Men vs. Women

• Pick6

  

  sleeper;740943 wrote:Screens, pump fakes, boxing out, execution, etc... Honestly have you ever played basketball? The city teams(read: all black teams) don't win every game against the white suburban kids. Heck, they don't even win half of them.

  
  screens arent going to work when they are 40lbs less than the guy and not as strong. pump fakes arent going to work when the guy is 6 inches taller than her. boxing out wont work when you arent strong or big enough to get into position and move them.
• sleeper

  

  Pick6;740954 wrote:screens arent going to work when they are 40lbs less than the guy and not as strong. pump fakes arent going to work when the guy is 6 inches taller than her. boxing out wont work when you arent strong or big enough to get into position and move them.

  You don't know how to play basketball.
• Hb31187

  

  sleeper;740943 wrote:Screens, pump fakes, boxing out, execution, etc... Honestly have you ever played basketball? The city teams(read: all black teams) don't win every game against the white suburban kids. Heck, they don't even win half of them.

  Not all white suburban kids are non athletic and smaller than the city league teams. Mens teams for the most part will be bigger, faster, stronger, and not just by a slim margin. WNBA players would be overwhelmed
• sleeper

  

  Hb31187;740984 wrote:Not all white suburban kids are non athletic and smaller than the city league teams. Mens teams for the most part will be bigger, faster, stronger, and not just by a slim margin. WNBA players would be overwhelmed

  
  LOL, ya okay.
• Hb31187

  

  Brilliant rebuttal. Not quite sure why im arguing with you in the first place actually, kinda wasting my words
• tk421

  

  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
  

  The Canadian women played 21 games against AMHL clubs made up of 16-to 18-year-old males in the lead up to the Olympics in Turin, Italy. Those games were crucial to Canada's preparation and will again be instrumental for head coach Melody Davidson and the 26 women trying to make the team.
  
  Under Davidson, Canada went 9-11-1 versus midget teams in the five months leading up to the 2006 Olympics.

  So, the absolutely very best of Canadian women's hockey regularly lose games against 16-18 year old boys. Why would basketball be anything different?
• sleeper

  

  Using other sports as a proxy is pointless.
• Pick6

  

  sleeper;740967 wrote:You don't know how to play basketball.

  
  i only played from 5th grade until i graduated..you're right.
• sleeper

  

  Pick6;741016 wrote:i only played from 5th grade until i graduated..you're right.

  
  Sitting the bench doesn't count.
• sherm03

  

  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.
• Pick6

  

  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.

  
  that doesnt make any sense at all...obviously the best player doesnt always equal the biggest player...you know there are different positions. that 6'0" Tu Holloway might have a 5'6" girl on him. Every position the girls will be outmatched. Nobody is saying just because ONE player is taller than another they are better.
• Hb31187

  

  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.

  Size weight strength and athleticism. The combination is what puts it over the top. WNBA post players would get absolutely abused int he post, and the Guards may be quick...but not as quick strong and athletic as good D1 high school boys guards, or mens college teams
  
  
  and that 6'0 180lb tiny PG Tu...is probably stronger than the best post players in the WNBA lol
• sherm03

  

  Pick6;741044 wrote:that doesnt make any sense at all...obviously the best player doesnt always equal the biggest player...you know there are different positions. that 6'0" Tu Holloway might have a 5'6" girl on him. Every position the girls will be outmatched. Nobody is saying just because ONE player is taller than another they are better.

  
  I agree...the best player is not always the biggest player. The point is, just because a player is smaller does not mean that they are automatically outmatched by a bigger defender.
• Hb31187

  

  sherm03;741050 wrote:I agree...the best player is not always the biggest player. The point is, just because a player is smaller does not mean that they are automatically outmatched by a bigger defender.

  
  When the bigger defender is also stronger, and more athletic....it certainly doesnt bode well for the smaller player. Let alone a team full of them
• sherm03

  

  Hb31187;741049 wrote:Size weight strength and athleticism. The combination is what puts it over the top. WNBA post players would get absolutely abused int he post, and the Guards may be quick...but not as quick strong and athletic as good D1 high school boys guards, or mens college teams
  
  
  and that 6'0 180lb tiny PG Tu...is probably stronger than the best post players in the WNBA lol

  
  I'm not talking about college teams against WNBA. The question is high school boys vs. WNBA. And I just don't think that most high school boys teams have the advantage to beat a WNBA team on any consistent basis. They may take one or two out of ten...but overall, I think the WNBA team would win easily.
• Hb31187

  

  Not a small like d3 or 4 team. But a good D1 team(top 15 or so) in a state like ohio where basketball is pretty good overall talent. Would handle a WNBA team more times than not IMO
• sleeper

  

  Hb31187;741051 wrote:When the bigger defender is also stronger, and more athletic....it certainly doesnt bode well for the smaller player. Let alone a team full of them

  
  If you take the biggest players in the OP's example, versus the biggest in the WNBA, the WNBA is giving up a total of 5 inches from all 5 positions combined. Whoop-de-doo.
• Hb31187

  

  sleeper;741063 wrote:If you take the biggest players in the OP's example, versus the biggest in the WNBA, the WNBA is giving up a total of 5 inches from all 5 positions combined. Whoop-de-doo.

  
  Vs the biggest in the WNBA? or against an average WNBA team? And im talkin D1 HS teams(which was argued couldnt keep it within 30 of a WNBA team)
• sleeper

  

  Hb31187;741067 wrote:Vs the biggest in the WNBA? or against an average WNBA team? And im talkin D1 HS teams(which was argued couldnt keep it within 30 of a WNBA team)

  
  The team's in the OP's post. I don't know(and honestly don't really care) about the average height and weight of a WNBA player vs the average D1 HS player. It doesn't matter, the WNBA team would win every time.
• Manhattan Buckeye

  sleeper;741063 wrote:If you take the biggest players in the OP's example, versus the biggest in the WNBA, the WNBA is giving up a total of 5 inches from all 5 positions combined. Whoop-de-doo.

  
  And its completely beside the point, in the women's game height would be a disadvantage if they were to play against men. I don't care if a woman is 6'4", if she weighs 140 lbs and can't run with a 6'4" guy she becomes a liability. The best bet is to have women like Bird, Taurasi, etc. that are quick and can handle the ball. Reading this thread I'm convinced a lot of people have never played against a good HS team. I'm about Taurasi's height/weight (nearly exactly according to her wiki page), and I got destroyed in my last game in HS by a guy from Proctorville Fairland that was 6'4" and maybe 185. It didn't matter that I could handle the ball better than him, that I could shoot better than him, that I may have been smarter than him. He was just too damn big and fast for me and the rest of our team to overcome.
  
  Height isn't the issue by itself, it is height plus the athleticism. And teams that the OP mentioned have that. Forget big schools, I wached Oak Hill a few games the year they won the state, not only would their varsity beat my college's women's team, I'm not unconvinced their JV wouldn't. There was something in the water in Jackson Co. for those few year. Those guys were built like cro-magnon men.
• sleeper

  

  Manhattan Buckeye;741085 wrote:And its completely beside the point, in the women's game height would be a disadvantage if they were to play against men.

  
  These are boys, not men.
• Manhattan Buckeye

  Yeah, OJ Mayo and Patrick Patterson (per my response to Sherm) were really "boys". These guys were monsters, as was LBJ, Dwight Howard, Amare Stoudemire (without a doubt the best HS player I've seen in person), etc. The athleticism difference puts it to a different sport level.
• sleeper

  

  Manhattan Buckeye;741093 wrote:Yeah, OJ Mayo and Patrick Patterson (per my response to Sherm) were really "boys". These guys were monsters, as was LBJ, Dwight Howard, Amare Stoudemire (without a doubt the best HS player I've seen in person), etc. The athleticism difference puts it to a different sport level.

  
  Oh so every once in a while a great player with extreme athleticism comes around and you use that as a proxy that a team is composed entirely of these players?
  
  I'll stand by my comment of WNBA -30 against any high school boys team.
• Manhattan Buckeye

  sleeper;741100 wrote:Oh so every once in a while a great player with extreme athleticism comes around and you use that as a proxy that a team is composed entirely of these players?
  
  I'll stand by my comment of WNBA -30 against any high school boys team.

  
  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!
• sleeper

  

  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!

  
  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.