]

The only A10 team ahead of them on Sagarin is GW at #52, which they'll only get to play once, Jan 26th at home. Really looking like they will need to get the automatic bid.

[bonwich]

3 hours ago, SShoe said:

That's some very poor scheduling then. 

Is it possible that this year's women's team is in the same never-never land as the men's team used to be, that is, too risky to be a buy game but not yet a guarantee of improving the other team's SOS? So at least a few potential OOC opponents would keep their distance?

[kwyjibo]

8 minutes ago, bonwich said:

Is it possible that this year's women's team is in the same never-never land as the men's team used to be, that is, too risky to be a buy game but not yet a guarantee of improving the other team's SOS? So at least a few potential OOC opponents would keep their distance?

This was only an excuse for the men and it was never really true.  It might be tough to schedule specific opponents but if you want to schedule more tough games it can always be done.  It might be a little work but it is always possible.  It is even less true for the women--look at UWGB's schedule.  More importantly, SLU is a good team in a bad conference which would make smart coaches more likely to want to schedule them, not less.

[Cowboy]

1 hour ago, Pistol said:

Their SOS is currently rated 331. Woof. You pretty much have to run the table when you schedule like that out of conference. Losses were to 73 UALR, 140 Indiana State, and 176 Tulsa. Best wins are 49 Mizzou and 63 Washington State.

So they didn't do themselves any favor by losing those games. They're not brutal losses to teams that will be 200+ in the final RPI, but they don't have enough strength elsewhere to absorb them.

Sagarin is a far superior rating system, and 75 makes much more sense for them than 145; RPI's ranking is 75% based on other teams' performance, so it's a deeply flawed, skewed system at best. Sagarin shows them kind of as what they are: a bubble team with plenty of work left to do.

-do at large teams have these losses? if they do are they offset by top 20 wins? please understand that I would love to see the ladies dancing and hope it happens but it sure looks like it will require winning the a10 tourney

9 minutes ago, bonwich said:

Is it possible that this year's women's team is in the same never-never land as the men's team used to be, that is, too risky to be a buy game but not yet a guarantee of improving the other team's SOS? So at least a few potential OOC opponents would keep their distance?

-we were told by a poster (I don't remember who) that the women's schedule for this season would be much improved over prior versions, didn't happen, goes to show with scheduling to always remember it takes two to tango

-I'll have to try to make the GW game, might be their biggest test in conference

[bonwich]

13 minutes ago, kwyjibo said:

This was only an excuse for the men and it was never really true. 

I seemed to remember hearing Majerus himself say that it was very difficult to get strong OOC opponents, especially those from "power" conferences, and indeed, I found the exact quote.

"The list of schools that Rick Majerus said have turned SLU down is long. 'Last week, Porter (Moser) called Marquette, Minnesota, Iowa, Notre Dame -- the Notre Dame AD's daughter goes here. We'll play anybody. We called Georgetown, Boston College. We wanted to keep the Nebraska series up.' "

I don't doubt that our internal abilities at scheduling could be improved, but it has been somewhat doctrinal for quite a while that SLU, in general not for lack of trying, has trouble booking "quality" ("name"?) opponents. 

[kwyjibo]

17 hours ago, bonwich said:

I seemed to remember hearing Majerus himself say that it was very difficult to get strong OOC opponents, especially those from "power" conferences, and indeed, I found the exact quote.

"The list of schools that Rick Majerus said have turned SLU down is long. 'Last week, Porter (Moser) called Marquette, Minnesota, Iowa, Notre Dame -- the Notre Dame AD's daughter goes here. We'll play anybody. We called Georgetown, Boston College. We wanted to keep the Nebraska series up.' "

I don't doubt that our internal abilities at scheduling could be improved, but it has been somewhat doctrinal for quite a while that SLU, in general not for lack of trying, has trouble booking "quality" ("name"?) opponents. 

He mentions specific schools and that was possibly quite late in the process;  every coach has been able to schedule tougher games eventually when they wanted to (even ultimately Majerus).  I have no doubt Majerus one day tried to schedule harder and found our it was not an instant fix but like a lot of things a consistent effort will yield results.

People seem to forget that Spoonhour (when he wanted to because he believed in easier schedules), Romar, and Soderberg consistently produced harder N-C schedules when the need was less.

Also, for the women it is not that I expected them to play UConn, Notre Dame, and Louisville all right away.  But there are literally hundreds of teams that were better than the multitude of 300+ teams we scheduled.  The women's schedule was epically bad and entirely predictable--and the result has been unfortunate even though they won their 2 biggest games.  I do think if they continue to win and win big they can ultimately make a case for themselves with a weak RPI but the point is they need never have put themselves in that situation.

[Cowboy]

On 12/22/2016 at 3:34 PM, bonwich said:

-not sure why I am quoting bonwich here, but Ladies on CBSSN Sunday at noon at VCU - go get 'em Ladies!

[SShoe]

18 hours ago, bonwich said:

Is it possible that this year's women's team is in the same never-never land as the men's team used to be, that is, too risky to be a buy game but not yet a guarantee of improving the other team's SOS? So at least a few potential OOC opponents would keep their distance?

Do women's teams other than the top programs (UCONN, Tennesse, etc.) have buy games? What would be the point if you're only drawing 500 fans? I think good scheduling can be difficult for men's teams like SLU, but I have a hard time believing it's the same for the women since you don't have to guarantee 18 home games to season ticket holders.

[slufan13]

Rumor is that their may be a premier home/home series added to the schedule next year. Probably too little too late though. 

[Cowboy]

24 minutes ago, slufan13 said:

Rumor is that their may be a premier home/home series added to the schedule next year. Probably too little too late though. 

-save me the time of looking, did you post that the schedule for this season would be upgraded?

[slufan13]

2 hours ago, Cowboy said:

-save me the time of looking, did you post that the schedule for this season would be upgraded?

I don't think I did but I think there was an article in the PD after last season where Lisa Stone said they were sitting down with some members of the tournament committee trying to put together a schedule that would give us a better RPI. I am guessing that meeting never happened. 

[kmbilliken]

46 minutes ago, slufan13 said:

I don't think I did but I think there was an article in the PD after last season where Lisa Stone said they were sitting down with some members of the tournament committee trying to put together a schedule that would give us a better RPI. I am guessing that meeting never happened. 

Seems like that is something they should already know.

[billiCAN]

I wondered about Wednesday's 11 AM start time:

http://www.slubillikens.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=27200&ATCLID=211401097

" Saint Louis University women’s basketball will welcome approximately 3,000 local elementary and middle-school students to Chaifetz Arena for the seventh annual Education Day field trip Wednesday, Jan. 11. The Billikens host Atlantic 10 Conference rival St. Bonaventure in a game that begins at 11 a.m."

 

 

[White Pelican]

1 hour ago, billiCAN said:

I wondered about Wednesday's 11 AM start time:

http://www.slubillikens.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=27200&ATCLID=211401097

" Saint Louis University women’s basketball will welcome approximately 3,000 local elementary and middle-school students to Chaifetz Arena for the seventh annual Education Day field trip Wednesday, Jan. 11. The Billikens host Atlantic 10 Conference rival St. Bonaventure in a game that begins at 11 a.m."

 

 

I unknowingly went to that schoolkids game last year. Most of the lower bowl will be reserved for various schools. The street and back lot will be filled with school buses. It is a good time though. Last year, Lisa Stone got on the PA and asked all the kids to scream cheer and it was deafening. And a teacher went home a few hundred bucks richer as he made the Shot for Cash.

I have a season ticket this year and plan on going again. Thanks BilliCAN. I had wondered if it was the schoolkids game.

[brianstl]

The women's team currently stands at 131 in the official NCAA RPI rankings and 62 in the Sagarin rankings headed into today's game.  The spread between the two rankings is pretty amazing.  They won't get any kind of real boost in the RPI by winning today.   The Bonnies have an RPI of 241.