tk421;741009 wrote:For those of you who swear boys high school age couldn't possibly beat the best women's team, let's look at hockey. The Canadian Women's Olympic team regularly plays against their midget league up in Canada, and they do lose some of those games. These are played without body checking, so supposedly no contact.

http://www.thehockeynews.com/articles/28013-Canadian-womens-hockey-team-to-open-schedule-against-midget-tripleA-clubs.html

I had to laugh at this quote from the article.

Their natural size and their stick length I find is a huge thing because you can have a step on a player and all of a sudden, he pokes

sleeper;741119 wrote:Because comparing hypotheticals with any real factual data is impossible. Add in the delusional of height, weight, and athleticism making enough difference for a group of boys to beat professional women, then there is zero point of even trying. You can't change people's minds, why should I care if they want to remain wrong their entire life? It doesn't affect me, I just find it hilarious.

I agree, there is delusion involved.

Did you even notice that no one even begin to mention how to coach against a good boys' team other than me?

Manhattan Buckeye;741115 wrote:And I'll stand by my mine, that any team with reasonable height and athleticism (which 'Peake, 'Burg, Portsmouth, I-town, etc. as well as teams with the monsters I mentioned) will win.

At least you can comfort yourself on this, nothing you posted changed or affected my mind in any way. Instead of putting words in my mouth (" a proxy that a team is composed entirely of these players?" total douche move, are you kidding me a team of LBJ's wouldn't just beat women's teams, they'd win the NBA championship), perhaps you should have concentrated on the points.

And you can take that to the bank!

Last years northland team with Sully JD ect would smash a WNBA team, hell this years team with Burke and multiple athletic 6'7 6'8 players would beat a WNBA team

I still don't think the person who said that the WNBA team would beat those other teams I listed has looked at their roster. You can argue that size and height has nothing to do with skill all you want, when you try and tell me that the WNBA champs are going to beat this team 8-9 times out of 10, I'm going to call you delusional every time.

Arlington County Day FL. Still high school "boys" according to sleeper. Absolutely NO chance of beating the WNBA champ Storm. Absolutely none, according to the experts on here. You all must be crazy. The women would be lucky to hang within 20, let alone win a game.

<table align="center" border="1" cellpadding="2" width="600"><tbody><tr><th scope="row"> </th> <th scope="row"> </th> <td> </td> <td> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <th scope="row"> </th> <th scope="row"> </th> <td> </td> <td> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <th scope="row"> </th> <th scope="row"> </th> <td> </td> <td> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <th scope="row"> </th> <th scope="row"> </th> <td> </td> <td> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <th scope="row"> </th> <th scope="row"> </th> <td> </td> <td> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <th scope="row"> </th> <th scope="row"> </th> <td> </td> <td> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <th scope="row"> </th> <th scope="row"> </th> <td> </td> <td> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <th scope="row"> </th> <th scope="row"> </th> <td> </td> <td> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <th scope="row"> </th> <th scope="row"> </th> <td> </td> <td> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <th scope="row"> </th> <th scope="row"> </th> <td> </td> <td> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <th scope="row"> </th> <th scope="row"> </th> <td> </td> <td> </td> <td> </td></tr></tbody></table>

The Storm would crush that team by 30, no doubt.

Now you're just being silly.

sleeper;741013 wrote:Using other sports as a proxy is pointless.

I'm not sure why you'd say this. Hockey and basketball have a lot of parallels, both in the style of play and in the physiology that might help gain an advantage.

sherm03;741039 wrote:If size and weight were the only things that mattered in basketball, then the best teams in basketball would be made up of nothing but dudes that are 6'11" and 250lbs.

If size and weight were the only things that mattered, Xavier's best player last season would have been Kenny Frease (7'0", 269lbs.)...but in reality it was Tu Holloway (6'0", 180lbs.).

Bottom line...just because the boys' team is bigger than the WNBA team does not mean they will definitely win every game.

And comparing it to hockey does not make sense.

I would certainly say speed would have to come into play.

And as my earlier post referenced, it appears that high school boys who put up mere state records (in our little state of Ohio alone) had better times than the world-record-holding women in the same races ... in every single race ... sprint or distance.

This topic ultimately is pointless, and I'd never even given it thought. At first glance, I fell in the range sleeper was arguing. The more I look into it, though, the more I think that there are plenty of high school boys basketball teams that could hang with, or even beat, WNBA teams. There are teams out there who are bigger, faster, stronger, have more endurance, and whose mechanics are not going to be so far behind the WNBA players as to allow them to compensate. It's just not realistic.

sleeper;741302 wrote:The Storm would crush that team by 30, no doubt.

lol'd.

Ignorant ass thread

clickclickboom;742031 wrote:Ignorant ass thread

I'm interested in why you think this. Please elaborate.

People really think that a high school boys team could beat a WNBA team?

clickclickboom;742107 wrote:People really think that a high school boys team could beat a WNBA team?

Yes

Hb31187;742116 wrote:Yes

Ignorant

clickclickboom;742126 wrote:Ignorant

Yes you are.

Bigger, Faster, Stronger, more athletic and not far behind...if behind at all on fundamentals=Win.

Bigger? slightly
Faster? sure
Stronger? irrellevant
Behind in fundamentals? unbelievably

Strength is irrelevant in basketball...and im the ignorant one? L M A O

Yeah.. if only i knew something about this weird game of basketball.. the ball goes in the orange thing right? why are there so many lines?

dude, a WNBA team would destroy any high school team. heck UCONN would beat any high school team. They shoot the ball alot better, defend a heck of a lot better, turn it over a lot less, and are just plain better.

You're really that stupid?

ANY Hs team? Oak Hill would win by 30 against Uconn, so i truly hope you're joking. They defend better...against opponents that are their speed and athleticism, they turn it over because they dont have longer stronger defenders pressuring them the whole game. And if they were better, people would give 2 shits about the WNBA. Theyre inferior in almost every facet of the game except maybe shooting, and good luck shooting over someone bigger, more athletic and longer than you.

You done now?

nope, first of all the D3 high school basketball team is not that much bigger and stronger than the WNBA team. You're definitely underestimating this team's speed, and let me rephrase the any high school team thing, any public high school.

clickclickboom;742172 wrote:nope, first of all the D3 high school basketball team is not that much bigger and stronger than the WNBA team. You're definitely underestimating this team's speed, and let me rephrase the any high school team thing, any public high school.

I agree that a D3 team(ones that arent private) would get beat by a WNBA team, I never argue that. My argument was that a GOOD D1 HS team would beat a WNBA team. For example Northland this year and last

alright so were kinda on the same page here, but i was too lazy to read the first 3 pages of this garbage. WNBA is pretty talented, just nobody has the attention spand to watch anything more than Lebron James dunking on SportsCenter every morning.

clickclickboom;742107 wrote:People really think that a high school boys team could beat a WNBA team?

Not all high school teams, but if you don't know that there are, and have been, some AMAZING high school basketball teams around this country that would EASILY beat some of the WNBA teams, then you know too little about either one or the other.

clickclickboom;742138 wrote:Bigger? slightly

Average WNBA player is 5' 11". You really think that the average high school basketball player is only "slightly" taller? Hell, I played on a little D3 team back in 2001, and our team average 6' 3".

Most D1 school would be hilariously taller as a team than a 5' 11" average. To think otherwise is just silly.

For what it's worth, we could NOT have beat a WNBA team.

clickclickboom;742138 wrote:Faster? sure

As I proved earlier, high school boys are DECISIVELY faster, since even just the boys in the state of Ohio (nevermind the country) have beaten all women's world records in the races they have in common.

clickclickboom;742138 wrote:Stronger? irrellevant

You've obviously never played in the paint. The centers and power forwards on most large D1 schools would manhandle WNBA centers. I've played against a girl who was a professional basketball player in Europe. She was a power forward at 6' 3". If I had to guess, she was about 200 lbs of muscle. Don't get me wrong, she was strong and physical, but I backed my 250-lb. ass into her and basically sealed her under the hoop for most of the game. It was the easiest 20 points I'd ever gotten.

For what it's worth, I suck at basketball. I'm just tall, large, strong, and moderately fundamental. At some point, that really is enough.

clickclickboom;742138 wrote:Behind in fundamentals? unbelievably

Um ... not really. A lot of kids in the big urban schools have been learning the fundamentals since they were about five. To suggest that they are THAT far behind in fundamentals leads me to believe that you really haven't paid attention to boys high school basketball. What do you think coaches teach during practice? Sometimes not every player on a team is fundamentally sound, but on the whole, no, high school boys teams are not that far behind.

This is the one area I do think the WNBA does have a slight edge, though.

For what it's worth, based on the earlier numbers, high school boy athletes seem to have better endurance as well, if you read anything like that into the distance running times being compared.

clickclickboom;742159 wrote:Yeah.. if only i knew something about this weird game of basketball.. the ball goes in the orange thing right? why are there so many lines?

dude, a WNBA team would destroy any high school team. heck UCONN would beat any high school team. They shoot the ball alot better, defend a heck of a lot better, turn it over a lot less, and are just plain better.

You're hilarious.

I'm willing to bet that 5' 11" is roughly the average heighth of high school basketball teams, and of course they're way behind in fundamentals they got to the WNBA because they've worked on fundamentals for their entire lives, what records are you talking about with speed? and you're right i've never stepped in the paint before in my life and really don't see how anyone could have a finess game down there.

clickclickboom;742211 wrote:I'm willing to bet that 5' 11" is roughly the average heighth of high school basketball teams

Yes, in the 1970s or 1980s, you might have been right.

Now, that'd be the shortest team on the court damn near every game. That might be the average height of some MIDDLE SCHOOL teams.

clickclickboom;742211 wrote:and of course they're way behind in fundamentals they got to the WNBA because they've worked on fundamentals for their entire lives

But so have many of these boys. It's not like the average varsity player is 15 here. Many of these players are 18 years old. At that point, many have been competing for 13 years, learning the game.

I'm not at all suggesting that the high school kids are the clear favorite in the category of fundamentals, or even that they are the favorite at all. But these aren't grade school kids learning the game. These are kids who have also heard the fundamentals for a decade or more.

It would be illogical to think that they are "far behind" the WNBA players. Hell, some aren't "far behind" the NBA players (the ones that have been able to succeed in the NBA either right out of high school, or after the one year of college. Given the distance between the NBA and the WNBA in terms of quality of play, that only increases the number of high school players who could succeed in the WNBA.

So no, the WNBA is not way ahead. I think they are ahead, but not drastically, and I would contend that no relevant statistic could ever lend any credibility to the notion that they are.

clickclickboom;742211 wrote:what records are you talking about with speed?

Sorry. It was in one of those earlier pages.

I posted comparisons between track and field records, as the discussion came to speed. I compared the OHSAA boys race records with the women's world records. Not all high school boys. Just the ones who went to school in Ohio. I'd say I'm limiting the talent pool quite a bit by doing that.

There is not a single race, sprint OR distance, in which the Ohio high school boys record is not better than the women's world record. Florence Griffith-Joyner, who has held the women's 100m and 200m record for 23 years ... got beat by Brandon Saine of Piqua HS (in 2006) and Chris Nelloms of Dayton Dunbar HS (in 1990) respectively. In fact, even in field events, the Ohio high school boys outperform the female world-record-holders.

These are high school "boys" outperforming the best women in the world.

clickclickboom;742211 wrote:and you're right i've never stepped in the paint before in my life and really don't see how anyone could have a finess game down there.

You can't, really. Strength, size, and some height are the only metrics that really matter down there. Most D1 high schools could just pass it to their centers all night, as a high school center at a large D1 high school would be able to have his way with most any WNBA player.

I brought that up on the grounds that you said strength was irrelevant. As someone who basically never left the key, I can tell you. Strength is VERY important.

Sigh.. I still don't think that 5'11" is too far out there for a guess.

do you realize you're talking exteme cases for most of your argument on fundamentals, just because this one kid on a team in your area has been practicing since he was 2 doesn't make it common. All the players in the WNBA are those extreme cases. most high school players are just shootin 3's and tryin to see if they can dunk.

So you're comparing the best high school track records with Women's track records? that doesn't make any sense in comparing the speed of WNBA and high school basketball

And finally, i've been in the paint before, i've lived in there for 10 years i know how well someone can do with minimal strength.

clickclickboom;742244 wrote:do you realize you're talking exteme cases for most of your argument on fundamentals, just because this one kid on a team in your area has been practicing since he was 2 doesn't make it common. All the players in the WNBA are those extreme cases. most high school players are just shootin 3's and tryin to see if they can dunk.

This isn't, at all, true. The kids that never end up playing competitively are the kids you're talking about. Not even remotely close to the same as high school players. If you truly think that's an "average" high school basketball player, just shooting 3-pointers and trying to dunk, then you know nothing about high school basketball. The notion that you think an average team is still 5' 11" lends credibility to that notion.

clickclickboom;742244 wrote:So you're comparing the best high school track records with Women's track records? that doesn't make any sense in comparing the speed of WNBA and high school basketball

The speed is a different kind, but it establishes the edge, athletically. The two kinds of speed are different, but a case can be made that they are likely proportional to track and field. As such, the boys would still have the distinct edge, but proportionally.

clickclickboom;742244 wrote:And finally, i've been in the paint before, i've lived in there for 10 years i know how well someone can do with minimal strength.

I've yet to see ANYONE consistently successful in the paint without being able to hold their own in strength. Elbow fade-away shots maybe? Couple that with the distinct height disadvantage. Compared to D1 high school centers, WNBA centers would be (for the most part) shorter, lighter, weaker, and slower. That cannot be overcome just because you have a slight, or even moderate, edge in fundamentals.

I take it you were being sarcastic before when you said you'd never been in the paint. I didn't get the sarcasm. My apologies.