A really good eighth grade boys team (or freshman team) would IMO beat most good varsity girls teams by a good margin (maybe not Dayton Chaminade-Jullienne or Latoya Turner-led Pickerington). As KB09 has said, they just aren't able to physically maintain the same level of effort and play.

reclegend22;1603729 wrote:A really good eighth grade boys team (or freshman team) would IMO beat most good varsity girls teams by a good margin (maybe not Dayton Chaminade-Jullienne or Latoya Turner-led Pickerington). As KB09 has said, they just aren't able to physically maintain the same level of effort and play.

I mean I'd probably tend to agree with that, just think it's funny that people don't believe a professional women's team couldn't compete with or beat a decent to good HS team.

robj55;1603738 wrote:I mean I'd probably tend to agree with that, just think it's funny that people don't believe a professional women's team couldn't compete with or beat a decent to good HS team.

Well, considering I dont think a single NCAA Mens team would lose, it stands to reason that I think a good HS team would also not lose. Those teams routinely have 3-6 players going to play college ball.

lol, based on the last couple of pages, you can sure tell the CBB season's over

Laley23;1603743 wrote:Well, considering I dont think a single NCAA Mens team would lose, it stands to reason that I think a good HS team would also not lose. Those teams routinely have 3-6 players going to play college ball.

Yeah I get that logic, but there is also a lot bad HS basketball out there, low IQ, poor fundamentals and a ton of selfish play. It just depends on what we are constituting as a GOOD team.

Laley23;1603743 wrote:Well, considering I dont think a single NCAA Mens team would lose, it stands to reason that I think a good HS team would also not lose. Those teams routinely have 3-6 players going to play college ball.

\
I would constitute a HS team who have 3-6 kids going on to play college hoops much higher than just a 'good' HS team.

thavoice;1603753 wrote:\
I would constitute a HS team who have 3-6 kids going on to play college hoops much higher than just a 'good' HS team.

Eh, depends. Indiana...no. Although, maybe if you take the whole country yes.

Tons of times the teams in Indiana dont even make it out of sectional, and they are ALWAYS sending at least 3 kids to go play in college it seems.

St. Johns last year with Marc Loving had at least 4 kids who will play in college. Now, 1 was a freshman, but they still had 3. They were beat real quick and I dont even think they won the league.

Central Catholic had 1 kid going to play basketball, but 3 others going to major D1 for football. They werent great.

Bowsher this year has 1 kid going to play next year and from watching them, Id guess they have quite a few younger kids going as well. Good, not great.

vball10set;1603561 wrote:My post was directed solely at sleeper, period. There's no doubt that putting together a team of 20-something athletes that can ball would prolly beat some WNBA teams, but we're talking sleeper here

I've played against women who played D1 college and some women who played professionally overseas for a few years. While I've never played against a WNBA player I can tell you the men outclass D1 women's basketball players fairly easily. Mostly, the women are just above average shooters and hustle on defense but they have trouble getting anything going off the dribble or getting anything done in the lane against men.

Women are straight up not good at basketball especially compared to men.

I've played against two WNBA players, Rhonda Blades and Sheri Sam....very good players. Blades probably would have started on my high school's team. Sam could play, and would make my HS team, but wouldn't start. No position for her. She can play her role in women's basketball, but she isn't strong enough or can jump with a good 3 or 4 guy that has 3 inches and 25 lbs on her.

Fundamentals are great, but they mean little when athleticism means you can't even get a shot off. Men's basketball and women's basketball are just as different as baseball and women's fast-pitch softball.

Laley23;1603659 wrote:I had a former WNBA champion coach my sister in HS. She sucked. I mean, absolutely terrible. She was considered a 4, and was like 5'10. Couldnt shoot, couldnt dribble well. She wasnt a star by any means, but played in the rotation for the Detroit team that won the title. I forget her name, but she was not good. No doubt most teams who make it to states in HS are beating a WNBA team.

They aren't terrible, but the athletic and physical difference is just too much to overcome, this is Sheri Sam's bio:

http://seattletimes.com/sports/storm/roster/bios/sam.html

6'0 (there is no way she is a legit 6'0), 160 lbs and played the 3 and made the WNBA all-star game. She could shoot, had good fundamentals but couldn't handle a normal 3 guy on a half-way decent high school team, and certainly no one that played college ball.