darbypitcher22 wrote:
what, because I'm not going to let you trash women's basketball?
PROTIP: When you say "I'm not going to let you trash women's basketball", that insinuates you have a means of stopping one from trashing women's basketball. Honestly, you don't. You can make counterpoints (that, from the general opinion of the WNBA, likely will be ignored or mocked), but you can't stop it.
In my opinion, the so-called "superior fundamentals" that women's basketball has makes them less compelling due to being combined with lesser athleticism. After OSU's women's NCAA tournament loss, on the "bash Jim Foster for sucking in big games" thread, I mentioned how the Bucks never mounted any real comeback after getting down. Someone replied that the women's game doesn't really have those runs near the frequency the men's game does.
That made me think. On the norm, what causes those runs? Athletes being athletes. Aggressive presses forcing turnovers, pure shooters heating up to NBA Jam "on fire" status, powerhouses slamming inside to pound down dunks. In the more fundamental game, it tends to more often be the superior team just choking down their opponent by simply being better. The men's game is more unpredictable and more enjoyable to me.
And as far as saying ud rather watch a WNBA game then a Mens pro game...refer to the above image
