Stay Connected with the Seattle Storm Facebook Twitter YouTube Instagram StormWatch
  • Print

2005 WNBA Draft Prospect Stats

To give another perspective on some of the top prospects as the 2005 WNBA Draft approaches, storm.wnba.com has collected the statistics for 25 of these players, evaluating them using some statistics you might not be familiar with, but provide a better perspective on how well they performed in college than merely traditional points, rebounds and assists.

Reading this chart:
TS% - True Shooting Percentage, the best measure of total shooting efficiency. This is found by PTS/(2*(FGA + (.44*FTA)))
R40 - rebounds per 40 minutes
Pass - combines assist/turnover ratio and assists/minute. This is found by 50 * ((AST/MIN)^2) * (AST/TO)
EFF40 - WNBA.com's Efficiency rating per 40 minutes. This is found by 40*((PTS + REB + AST + STL + BLK - TO - (FGA-FGM) - (FTA-FTM))/MIN)

Player       Col   MPG   PPG   RPG  APG   TS%   R40  Pass  EFF40
----------------------------------------------------------------
D. Jackson   OKL  32.8  14.6   8.5  5.8  .533  10.4  2.85   25.9
K. Haynie    MSU  33.0  10.8   6.6  5.4  .532   8.0  3.09   22.5
D. Wheeler   ARZ  33.5  17.6   5.1  4.4  .518   6.1  1.57   21.6
T. Johnson   LSU  31.0  10.3   3.3  7.7  .544   4.2  8.90   19.8
L. Moore     TEN  27.3   5.1   4.6  3.3  .412   6.7  0.99   12.4
----------------------------------------------------------------
T. White     MST  35.7  23.5   7.7  3.4  .526   8.6  0.39   24.3
R. Hodges    FSU  34.5  19.2   5.6  1.5  .536   6.5  0.05   17.8
T. Wright    PSU  35.2  19.3   4.5  3.6  .484   5.1  0.64   17.5
E. Taylor     LT  21.6  11.2   4.1  2.0  .464   7.5  0.36   16.9
C. Newton    RUT  29.2   9.4   4.1  2.3  .502   5.7  0.59   16.0
----------------------------------------------------------------
K. Wecker    KSU  32.1  21.0  10.1  2.6  .554  12.6  0.32   29.6
K. Mann     UCSB  33.3  19.5   9.4  2.3  .505  11.4  0.26   23.3
N. Bell      UNC  22.5  10.6   5.6  1.8  .483   9.9  0.23   21.8
A. Williams  ILL  31.4  17.8   4.6  2.7  .507   5.8  0.30   19.4
S. Ely       TEN  30.9  14.4   7.0  1.7  .512   9.1  0.07   17.9
----------------------------------------------------------------
McCarville   MIN  30.8  16.0  10.6  3.7  .550  13.7  0.82   30.9
K. Flavin    RIC  31.1  16.8   8.8  1.9  .598  11.3  0.15   27.0
S. Blackmon  BAY  31.7  15.4   7.9  1.8  .538  10.0  0.16   22.1
Kraayeveld   ORE  32.5  14.7   8.3  1.8  .560  10.2  0.08   20.8
J. Batteast   ND  33.6  16.9   6.6  2.6  .485   7.9  0.37   19.5
----------------------------------------------------------------
K. Feenstra  LIB  25.9  17.8  10.3  0.9  .687  16.0  0.03   38.7
S. Irvin     TCU  31.7  19.9  11.8  2.1  .535  14.9  0.13   34.2
S. Lyttle    HOU  33.4  18.8  12.1  1.5  .516  14.5  0.06   28.9
K. Braxton*  UGA  24.4  13.7   8.0  1.2  .518  13.1  0.04   24.8
K. Roehrig   MSU  29.7  13.4   7.2  1.6  .541   9.7  0.14   22.2

When looking at the Efficiency per 40 minutes, which is a natural tendency, keep in mind that this statistic tends to be biased towards inside players, which is how the fourth highest-rated center (Kara Braxton) can rate better than all but one guard. Posts get more rebounds and blocks than perimeter players get assists and steals, and their field-goal percentages are also generally higher.

Even within position groups, EFF40 is biased towards players who grab a lot of rebounds, like Dionnah Jackson, as opposed to players who do other things, like passer Temeka Johnson.

Strength of schedule is also an important consideration. While Katie Feenstra rates as the top overall player, she played a weak schedule. Jeff Sagarin rated Liberty's schedule 217th in NCAA Division I. The ratings for Kristen Mann (148), Kate Flavin (72) and Sancho Lyttle (76) also need some air taken out of them

It should also be noted that these statistics reflect only the player's senior season and not her entire NCAA career. Erica Taylor is the best example of this, as she played a limited schedule this season after giving birth midway through the year.