WNBA "Death" Lineup Analysis

[Doctor MJ]

So one of the things I like to look at are the lineups that are having the most success, in part because that can sometimes bode well for predicting the playoffs.

Let me just show some playoff data in recent years.

2021 Sky: Sloot, Quigley, Copper, Parker Stevens - 17.9 M/G, +9.9 PM/G
2022 Aces: Gray, Plum, Young, Wilson, Stokes - 17.5 MPG, +5.2 PM/G
2023 Aces: Gray, Plum, Young, Wilson, Stokes - 15.4 MPG, +10.3 PM/G

It's not a given that the championship team will ride one line up for a lot of minutes in the playoffs, but clearly, it's an advantage when you can do that.

Additionally, sometimes that dominance only emerges in the playoffs - like the 2021 Sky - so regular season can't tell us too much.

But here's the data we have for the 2024 season so far. I'll list first the big minute regular season lineups for each team, and then the one with the best total +/- if relevant.

Sun: Harris, Carrington, Jones, Thomas, Bonner - 401 Min in 29 GP, +64 PM total
Lynx: McBride, Carleton, Collier, Williams, Smith - 394 Min in 28 GP, +168 PM total
Storm: Diggins, Loyd, Horston, Nneka, Ezi - 338 Min in 23 GP, +77 PM total
Sky: Allen, Mabrey, Carter, Cardoso, Reese - 220 Min in 18 GP, +44 PM total
Lib: Sloot, Sabrina, Laney, Stewie, Jones - 181 Min in 13 GP, +91 PM total
Fever: Clark, Mitchell, Samuelson, Smith, Boston - 178 Min in 19 GP, -21 PM total
Merc: Taurasi, Cloud, Copper, Cunningham, Griner - 177 Min in 19 GP, +31 PM total
Wings: Arike, Billings, McCowan, Siegrist, Uzun - 171 Min in 10 GP, -2 PM total
Aces: Plum, Young, Clark, Wilson, Stokes - 155 Min in 13 GP, +6 PM total
Dream: Gray, Canada, Howard, Hillmon, Charles - 143 Min in 7 GP, +50 PM

Ordering by +/-:

1. Lynx: McBride, Carleton, Collier, Williams, Smith - +168 in 28 GP
2. Lib: Sloot, Sabrina, Laney, Stewie, Jones - +91 in 13 GP
3. Storm: Diggins, Loyd, Horston, Nneka, Ezi - +77 in 23 GP
4. Sun: Harris, Carrington, Jones, Thomas, Bonner - +64 in 29 GP
5. Dream: Gray, Canada, Howard, Hillmon, Charles - +50 in 7 GP
6. Sky: Allen, Mabrey, Carter, Cardoso, Reese - +44 in 18 GP
7. Merc: Taurasi, Cloud, Copper, Cunningham, Griner - +31 in 19 GP
8. Aces: Gray, Plum, Young, Clark, Wilson - +29 in 19 GP
9. Wings: Arike, Sabally, McCowan, Uzon, Howard - +26 in 6 GP
10. Fever: Clark, Mitchell, Hull, Dantas, Boston - +26 in 5 GP

Observations:

1. The Lynx have ridden their death lineup like no other. They should be seen as a serious contender.
2. The Liberty have had an even more impressive lineup I think, but were disrupted by injury. The fact they still have the best record in the league despite the injury, makes them a clear favorite if healthy.
3. Storm & Sun have solid death lineups.
4. The Dream look strangely intriguing by this method.
5. The Aces really just seem like what was working for them the last two years stopped working, and if they go on to win the title, it probably won't be because they "flip the switch" but because they find another approach that works.

6. The Fever are the only team listed whose primary lineup is a net negative, and that's very interesting given it being a year with so much figuring out for them.

It should be noted that even if I chop off the first part of the season, and focus only on 6/3 onward when they've had the best offense, a) they are still playing that same lineup as the big minute lineup, but b) the Fever have 3 other lineups with better total +/- in that span despite the lesser minutes.

While that big minute lineup has at least been a net positive from 6/3 on, I do think it makes sense to ask whether the Fever still aren't playing optimized lineups, and in particular whether Lexie Hull should be playing more.

[Green Chile]

Interesting. Lynx play some of the most beautiful basketball I've ever seen. Great ball movement, selfless basketball on both sides of the floor. Even past their "death lineup", they seem to have a never ending supply of bigs that can move, defend, and shoot. And then getting Hines-Allen almost seems unfair.

In any case, these Playoffs are going to be absolutely wild. All these teams seem like they could take a series against anybody.

Even all the way down to ATL (if they ever decide to take that 8-seed). With Canada and Howard, they can cause some problems.

[ellobo]

So one of the things I like to look at are the lineups that are having the most success, in part because that can sometimes bode well for predicting the playoffs.

Let me just show some playoff data in recent years.

2021 Sky: Sloot, Quigley, Copper, Parker Stevens - 17.9 M/G, +9.9 PM/G
2022 Aces: Gray, Plum, Young, Wilson, Stokes - 17.5 MPG, +5.2 PM/G
2023 Aces: Gray, Plum, Young, Wilson, Stokes - 15.4 MPG, +10.3 PM/G

It's not a given that the championship team will ride one line up for a lot of minutes in the playoffs, but clearly, it's an advantage when you can do that.

Additionally, sometimes that dominance only emerges in the playoffs - like the 2021 Sky - so regular season can't tell us too much.

But here's the data we have for the 2024 season so far. I'll list first the big minute regular season lineups for each team, and then the one with the best total +/- if relevant.

Sun: Harris, Carrington, Jones, Thomas, Bonner - 401 Min in 29 GP, +64 PM total
Lynx: McBride, Carleton, Collier, Williams, Smith - 394 Min in 28 GP, +168 PM total
Storm: Diggins, Loyd, Horston, Nneka, Ezi - 338 Min in 23 GP, +77 PM total
Sky: Allen, Mabrey, Carter, Cardoso, Reese - 220 Min in 18 GP, +44 PM total
Lib: Sloot, Sabrina, Laney, Stewie, Jones - 181 Min in 13 GP, +91 PM total
Fever: Clark, Mitchell, Samuelson, Smith, Boston - 178 Min in 19 GP, -21 PM total
Merc: Taurasi, Cloud, Copper, Cunningham, Griner - 177 Min in 19 GP, +31 PM total
Wings: Arike, Billings, McCowan, Siegrist, Uzun - 171 Min in 10 GP, -2 PM total
Aces: Plum, Young, Clark, Wilson, Stokes - 155 Min in 13 GP, +6 PM total
Dream: Gray, Canada, Howard, Hillmon, Charles - 143 Min in 7 GP, +50 PM

Ordering by +/-:

1. Lynx: McBride, Carleton, Collier, Williams, Smith - +168 in 28 GP
2. Lib: Sloot, Sabrina, Laney, Stewie, Jones - +91 in 13 GP
3. Storm: Diggins, Loyd, Horston, Nneka, Ezi - +77 in 23 GP
4. Sun: Harris, Carrington, Jones, Thomas, Bonner - +64 in 29 GP
5. Dream: Gray, Canada, Howard, Hillmon, Charles - +50 in 7 GP
6. Sky: Allen, Mabrey, Carter, Cardoso, Reese - +44 in 18 GP
7. Merc: Taurasi, Cloud, Copper, Cunningham, Griner - +31 in 19 GP
8. Aces: Gray, Plum, Young, Clark, Wilson - +29 in 19 GP
9. Wings: Arike, Sabally, McCowan, Uzon, Howard - +26 in 6 GP
10. Fever: Clark, Mitchell, Hull, Dantas, Boston - +26 in 5 GP

Observations:

1. The Lynx have ridden their death lineup like no other. They should be seen as a serious contender.
2. The Liberty have had an even more impressive lineup I think, but were disrupted by injury. The fact they still have the best record in the league despite the injury, makes them a clear favorite if healthy.
3. Storm & Sun have solid death lineups.
4. The Dream look strangely intriguing by this method.
5. The Aces really just seem like what was working for them the last two years stopped working, and if they go on to win the title, it probably won't be because they "flip the switch" but because they find another approach that works.

6. The Fever are the only team listed whose primary lineup is a net negative, and that's very interesting given it being a year with so much figuring out for them.

It should be noted that even if I chop off the first part of the season, and focus only on 6/3 onward when they've had the best offense, a) they are still playing that same lineup as the big minute lineup, but b) the Fever have 3 other lineups with better total +/- in that span despite the lesser minutes.

While that big minute lineup has at least been a net positive from 6/3 on, I do think it makes sense to ask whether the Fever still aren't playing optimized lineups, and in particular whether Lexie Hull should be playing more.

For the Liberty, by the eye test, I don't love lineups with Sabrina and Sloot together. I think the Liberty's best lineup is Sabrina, Stewie, JJ, Betnijah, and Fiebich, and their second best lineup is with Thornton instead of Fiebich. IMO, those lineups have the best defensive length and versatility, with fewer matchup disadvantages, and the best offensive spacing and three point shooting.

Sloot isn't necessarily washed, and I don't know how the regular season numbers compare, but if I were looking for a "death lineup" for the Liberty to lean on in the playoffs, I'd be looking for the length and shooting of Fiebich instead of Sloot.

[Doctor MJ]

So one of the things I like to look at are the lineups that are having the most success, in part because that can sometimes bode well for predicting the playoffs.

Let me just show some playoff data in recent years.

2021 Sky: Sloot, Quigley, Copper, Parker Stevens - 17.9 M/G, +9.9 PM/G
2022 Aces: Gray, Plum, Young, Wilson, Stokes - 17.5 MPG, +5.2 PM/G
2023 Aces: Gray, Plum, Young, Wilson, Stokes - 15.4 MPG, +10.3 PM/G

It's not a given that the championship team will ride one line up for a lot of minutes in the playoffs, but clearly, it's an advantage when you can do that.

Additionally, sometimes that dominance only emerges in the playoffs - like the 2021 Sky - so regular season can't tell us too much.

But here's the data we have for the 2024 season so far. I'll list first the big minute regular season lineups for each team, and then the one with the best total +/- if relevant.

Sun: Harris, Carrington, Jones, Thomas, Bonner - 401 Min in 29 GP, +64 PM total
Lynx: McBride, Carleton, Collier, Williams, Smith - 394 Min in 28 GP, +168 PM total
Storm: Diggins, Loyd, Horston, Nneka, Ezi - 338 Min in 23 GP, +77 PM total
Sky: Allen, Mabrey, Carter, Cardoso, Reese - 220 Min in 18 GP, +44 PM total
Lib: Sloot, Sabrina, Laney, Stewie, Jones - 181 Min in 13 GP, +91 PM total
Fever: Clark, Mitchell, Samuelson, Smith, Boston - 178 Min in 19 GP, -21 PM total
Merc: Taurasi, Cloud, Copper, Cunningham, Griner - 177 Min in 19 GP, +31 PM total
Wings: Arike, Billings, McCowan, Siegrist, Uzun - 171 Min in 10 GP, -2 PM total
Aces: Plum, Young, Clark, Wilson, Stokes - 155 Min in 13 GP, +6 PM total
Dream: Gray, Canada, Howard, Hillmon, Charles - 143 Min in 7 GP, +50 PM

Ordering by +/-:

1. Lynx: McBride, Carleton, Collier, Williams, Smith - +168 in 28 GP
2. Lib: Sloot, Sabrina, Laney, Stewie, Jones - +91 in 13 GP
3. Storm: Diggins, Loyd, Horston, Nneka, Ezi - +77 in 23 GP
4. Sun: Harris, Carrington, Jones, Thomas, Bonner - +64 in 29 GP
5. Dream: Gray, Canada, Howard, Hillmon, Charles - +50 in 7 GP
6. Sky: Allen, Mabrey, Carter, Cardoso, Reese - +44 in 18 GP
7. Merc: Taurasi, Cloud, Copper, Cunningham, Griner - +31 in 19 GP
8. Aces: Gray, Plum, Young, Clark, Wilson - +29 in 19 GP
9. Wings: Arike, Sabally, McCowan, Uzon, Howard - +26 in 6 GP
10. Fever: Clark, Mitchell, Hull, Dantas, Boston - +26 in 5 GP

Observations:

1. The Lynx have ridden their death lineup like no other. They should be seen as a serious contender.
2. The Liberty have had an even more impressive lineup I think, but were disrupted by injury. The fact they still have the best record in the league despite the injury, makes them a clear favorite if healthy.
3. Storm & Sun have solid death lineups.
4. The Dream look strangely intriguing by this method.
5. The Aces really just seem like what was working for them the last two years stopped working, and if they go on to win the title, it probably won't be because they "flip the switch" but because they find another approach that works.

6. The Fever are the only team listed whose primary lineup is a net negative, and that's very interesting given it being a year with so much figuring out for them.

It should be noted that even if I chop off the first part of the season, and focus only on 6/3 onward when they've had the best offense, a) they are still playing that same lineup as the big minute lineup, but b) the Fever have 3 other lineups with better total +/- in that span despite the lesser minutes.

While that big minute lineup has at least been a net positive from 6/3 on, I do think it makes sense to ask whether the Fever still aren't playing optimized lineups, and in particular whether Lexie Hull should be playing more.

For the Liberty, by the eye test, I don't love lineups with Sabrina and Sloot together. I think the Liberty's best lineup is Sabrina, Stewie, JJ, Betnijah, and Fiebich, and their second best lineup is with Thornton instead of Fiebich. IMO, those lineups have the best defensive length and versatility, with fewer matchup disadvantages, and the best offensive spacing and three point shooting.

Sloot isn't necessarily washed, and I don't know how the regular season numbers compare, but if I were looking for a "death lineup" for the Liberty to lean on in the playoffs, I'd be looking for the length and shooting of Fiebich instead of Sloot.

Makes sense. Both are point guards, the Liberty are staggering them to some degree, and right now an WOWY comparison with the two looks like this:

1. Sloot no Sabrina +15.80
2. Sabrina no Sloot +14.74
3. Sabrina & Sloot +10.31
4. No Sabrina | Sloot -5.06

Worth noting that the best offensive lineups have Sabrina-no-Sloot while the best defensive lineups have Sloot-no-Sabrina.

My guess would be that Sloot is on the verge of becoming the clear 2nd-unit point guard with Sabrina as the clear 1st-unit point guard given Sloot's age.

I do still see Sloot as both the better passer and defender though, and these aren't small things to consider.

[beeshma]

Great OP. Something that helps contextualize the playoffs.

[Wingy]

:clap:

Great OP. Something that helps contextualize the playoffs.

I concur, great post and good for discussion. I unfortunately gotta be that guy who quibbles with the choice of label.

Seems closer to a look at starting lineups than “death lineups.” Far as I know that term came from the Warriors when they went away from the starters to their comparably smaller closers.

Still like the thread analysis regardless. We all know playoff rotations shrink and top lineups get leaned on more heavily.

[ellobo]

:clap:

Great OP. Something that helps contextualize the playoffs.

I concur, great post and good for discussion. I unfortunately gotta be that guy who quibbles with the choice of label.

Seems closer to a look at starting lineups than “death lineups.” Far as I know that term came from the Warriors when they went away from the starters to their comparably smaller closers.

Still like the thread analysis regardless. We all know playoff rotations shrink and top lineups get leaned on more heavily.

I agree, and my impression without really crunching the numbers is that WNBA teams lean on their starters/starting lineups even more than NBA teams. For instance, I just happened to notice that A'ja is averaging the same mpg as Jokic did this season and more than Embiid. So it's a 40 minutes game, but that doesn't mean everyone plays 20% less. It more often means the bench plays 20% less. Teams tend to start their best lineups and play those players a lot of minutes.

As I mentioned in my previous post in this thread, I think the Liberty are an exception because they start Sabrina and Vandersloot together, and I don't think that's their best lineup. I'd say the same thing with the Aces if they were starting Stokes, but they seem to have gotten away from that already. And I can see the Sun closing with Mabrey instead of Harris (I haven't been following their rotations closely, so I don't know if this is already the case in the regular season).

[Doctor MJ]

:clap:

Great OP. Something that helps contextualize the playoffs.

I concur, great post and good for discussion. I unfortunately gotta be that guy who quibbles with the choice of label.

Seems closer to a look at starting lineups than “death lineups.” Far as I know that term came from the Warriors when they went away from the starters to their comparably smaller closers.

Still like the thread analysis regardless. We all know playoff rotations shrink and top lineups get leaned on more heavily.

Fair point on the name. If we really get into this type of analysis it will make sense to first decide what we want to view, and figure out what to call it later.

[DOT]

AT went out of a game recently, and the Sun went small with a DiJonnai/Ty Harris/Mabrey/Bonner/Jones lineup, and it looked really good

Kind of like what happened last year when Brionna Jones had to miss the entire year and the Sun effectively played small ball with AT at C, I know Brionna is really good but I think a potential small ball lineup with AT at C with those other 4 could be lethal on offense.

[Ice Man]

I agree, and my impression without really crunching the numbers is that WNBA teams lean on their starters/starting lineups even more than NBA teams. For instance, I just happened to notice that A'ja is averaging the same mpg as Jokic did this season and more than Embiid. So it's a 40 minutes game, but that doesn't mean everyone plays 20% less. It more often means the bench plays 20% less. Teams tend to start their best lineups and play those players a lot of minutes.

Yep. Caitlin plays 35.5 minutes per game. That leaves only 4.5 minutes for her backup. (Although Wheeler gets more minutes than that because she subs for other players, too.) It also makes looking at +/- figures with and without Clark something of a moot exercise, since she is so rarely off the court. It's such a small sample size -- and also strange, in that it incorporates a good deal of garbage time.

[CIN-C-STAR]

I agree, and my impression without really crunching the numbers is that WNBA teams lean on their starters/starting lineups even more than NBA teams. For instance, I just happened to notice that A'ja is averaging the same mpg as Jokic did this season and more than Embiid. So it's a 40 minutes game, but that doesn't mean everyone plays 20% less. It more often means the bench plays 20% less. Teams tend to start their best lineups and play those players a lot of minutes.

Yep. Caitlin plays 35.5 minutes per game. That leaves only 4.5 minutes for her backup. (Although Wheeler gets more minutes than that because she subs for other players, too.) It also makes looking at +/- figures with and without Clark something of a moot exercise, since she is so rarely off the court. It's such a small sample size -- and also strange, in that it incorporates a good deal of garbage time.

I don't want to derail as I think this is an excellent post, but does anyone know why the women's game is 8 minutes shorter?
If it isn't translating to fewer minutes for the stars, then isn't it just devaluing the bench/role players and making it more difficult for more women to break into the game?
Additionally, there's obviously fewer commercials in a shorter game (or should be), so wouldn't the league benefit financially from a longer game that has more advertising opportunities (I know they just signed a long-term media deal anyway, but in principle at least)?
Wouldn't it also allow more players to post "video game numbers" in games, which leads to more exposure? If the NBA has taught us anything, it's that casuals love eye-popping box scores lol.
Just curious if anyone has any insight on this. The women's and men's game are the same length in high school and college.

[ellobo]

I agree, and my impression without really crunching the numbers is that WNBA teams lean on their starters/starting lineups even more than NBA teams. For instance, I just happened to notice that A'ja is averaging the same mpg as Jokic did this season and more than Embiid. So it's a 40 minutes game, but that doesn't mean everyone plays 20% less. It more often means the bench plays 20% less. Teams tend to start their best lineups and play those players a lot of minutes.

Yep. Caitlin plays 35.5 minutes per game. That leaves only 4.5 minutes for her backup. (Although Wheeler gets more minutes than that because she subs for other players, too.) It also makes looking at +/- figures with and without Clark something of a moot exercise, since she is so rarely off the court. It's such a small sample size -- and also strange, in that it incorporates a good deal of garbage time.

I don't want to derail as I think this is an excellent post, but does anyone know why the women's game is 8 minutes shorter?
If it isn't translating to fewer minutes for the stars, then isn't it just devaluing the bench/role players and making it more difficult for more women to break into the game?
Additionally, there's obviously fewer commercials in a shorter game (or should be), so wouldn't the league benefit financially from a longer game that has more advertising opportunities (I know they just signed a long-term media deal anyway, but in principle at least)?
Wouldn't it also allow more players to post "video game numbers" in games, which leads to more exposure? If the NBA has taught us anything, it's that casuals love eye-popping box scores lol.
Just curious if anyone has any insight on this. The women's and men's game are the same length in high school and college.

Basketball games in all collegiate and adult/professional leagues everywhere, for men and women, are 40 minutes long, EXCEPT the NBA, so the games are standard length, just not extra long like the NBA. Even though a longer game allows for more commercials, fitting into a shorter programming window may actually be more desirable for broadcasters (speculation on my part).

Edited to add: It's the same for the three point line. The WNBA line is the same standard distance above the break*** as every other basketball league in the world (NCAA and international). The NBA is the only league with a longer distance. So the WNBA line is not a "women's distance," it's a standard distance.

***Distances below the break vary very slightly among leagues because court widths vary, and below the break the line is defined by distance from the sideline, not distance from the basket. But it doesn't vary by much between the WNBA, NCAA, and FIBA.

[Doctor MJ]

I agree, and my impression without really crunching the numbers is that WNBA teams lean on their starters/starting lineups even more than NBA teams. For instance, I just happened to notice that A'ja is averaging the same mpg as Jokic did this season and more than Embiid. So it's a 40 minutes game, but that doesn't mean everyone plays 20% less. It more often means the bench plays 20% less. Teams tend to start their best lineups and play those players a lot of minutes.

Yep. Caitlin plays 35.5 minutes per game. That leaves only 4.5 minutes for her backup. (Although Wheeler gets more minutes than that because she subs for other players, too.) It also makes looking at +/- figures with and without Clark something of a moot exercise, since she is so rarely off the court. It's such a small sample size -- and also strange, in that it incorporates a good deal of garbage time.

This is a good concern to have. My general thoughts:

1. This is why getting play-by-play data back to Wilt's era wouldn't be as cool as you'd think. He just played too much to get meaningful Off minutes.

2. I don't actually think the WNBA is too problematic on this front in the regular season - noisier than the NBA given this and the shorter season, but still shows a meaningful signal over the course of a season, but...

3. Come play off time players playing the full 40 is really not that rare, and you add to that the shortness of the series - sometimes just 1-gamers - and it makes it hard to do too much with regression data in the WNBA playoffs.

[RSCD3_]

I agree, and my impression without really crunching the numbers is that WNBA teams lean on their starters/starting lineups even more than NBA teams. For instance, I just happened to notice that A'ja is averaging the same mpg as Jokic did this season and more than Embiid. So it's a 40 minutes game, but that doesn't mean everyone plays 20% less. It more often means the bench plays 20% less. Teams tend to start their best lineups and play those players a lot of minutes.

Yep. Caitlin plays 35.5 minutes per game. That leaves only 4.5 minutes for her backup. (Although Wheeler gets more minutes than that because she subs for other players, too.) It also makes looking at +/- figures with and without Clark something of a moot exercise, since she is so rarely off the court. It's such a small sample size -- and also strange, in that it incorporates a good deal of garbage time.

This is a good concern to have. My general thoughts:

1. This is why getting play-by-play data back to Wilt's era wouldn't be as cool as you'd think. He just played too much to get meaningful Off minutes.

2. I don't actually think the WNBA is too problematic on this front in the regular season - noisier than the NBA given this and the shorter season, but still shows a meaningful signal over the course of a season, but...

3. Come play off time players playing the full 40 is really not that rare, and you add to that the shortness of the series - sometimes just 1-gamers - and it makes it hard to do too much with regression data in the WNBA playoffs.

What are your opinions on making the games 48 minutes. The 40 minutes matches international competition already, proponents for it mention that higher scores would draw more interest and also allow younger bench players to develop more, and then others have stated that it would really mess up the per game averages before and after (and considering the totals will be changed a lot with more franchises and possibly a 44 or 48 game season in the future (even 40 is an increase) some dont want the length to change at all)

I think its not that likely but curious your thoughts

[ellobo]

All things considered, I don't see a compelling reason to make the games longer. I like being able to see the best players play a higher proportion of minutes. I also like the six foul limit with 40 minute games because star players having to sit with foul trouble is less of a factor.

[Doctor MJ]

Yep. Caitlin plays 35.5 minutes per game. That leaves only 4.5 minutes for her backup. (Although Wheeler gets more minutes than that because she subs for other players, too.) It also makes looking at +/- figures with and without Clark something of a moot exercise, since she is so rarely off the court. It's such a small sample size -- and also strange, in that it incorporates a good deal of garbage time.

This is a good concern to have. My general thoughts:

1. This is why getting play-by-play data back to Wilt's era wouldn't be as cool as you'd think. He just played too much to get meaningful Off minutes.

2. I don't actually think the WNBA is too problematic on this front in the regular season - noisier than the NBA given this and the shorter season, but still shows a meaningful signal over the course of a season, but...

3. Come play off time players playing the full 40 is really not that rare, and you add to that the shortness of the series - sometimes just 1-gamers - and it makes it hard to do too much with regression data in the WNBA playoffs.

What are your opinions on making the games 48 minutes. The 40 minutes matches international competition already, proponents for it mention that higher scores would draw more interest and also allow younger bench players to develop more, and then others have stated that it would really mess up the per game averages before and after (and considering the totals will be changed a lot with more franchises and possibly a 44 or 48 game season in the future (even 40 is an increase) some dont want the length to change at all)

I think its not that likely but curious your thoughts

It's an interesting thought about allowing more basketball talent to play significant minutes, but to be honest the actual reasons why the NBL went to a 48 minute way back when had more to do with what worked best with attendees - who wanted to be entertained for longer, and would buy food & drink while they were there - and I think in this day & age, shorter is probably better for any product that doesn't come with party invitations (as football games often do in the US).

To me it's more of a question then of whether the NBA should shorten to 40. The practical answer is of course "No" because of the history and what shortening the game would mess up in the revenue generating ecosystem, but the quality of the game would be better and it would leave players better prepared to dominate internationally.

EDIT: Oh, and on the length of the WNBA schedule. I sure hope that they have the NBA's issues firmly in mind when they consider what length they should be aiming for. Further I hope the NBA itself understands that this is an opportunity to experiment to find an internet-age ideal for a basketball product and they look to apply what gets learned elsewhere.

[RSCD3_]

We still arent too far into the minutes but the fever 5 woman lineup of Fagbenle-Boston-Hull-Mitchell-Clark are +25.4 in 75 minutes

[Ice Man]

We still arent too far into the minutes but the fever 5 woman lineup of Fagbenle-Boston-Hull-Mitchell-Clark are +25.4 in 75 minutes

The eye test says that's the best lineup, because Hull/Temi are more mobile than the players they replace. They defend better and they run the floor better. I mean, they're both role players, but at least they play the right roles for a Clark/Mitchell backcourt.

But yeah, that's very noisy data. With such few minutes, all the data can do is support my suspicion, but that's a long ways from being actual evidence.