Taking Stock at 2025 All-Star Break

[Doctor MJ]

Dallas Wings

11th in Standings (12th at ASB)
11th in SRS
8th in ORtg
9th in DRtg

Top 5 MPG players: Paige, Arike, Carrington, Li, Siegrist
Top 5 MP players: Arike, Paige, Hines-Allen, James, Carrington
Top 5 WS players: Paige, Li, Quinerly, Arike, Geiselsoder
Top 5 Raw +/- players: Jones, Charles, Harris, Li, Berger

So, to some degree, there's really no need for any real analysis. This was a team that handed the reins to Arike Ogunbawale as a rookie, and continued to build under the theory of her as the franchise player for her first 6 years, and while progressed seemed to being made up through 2023 when the team had a positive record & SRS and won a round in the playoffs, the bottom dropped out in 2024 leading to the worst season out of any of the franchise's Dallas year.

Had the Wings not lucked into winning the lottery, it would have been interesting to learn what the Wings' plan was, because other than Paige Bueckers, there really wasn't anyone in the 2025 draft to hand the reins over to. It thus seems likely that the Wings would have continued trying to build around Arike if not for getting Paige, but now that they've got Paige, the path forward seems relatively straight forward:

Build around Paige, don't worry about growing pains, pay attention to players who work well with Paige. I think we have to expect continued massive roster turnover for a while, and first and foremost this will probably mean moving on from Arike.

Whether Arike moves on or not, it seems clear her career is standing at a crossroads. Next year she'll be a 29-year-old player who has spent her entire development from youth as an alpha scorer, but who in the WNBA was never able to do this with the kind of efficiency needed to actually be good. Maybe some team will pay her with the expectation of her being an instant alpha, but frankly I'd say it's time for her to expect to make some changes. I'm skeptical she can actually play totally different and be more effective than playing the only way she's ever played, so my thoughts would be to either look to become a 6th woman microwave off the bench in the W, or she goes to a league whose competition is more like college ball, where she had great success as an alpha star.

Before we leave the pre-Paige period of the Wings, I feel I'd be remiss if I didn't mention their prior second star, Satou Sabally, who got the greater accolades in 2023 than Arike when the Wings actually had some success, and is now over in Phoenix having some more team success. While lucking into Paige I think makes the Wings content with where they are, I can't help but wonder what might have happened if they'd really turned the keys over to Sabally (and taken them away from Arike) years ago.

Back to the future, Paige is 23 and not only the best player on the team, but she's at least 2 years younger than anyone else on the Wings roster getting 20 MPG or more. Time will tell whether Paige becomes a WNBA superstar, but I expect that going into next season, the Wings will focus everything in their roster building around her. Good chance the team still isn't good, but we'll all be watching optimistically.

[Doctor MJ]

Connecticut Sun

Last in Standings
Last in SRS
Last in ORtg
Last in DRtg

Top 5 MPG players: Mabrey, Charles, Rivers, Lacan, Sheldon
Top 5 MP players: Charles, Rivers, Sheldon, Hartley, Nelson-Ododa
Top 5 WS players: Nelson-Odoa, Sheldon (only 2 positive WS players)
Top 5 Raw +/- players: Marshall, Toure, Lacan (only 3 positive +/- players)

It goes without saying that this Sun team is awful, but the scale of the awfulness is really something. I'll note the weirdness of a team this bad having any positive +/- players, and of course this is basically just a trio of players who haven't played much.

If we look at the bottom end of the league +/- leaders, we see that the worst 4 in the league are Charles, Sheldon, Hartley & Nelson-Ododa, and that Mabrey & Hartley come at 7th & 8th respectively. (Angel Reese & Kia Nurse of the Sky claim the 5th & 6th worse numbers in the league.)

When a team is as bad as the Sun are after being great in the previous years, it screams "they had to blow it up", and from a future-looking perspective, that's clearly the way to look at them. They're going to get a high draft pick next year, and we would presume that there will be a youth movement going forward.

Thing is, what's happening right now isn't a youth movement. They brought back the 36-year-old Tina Charles to operate as their star, and the other star-like player is Marina Mabrey who they brought in last year to help them compete and who is 28. While it's possible that the Sun went into the season looking to "tank", and in which case a god-awful record is part of the plan, I think this is unlikely, in part because with JuJu Watkins' injury, next year doesn't even seem like it has a clear cut future WNBA superstar. (Shout out to my Bruin Lauren Betts, but in all honesty, I'd say JuJu was better and young last year.)

There is one other thing on my mind that's going to lead me to dwell on the negative, and that's the fact that Charles has now managed to play through her age 36 season as a primary WNBA scorer, while being someone who as a rule puts up terrible TS%, and while scoring with an approach (interior post) which in general overrates how impactful box score data actually is.

Before I dwell on this, I feel I should say that the WNBA media is just remarkably by cheerleader-y compared to the NBA. Google Charles and you'll basically just see stuff talking about her as an all-time greater. If you did hard enough you'll see fans talk about her individualistic game and her tendency to burn bridges, but even there, you won't find articles talking about Charles as perhaps the most overrated basketball player in modern American basketball history, yet, I'd say this pretty clearly what she is.

Now "overrated" is a holistic negative judgment that isn't necessarily helpful for discussion, so let me clear:

The specific problem is that post volume scoring isn't as good of an offensive scheme as people a) used to think in the NBA or b) people seem to still think in the WNBA. This is the pace & space revolution in a nutshell - better to build your offense around players who don't need to rely on a predictable pass that defenses can prepare against.

Thing is, one of the reasons I'd argue that the WNBA was slower to recognize this, is that really up through the end of the career of Sylvia Fowles, she could still get to volume scoring totals efficiently, whereas this seemed to stop being a possibility in the NBA. I would emphasize that all of the impact data surrounding Fowles is considerably less impressive than people would assume for the reasons I've given above, and that it's not a coincidence in my assessment that Fowles' retirement resulted not in the Lynx having to rebuild, but instead more of a re-launch fully committing to Napheesa Collier as the franchise player... but the fact remains that if you were going to insist on building your offense around a post volume scorer, Fowles was probably the best case scenario with her career 63.6% TS.

And then you've got Charles with her her career 50.4% TS, and honestly it just all screams to me "Never build your offense around Charles".

Now as with Arike as I described in the previous post, when we look back at Charles' college career we see a much more positive story. While I think she got overrated relative to her teammate Maya Moore (something she has in common with all of Moore's teammates, as well as all other women basketball players of the modern era), it makes sense that Charles stood out a major draft prospect given her college effectiveness, and in a relatively soft draft, makes sense she'd go #1, and thus be treated like an instant franchise player in the W.

I'm not going to say it's a given that some other player from that 2010 draft was literally better than Charles (role player Alysha Clark?), but I would say that building your team's offense around Charles proved to be fool's gold.

Yet here we are, 15 years later, and Charles is literally back where she started (Connecticut Sun), so it cries out a question of how is it the W never figured this out?

Here, I think we have to zero in on 2012 where Charles' team went 25-9 and Charles won MVP. Should she have won MVP? No way, she wasn't the most valuable player on her own team (Kara Lawson). But she was the hyped "future superstar" on the team, and so when the team she got placed on did well - and we should note they were 16-18 the year they got the #1 pick and drafted her so this wasn't actually ever a bad team - Charles was the one everyone at the time was looking to celebrate.

From that point on, I'd say that Charles being both a college POY and a WNBA MVP (where both awards should have gone to Moore with Charles not close), meant she was seen as a proven WNBA superstar, and franchises from there on out seemed to acquire her thinking "Well, if we get Charles, at least we've got that volume scoring role set".

But it's amazing that this is how it worked given that in the year following 2012, the team dropped to 10-24. In fact, in a set of 3-year RAPM studies that were released a while back (I shared in the board thread talking about RAPM), Charles' numbers for the 3-year sample where her MVP season is the middle season, Charles actually has a net negative RAPM.

And while I don't want to talk as if Charles has just been a major net negative the whole time - I mean, she's a powerful 6'4" rebounder - it appears that she will retire with both a negative career +/-, and a negative career On-Off, and both of these are things I don't think we've ever seen in the Play-by-Play era ('96-97 onward).

This then to say, I'm afraid I see the fact that Charles has been able to have a long WNBA career as a venerated superstar scorer as a sign of rather glaring incompetence among WNBA front offices. I'm not aware of anything like this In the NBA during the era, and certainly not in the 2010s-20s by which time the NBA was in full blown analytics mode.

I'll end by mea culpa, apologizing for focusing on the negative and specifically authoring such a "hate" letter to Charles while the WNBA media keeps it positive, but man, I can't help but see the faith in Charles on-court as a massive sign that WNBA basketball decision makers were not taking inspiration from the NBA in a timely manner - and since this is still happening in 2025, at least some of the WNBA still hasn't gotten with the times.

But, if anyone wants to push back, it would be quite worth while to identify anything in my post that goes too far.

[BlacJacMac]

I just want to thank you for this thread. I wish I had more to add, but you've done such outstanding, comprehensive work, that all I can do is read and learn.

Thank you.

[Doctor MJ]

I just want to thank you for this thread. I wish I had more to add, but you've done such outstanding, comprehensive work, that all I can do is read and learn.

Thank you.

Thank you so much for your kind words BlacJacMac! They don't just make me feel good, they make me more confident that others are interested in these thoughts - I sometimes think no one is really interested in this stuff but me.

To you and anyone else, feel free to ask questions. I make no claims of having any kind magical authority on basketball truth and could very well be wrong, but if there's something that wasn't well communicated before, or you're just curious about something, please don't hold back.

Cheers,
Doc