replacements next year.....as one would expect. Looks to me at this stage that next season is going to be a real challenge for MM. Maybe similar to Brey this year. However with MM, she has the advantage of having a dominant team and lesser competition that allow her to substitute liberally and develop the younger players, which she is doing. But, I think the hill will be to steep to climb to the top next year. A bit early to make these remarks, so we’ll see.

"...but still a long way to go to be starting replacements next year."

"A bit early to make these remarks, so we’ll see."

Tim:

Are you saying that it's too early to be saying that Mik Vaughn and/or Dani Patterson are ready to take over as starters in 2019-2020 and/or that 's it premature to be having these discussions?

I think that's the takeaway I got, but just wanted to make sure.

Given how prominent our starting 5 are and the need for MM to keep their cylinders running smoothly, it's tough to get viable minutes for the subs, particularly playing together as a quasi unit. Still, I like what I see of the sophs' progress so far this year. Will like to see what happens as we move forward and withhold judgement until then.

One person I will be focusing on though is Vaughn, who is clearly the option and choice to take over the low post.

in time, I do not see indications that the those players will have developed to the point of being "good enough" replacements by next season...good enough to make ND as competitive as the last couple of years. Yes, they will probably start because there aren't a lot of alternatives with the mass departure of the senior (5th) year starters. I was focusing on comparative talent and what I expect to be a substantial drop-off in talent/performance next season. As I stated or implied, it's early and I accept the development issue point, but all athletes don't develop into great players (like we have today) just because they are now young and inexperinced. At this point, I don't see them developing into the talent level that we have today, but again it's way too early to make any absolute statements.
I'm just speculating between games.

I like what I see in Vaughn. She might turn out to be a very good one. Confidence is a big element of player development and MM is giving these younger players the opportunity to develop that. Mika seems to be gaining in that area.

And, I am by no means qualified to evaluate potential performance outcomes from young players. So there is that, too.

The Board recently has begun to wade into the waters of next year’s pool of players, both in recruiting, but more specifically what next year will bring to the court. It may be premature to judge next year’s team, but I don’t think it’s premature to be having these discussions, albeit with the understanding that, while we have some information, we really don’t know how these women will advance. I’m willing to share my thoughts, if only for stimulating speculation.

The projected starting 5, I see as Jackie Young, Mikayla Vaughn, Daniel Patterson, Jordan Nixon, and Katlyn Gilbert. Abby Prohaska may prove me wrong, and I believe that she could play more minutes than some starters if defense, more than offense is deemed a bigger problem.

I hate to say this, but the first order of business will be to lower expectations for this group compared to this year. Last year I repeatedly spoke out against lowering expectations or falling into the “next year will be our year” syndrome. Sure I got worried when Lili went down, but I knew (or thought I knew) the incredible talent of Jessica Shepard. But next year’s group doesn’t project as well.

By the numbers, this year’s starting 5 hold a average (high school recruiting) rating of 6.4. Next year's projected lineup will be 28.5. That’s a huge jump. Hold on, I know there’s more to basketball than high school ratings. Mississippi State has repeated shown that, and could again this year. If it was up to high school ratings, UConn would be running away with the race. I also know that Mikayla Vaughn is not a 67.5. No way! However, with the exception of Jackie (admittedly, a large exception), we will have top 20ish rated players, not top 10ish, and those will be very young.

Additionally, with the exception of Vaughn, there doesn’t appear to be an Arike or a Marina personality in the bunch who will just play with abandon. At this time I see next year's team as a major challenge for the coaching staff and for our high expectations.

..of both Tim and Baba.

Tim: I was multi-tasking waay too much yesterday afternoon after our game between watching other WBB games (Syracuse PG is fun! Jen Staiti of Georgia looks like --but does not quite play like -- Jess three years ago!), so I wasn't quite sure of the takeaway. Thanks for the fine tuning.

Baba, tip of the hat for the look into/from rankings, etc.

Since this in between-games time, a few thoughts:

- Hard to imagine being able to replace a lineup as stellar as this one. It took some twists of fate to get all of them on the same floor at once, so for me it's natural to not have the same amount of talent at hand.

- A lot of teams will be losing major components: UConn's KLS and Collier, MSU's McCowan and Howard, Louisville's Durr, Carter and Fuehring; and, Marquette's entire lineup of !,000+ pt scorers, to name a few.
So we're not alone...

- We've got Jackie back, thank our stars, who will be given free rein, much like Jewell was.

- Expect Mik Vaughn and Jordan Nixon to start, for sure. If all progresses, would also think Dani Patterson will be there, too. And Sam will be in some kind of rotation up front.

- The other guard? Might depend on who meshes best with the others. Could be Katlyn, could be Anaya. And Abby is going to get PT because she makes units stronger.

- Teams that will be good from the get go: Maryland, Oregon (if Ioncescu comes back). Teams that will get better as season goes on: Stanford (post-Smith), Baylor (Smith for Brown), UConn (if ONO improves). ACC possibilities: 'Cuse, NC State.

in the meantime, I want to see how our sophs and frosh continue to progress this season.

They might be a lot like Duke's class in men's basketball

It'll take awhile to mesh those disparate talents with one another and the returning players of note. Certainly not saying they can't do it, but it takes some time. Boston, however, is one steady customer and can help anybody. Just make sure she gets the ball on steady basis.

Stanford has the returning and incoming talent to do the same, once they're used to Smith not bailing them out.

And she will take her game to the next level (Arike and Marina level). Also counting on incoming freshmen to be ready (yeah I know) and they do have loftier ratings (Brunelle top 5 and Peoples top 25). Some freshmen are ready for college and I think playing on international teams probably helps

Of course we get Gilbert back as well

sophomore and junior year. Compare his last years stats with this years. I look for Vaughn's development to be similar.