ClayK said:

---

As one involved in choosing high school all-American teams, and one who has been "wrong" many times, there are certain things I've learned to look for over the year.

But to begin with, there's a key factor that's often ignored: Are the rankings based on performance against same-age competition, or on potential to produce at a higher level?

Dalayah Daniels (and Gabby Green) are both classic examples of players whose weaknesses were disguised by their physical ability against players of their own age (and thus strength and experience). Daniels didn't have to shoot from outside in club or high school ball because she was quicker than players her size and taller than players who were quicker. When she got to college, both of those advantages narrowed considerably.

Which meant that some key skills had to come into play, first and foremost the ability to score from the perimeter. But the way high school and club ball is structured, there is no motivation for any coach to develop new skills for a player. Parents want to have their child on a winning team, and fixing Daniels' broken shot at those lower levels would have resulted in losses. So coaches kept dialing up Daniels going to her strengths, and when those strengths were no longer enough, she had nothing to fall back on.

Another key skill is court vision and ability to pass. Daniels' A/TO last year was 26/41, which is mediocre for a pure post and pretty much unplayable for a wing. Again, club and high school coaches had no incentive to encourage Daniels to pass the ball to an inferior player -- they were there to win (if they didn't, the parents would put the girl on another team), so when she got it, she shot it.

There are similar issues with the "highly rated" bigs. It's relatively easy for a 6-4 girl to get points and rebounds at the club and high school level because they don't face similar size very often. In the Pac-12, it's every night, so unless you're just a better athlete, you have to be able to pass and make midrange jumpers. As the saying goes, you can't coach size, so a tall girl with reasonable athleticism will always be "highly rated," but can she make jumpers and pass out of double teams?

---

ClayK said:

---

... Which meant that some key skills had to come into play, first and foremost the ability to score from the perimeter. But the way high school and club ball is structured, there is no motivation for any coach to develop new skills for a player. Parents want to have their child on a winning team, and fixing Daniels' broken shot at those lower levels would have resulted in losses. So coaches kept dialing up Daniels going to her strengths, and when those strengths were no longer enough, she had nothing to fall back on ...

---

puget sound cal fan said:

---

...and Fatou and Sela were relegated to bench time not playing time. I wonder how much development is going on with the bigs?

---

ClayK said:

---

Off of her high school career, Bonner gets most of her points close to the basket, usually after going left. She did not look for three-pointers.

It's hard to tell about her defense because BOD generally had her guarding a weaker offensive player, presumably to keep her out of foul trouble.

---

stu said:

---

Thanks for that. How would you compare her game to Mia's?

---

ClayK said:

---

Mia and Amaya are very different players.

If Mia embraces defense, she can carve out a spot for herself in the Cal rotation -- and if she gets comfortable, she can be a solid offensive player at the P5 level. She's a decent three-point shooter, and is long enough to get to the rim effectively. But she's not quite explosive enough to be a double-digit scorer, I don't think. But I could see her getting 12 or so a game if everything fell into place.

Amaya is a superior athlete, and uses that athleticism to score close to the basket. She can make threes, but doesn't have a quick release. Amaya presumably could be a plus defender, but that's never been asked of her -- though if she did develop in that area, it would be a huge plus. Amaya greatly favored going left, even though she's right-handed, and that could catch up to her at the college level, though she's not helpless going right.

If Bonner can be a credible threat from the arc, she could get 15 a game, and if she applies her athleticism to defense, she could be a solid starter at the two or three. I don't see her as an all-conference player, but I could be wrong. There are a lot of players who relied on athleticism at the lower levels, and then added to their game in college, and if she's one of them, she's got a very bright future.

---

wbbilluminati said:

---

To. UW

---

BearBint said:

---

Sorry, I'm losing track of this thread. Seattle? U.W.? Dalayah's going to U.W.? Someone else is going there? Coming from there?

---