Knock the women's game for their below-the-rim play but they're better in the fundamentals overall. It'd be a match of athleticism against fundamentals to see who'd win. I think the women would beat the HS teams and would beat a fair number of men's teams too.
I disagree. Athleticism is about more than above-the-rim play. It's speed, lateral quickness, endurance, strength, etc., etc. I just don't think top women can compete with even average college male athletes in that regard.
perhaps you watch more 'average' mens teams than I do Roy (which isn't much of a stretch) but the ones I've seen aren't solid fundamentally. They don't have more than a few guys that can shoot. Most of the players are poor FT shooters. Most don't fundamentally box out on the boards. Most have poor defensive footwork. Most rely on loose interpretations of the rulebook to get away with what the pass off as ballhandling. Many make poor passes, particularly under pressure.
I don't watch much women's ball (primarily because there's so few good women players and let's face it, the only team worth watching is the C's or the local college teams) but the good players I've seen are pretty solid fundamentally. They're not nearly as athletic as men but how many times have smarter, more-skilled teams beaten more athletic teams.
Also consider the fact that with most of the men's best talent jumping to the pro's very early from college, there's even more mediocre men's college teams out there.
