With the WNBA season quickly approaching, I pulled data on the 2018-2019 draft class to compare to the 2020-2021 draft class. From that equation, we can make predictions on who might have more success than originally projected and who might have been drafted a little bit too high in this year’s class.
Of note – due to the challenges of the 2019-2020 season they have been left out of the analysis.
2019 Draft Class – Top 10
| PLAYER | TEAM | RANK | TOTAL SCORE | USAGE WEIGHT | Win Share Weight | STRENGTH WEIGHT | PER WEIGHT | 3% WEIGHT | eFG% WEIGHT | PPG WEIGHT | A/TO WEIGHT | APG WEIGHT | RBPG WEIGHT | STEALS WEIGHT |
| Arike Ogunbowale | Notre Dame | 1 | 79311.25 | 1835 | 765 | 53760 | 3710 | 1746 | 2550 | 9120 | 2151 | 1750 | 1068 | 856.25 |
| Napheesa Collier | UConn | 2 | 79067.25 | 1660 | 771 | 52920 | 3835 | 972 | 3745 | 9072 | 2094 | 1715 | 1522 | 761.25 |
| Katie Lou Samuelson | UConn | 3 | 78991 | 1517.5 | 765 | 52920 | 3730 | 1899 | 3355 | 8868 | 2241 | 1765 | 1298 | 632.5 |
| Asia Durr | Louisville | 4 | 78771.25 | 1877.5 | 760 | 53410 | 3745 | 1584 | 2940 | 9096 | 2139 | 1672.5 | 786 | 761.25 |
| Megan Gustafson | Iowa | 5 | 78742.75 | 1857.5 | 770 | 52500 | 3855 | 2307 | 3825 | 9252 | 1512 | 1170 | 1538 | 156.25 |
| Alanna Smith | Stanford | 6 | 78495.75 | 1845 | 761 | 53060 | 3820 | 2049 | 3660 | 8976 | 978 | 1302.5 | 1468 | 576.25 |
| Bridget Carleton | Iowa St. | 7 | 78325.75 | 1775 | 768 | 51730 | 3805 | 1854 | 3165 | 9108 | 1944 | 1790 | 1468 | 918.75 |
| Jessica Shepard | Notre Dame | 8 | 77787.5 | 1415 | 764 | 53760 | 3785 | 3 | 3660 | 8592 | 1902 | 1672.5 | 1514 | 720 |
| Natisha Hiedeman | Marquette | 9 | 77073.75 | 1600 | 756 | 51030 | 3645 | 2007 | 3125 | 8748 | 2181 | 1842.5 | 1268 | 871.25 |
| Kiara Leslie | NC State | 10 | 76391.75 | 1660 | 725 | 52710 | 3340 | 1932 | 2365 | 8352 | 1812 | 1547.5 | 1372 | 576.25 |
Initial Reaction
These projections seem actually really solid. Things went a little bit better than I thought they would as far as rankings, We will see how well they project the newest class.
Jackie Young – Young did not score poorly in this projection, due to the WNBA draft rules to keep this analysis relatively concise I only pulled the senior/draft class. Young was a junior at Notre Dame when drafted and I did not pull her data. For the comparision, I was able to pull Charli Collier’s numbers (see below).
Some slight “wins”
Arike Ogunbowale – ended up being rated first in my projection. She was drafted 5th to the Dallas Wings. I think this was the biggest miss of the draft and the biggest “win” of my projection. Ogunbowale has been dominant in her first two seasons in the WNBA and has had the most successful career of the 2019 class so far.
Napheesa Collier – Another positive showing for the projection. Collier rounded out my projection at number two and has also been off to an incredible start in her first two seasons. Collier went 6th right behind Ogunbowale to the Lynx. So far she has been averaging 14.3 points per game and 7.5 rebounds. I’d say much better than the 6th pick.
Kristine Anigwe – While I don’t really like to be “right” in projecting a player might not excel at the next level, it is important to note. Anigwe was drafted 9th to the Sun. In her first two seasons, she has only amassed 10 minutes a game and just a few points per game. She was ranked #45 in my ranking system. 45 is definitely too low of a ranking for her and the fact that she just hasn’t seemed to find a great fit yet contributes to the low production, I still believe she was taken too early.
Bridget Carleton – Taken later in the second round – Carleton rounded out my projection at number 7. In her first two seasons, she has done a much better job than many of the players drafted ahead of her. Good enough to warrant the 7th pick? Probably not, but definitely notable. She ended up seeming like the late-round “steal” of this draft.
Marina Mabery – Mabrey – not listed above, came in at my projection at number 11. Drafted in the mid second round has had a very solid start warranting the higher spot.
Slight “Misses”
Megan Gustafson – Gustafson, ranked 5th in my projection, has definitely not lived up to that spot. This shows the challenges of only working with numbers. It does not quite account well enough for athleticism. As you move on to the next level the physicality and speed of the game increase so drastically. Unfortunately, Gustafson is not quite as athletic as many of the bigs in the WNBA and has struggled as a result.
2021 Projections
| PLAYER | TEAM | RANK | TOTAL SCORE | USAGE WEIGHT | Win Share Weight | STRENGTH WEIGHT | PER WEIGHT | 3% WEIGHT | eFG% WEIGHT | PPG WEIGHT | A/TO WEIGHT | APG WEIGHT | RBPG WEIGHT | STEALS WEIGHT |
| Dana Evans | Louisville | 1 | 80613 | 1925 | 795 | 55090 | 3760 | 1758 | 2595 | 9444 | 2175 | 1875 | 456 | 740 |
| Aari McDonald | Arizona | 2 | 79717 | 1980 | 789 | 54110 | 3875 | 1674 | 2015 | 9456 | 1791 | 1895 | 1152 | 980 |
| Nancy Mulkey | Rice | 3 | 79152.5 | 1805 | 791 | 53480 | 3955 | 2382 | 3620 | 8796 | 1503 | 1267.5 | 1488 | 65 |
| Kayla Jones | NC State | 4 | 79061 | 1072.5 | 749 | 55090 | 3570 | 2178 | 3525 | 7200 | 2058 | 1652.5 | 1396 | 570 |
| Kiana Williams | Stanford | 5 | 79045.5 | 1340 | 793 | 55790 | 3010 | 2007 | 2795 | 8340 | 2235 | 1717.5 | 278 | 740 |
| Moon Ursin | Baylor | 6 | 78682.5 | 835 | 798 | 54810 | 3330 | 2037 | 2970 | 7632 | 2334 | 1852.5 | 1344 | 740 |
| DiJonai Carrington | Baylor | 7 | 77808.5 | 1890 | 779 | 54810 | 3725 | 1152 | 2380 | 8388 | 1191 | 1505 | 1046 | 942.5 |
| Jill Townsend | Gonzaga | 8 | 77715.5 | 1665 | 786 | 52780 | 3815 | 2037 | 3455 | 8016 | 1806 | 1547.5 | 1068 | 740 |
| Kysre Gondrezick | West Virginia | 9 | 77691 | 1787.5 | 774 | 52500 | 3480 | 1860 | 2480 | 9396 | 2091 | 1942.5 | 500 | 880 |
| Aaliyah Wilson | Texas A&M | 10 | 77556.25 | 1492.5 | 717 | 55370 | 2920 | 2169 | 2070 | 7692 | 1413 | 1585 | 1234 | 893.75 |
Using the same exact numbers and weights – this is how this most recent class ranked.
Note: The big challenge with this draft class was the strength of schedule balance. Since teams mostly played just their leagues, the RPI ratings weren’t quite as diverse as I would have hoped. However, I still have confidence in these projections and I am excited to see how they turn out.
Analysis
Charli Collier – The first thing you might notice is the #1 draft pick didn’t actually make it into my top ten. She ended up all the way at 22 for me. I definitely don’t think she should be that low I think the style of play at Texas impacted her numbers a little bit, but I do think number 1 might be a little too high. I suppose time will tell.
Dana Evans – Evans ended up at my number 1 spot. I love this, Evans went 13 to the Wings and I think that is too low. She was asked to do a lot on a very good Louisville team. She seems like a great leader. I think the tournament might have hurt her draft stock a little bit, but I am excited to watch her success this season.
Aari McDonald – McDonald went crazy in the tournament leading an excellent Arizona team and greatly improved her draft stock being taken #4 overall. My projection had her at number 2, pretty close to where she ended up. She will be fun to watch.
Nancy Mulkey – Mulkey had a great college career, but is definitely overrated. She went undrafted and while I am a little surprised by that, she definitely should not have ended up at number 3. This is where the strength of schedule really hurt this projection because it wasn’t wide enough to account for Rice’s schedule this year in an appropriate way.
Kayla Jones and Moon Ursin – Ended up pretty high in my projections, but neither decided to join the draft.
Overall, I’m pumped for this WNBA season whether I end up right or not! The WNBA is so competitive and needs to add some more teams to get more great players in. The lack of a diverse strength of schedule does concern me a little bit as far as my projections this year go, but it will be an interesting year for sure.
Want to see the entire projection list? Feel free to reach out at [email protected]