Laimbeer has got to look at Arike for #1: PR value/skill
by Domerduck (2019-01-12 13:11:26)

In reply to: A more realistic WNBA mock draft  posted by RISteve

Post Reply Return to McGraw's Bench

makes her a viable option. McCowan at #1 is not a slam dunk and Arike is better than #2 Durr, at least that was proven on Thursday when the game was on the line. If you want to sell tickets, Arike has got to be the biggest attraction of all the seniors in this draft. He has to think hard about not taking the most recognizable personality in women's BBall if he wants to increase the value of his franchise. Plus she's from his alma mater.

Watching how Oregon took McCowan out of that game in Eugene and Stanford took Brown out of their game in Palo Alto, neither are consistently dominating so why waste a number 1 pick on them. The most dominating women's center in college was Griner, and at 28 she still isn't more valuable than 36 years old multi skilled Taurasi on that Phoenix team. Little doubt the 2 best players in the WNBA are wings Delle Donne & Stewie. To me the only choices who might get close to that level could be KLS or Alanna Smith of Stanford, but there clearly not there now. Durr is a great player, but not as good as those 4 whose height (Brown & McCowan) and overall tool kit (KLS & Smith) make them rare players. Durr and Arike are in my mind on par for skill, but Arike has that "it" factor and is clearly more clutch.

That's why I think she's got to be considered over those other 5. The only player that might be more valuable at #1 would be Sabrina Ionescu if she comes out early. She's got the one personality and with her talent (triple double machine, clutch, takes over ganes) that can compare with Arike so she'd be a good choice at #1. This attached article written a few months back points this out which Laimbeer brings up the effect of underclassman declaring. Sabrina is the one college player who may bring as much attention as Arike and I believe has a much broader skill set (ala Taurasi).




Replies: