No need to accuse me of sour grapes. I like Howard a lot. I would certainly take her over Kizer this year.
Reeve didn't see it that way. That was a big problem. Felt they could get by with Kizer, who is now cut. The season still could work out, but making it a lot harder for the team. Laying even higher expectation on Maya and Fowles. They can't be perfect every game, and that's basically what it takes now to win.
That is not the issue. I am not a fan that likes to second guess management decisions of a successful team.
This is the first year for Reeve making all the decisions, and I never liked the decision not to re-sign Howard. Still not liking it obviously. if you don't like to second guess, then don't. But also don't try to take away right to second guess.
The reason we don't still have Howard is because she was stuck behind five starters that had each been an All Star and won multiple titles. Also, there is this thing called a salary cap and there are only forty minutes in a game. Which of our All Star players should we have taken money and playing time away from? Seattle had money and minutes available and we didn't so we allowed Howard to try for more success.
We allowed it, huh? Aren't we just generous to other teams. SEA must have the money, because they pay max to Langhorne, who was also supposed to get the bulk of the minutes, but she was injured coming into camp, Howard took over as starter and hasn't looked back. That's how good she is. Giving up good young vets in their prime isn't the best way to keep a dynasty going.
That, however, is NOT the major reason for our losses this year. Two things stand out. We have three players that are starting to reach later career issues.
I guess you just answered your question above. You seem to think all the starters are irreplaceable and are worth their salaries, and then go on to say these "later career issues" are an excuse for losing.
We also have four second team players that have been replaced. Each of those takes new players spending time playing together in order to adapt. We lost four players that averaged over 10 minutes per game (Renee 22, Plenette 14, Howard 12 and Perkins 16). We replaced them with four other players averaging over 10 minutes (Robinson 18, Wright 18, Jones 13 and Ceci 11).
This is the crux of the debate, did Reeve do a good job replacing these players? I'm saying no, should have made it a priority to keep Howard with Brunson likely retiring after this season. There was no keeping Montgomery, i understand that. But she's more easily replaceable than Howard. Did the Lynx have to pay max for DRob and give up a first round draft pick? Probably not, but I'm pretty sure you can have 7 max players on the team if you're frugal with the rest. A cheaper Kizer was Reeve's solution for losing Howard. It didn't pan out. That's a reality. It's a reality that might bite for a few years because Howard is obviously that good.
We are also replacing minutes and scoring from Lindsay.
Oh, how's that? Are you saying Whalen has become a detriment to the team? Why is she on the team then? She has a great paying job.
All is not lost. We have lost two home games and one away to the best two teams in the league (Pho and LA). We lost a buzzer beater away plus two other away games to good teams that played above their normal level. We are playing better together each game.
They have recently lost two of the worst teams in the league in Indiana and Chicago, most likely because we can't keep up with the youth on these teams, and Maya & Fowles can't afford to have an off night.
Better to do both but if I had to choose between having best regular season record or winning playoffs the latter is better. We still have a pretty good shot at that.
One of the chief reasons the Lynx have had great playoff success is securing that #1 seed every year for home court advantage. It means a lot. This year will likely be different.
