Erin Miller (Westfield) and Megan Kopecki (Watchung Hills) scored the 1,000th point of their respective careers this week, raising the total number of local girls to reach this milestone this season to six.
Caity Laub (Somerville), Melissa Soucek (Timothy Christian), Lauren Staats (Dunellen), Kelsey Kutch (Hillsborough) all eclipsed the mark during the season's first three weeks.
Asia Jenkins (Piscataway) and Catherine Carr (Bernards) scored their 1,000th point as juniors last season.
All of which begs the question: With the frequency that players are reaching 1,000, does it still carry the same meaning it used to?
That is not devalue the accomplishments of all 1,000-point scorers, but it seems as if the gold standard should be raised. Perhaps as high as 1,500.
My memory may be tainted, but I remember playing high school basketball -- not too long ago, actually -- and thinking 1,000 points was rare. I know I would have been happy to score 1/3 of that total. But now it seems like a regular headline in newspapers.
Are we experiencing a golden age of players on both the boys and girls side? Or has the significance of 1,000 truly declined?
Please post your thoughts....
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
I think a lot has to do with the type of schools these people play at. Girls that play at bigger schools, where more people come out each season..have less of a chance playing four years of varsity, usually most get one or at least 2 years at the freshman/JV level, therefore making it harder for them to score 1,000.
Players at smaller schools, where talent is scarce, have more of a better chance playing all four years on the varsity level, and play smaller, easier schools, therefore scoring 1,000 seems like nothing
With more playing AAU, there's a lot of very skilled girls that contribute as freshman. Many are starting as freshman, giving them 4 years to reach 1,000. That said, it's still quite an accomplishment. You still have to put the ball in the basket.
Some girls are strictly scorers, but some contribute more than points to the team with steals, assists, rebounds, and leadership. Those are the ones that should recognized at the end of the season - points plus the other categories make a complete player.
It may also be a sign of the times as well.
There was a time -- and some people still think -- that 1,000 yard rushing seasons and 3,000 yard passing seasons are impressive in professional football.
But when you average those totals out over a 16 game season, you'd only need about 62 rush yards a game for 1,000 and 187 pass yards a game for 3,000.
Does anyone think a QB who throws for 187 yards a game is impressive?
Me either.
I think as the athletes have improved, so have the standards to which they're held.
The high school game and pro game are obviously two different things, but I think increased expectations are universal.
I still think it's pretty hard for a girl to get 1,000, especially some of these big schools playing tough schedules. Hats off to those girls who work hard year-round to make themselves better players
Ryan,
Back when I was covering the beat, very few girls played as freshmen and sophomores. Only the top players who went on to play major college basketball played all four years on varsity.
That's not the case anymore.
Because of the growth of girls basketball, you have scores of girls ready to contribute on varsity by their freshman seasons.
Megan Kopecki, Lindsay Melone, Catherine Carr, Kelsey Kutch - all of them benefited from pre-high school development (feeder programs) and had the basics down by eighth grade.
So, basically, girls are playing more h.s. games nowadays than when I started covering the beat in the late 1990s (insert old joke here), giving them more chances to total more statistics.
The girls you mentioned are skilled - plus each has some size and can run. You add in that they start as a freshman, and most of them play on teams that press so they get their share of easy baskets, plus none of them play another sport so AAU improves their games in the off-season.
1000 is a great accomplishment, but 1500 may be the new standard. This is also a really solid class, which we've known since December 2003 when Kopecki iced Central on opening night, Melone played solidly for the 'ville, and Carr was the only bright spot for Bernards. Jenkins, Kutch, Laub, etc. have had fantastic careers as well, and each has had 4 years to develop on varsity.
If a girl starts as a freshman and turns out to be her team's best scorer over her four year stay, she will definitely amass 1,000 points (unless she plays for Union Catholic. Then 500-750 pts is more likely).
If a junior does it - like Erin Miller of Westfield did this week -I'm more inclined to see that as an important accomplishment.
C.O.
REALLY IS NO COMPARISON BETWEEN SCORING 25 AGAINST MANVILLE WHERE THE TALLEST PLAYER IS ABOUT 5' 7" AND HILLSBOROUGH WHERE THERE ARE A COUPLE PLAYERS AT OR NEAR 6 FOOT. IF I RECALL, AT THE MIDDLE SCHOOL LEVEL THERE WAS EVEN A SEPARATE LEAGUE WHERE THE SMALL SCHOOLS ONLY PLAYED AGAINST THE SMALLS AND THE SAME FOR THE LARGER SCHOOLS; SORT OF LIKE A MINOR AND MAJOR LEAGUE DISTINCTION
I think this year is a fluke...the Class of 2007 has some amazing players. I believe Jenkins, Carr, Kopecki, Melone, & Kutch were all dubbed the 'Fab 5 Freshmen' and none of them have disappointed. But, if you were to look at the 1,000 point scorers at each individual school, you'd realize there just aren't too many. Go to a game at Hunterdon Central, which is almost always a top 10 team, and look at the list of 1,000 point scorers hanging on the wall - I believe there are only 4 or 5 women who've reached that milestone. And from what I've heard, Kopecki is the first ever at Watchung Hills. If you look at it that way, you realize that 1,000 points is an incredible accomplishment! Way to go Girls!
I think that 1,000 is still a great accomplishment, but the 3 point line certainly is a big factor. Colleges are about to move it back, high school will certainly do the same.
Just play good fundamental ball, forget about the 1000 pts, its just an ego thing, to me thats nothing but jocking!!!, meaning the other 4 girls don't get the ball much. That fab 5 that someone mention, only 3 have game and the other 2 are just jocks with no game. Piscataway's jock-Jenkins-totally overrated, people just see a shooter and not an all around player, which she is not. If the coach told her not to shoot, she would have no game-selfish player. Never learn in 4 years there were other players just as good out there--bad coaching or is it just about winning or should it be disciplining the player. Lets see that next year done in college-I DON'T THINK SO!!
Post a Comment