Good point, if that is all they are. I thought Whitney did a little more than shoot. And, yes, bigs who are athletic would be nice. Still, are they good enough to go to a good Division I school or is it too early to tell?
Anyway, thanks for your reply. Nice to know what others are thinking.
Womenssports,
Last I saw on this site, the twins were 5-10 shooting guards.
And their status as high div 1 was up in the air (this could be out of date, I don't
have any recent info on their offers)
Now, if they have become 6-3 forwards, I retract my previous comment.
Womenssports,
Last I saw on this site, the twins were 5-10 shooting guards.
And their status as high div 1 was up in the air (this could be out of date, I don't
have any recent info on their offers)
Now, if they have become 6-3 forwards, I retract my previous comment.
From what I can find, they haven't grown. And, of course, you are right we have plenty of guards. But what we have now and what we actually have come 2016 can change. But you answered my real question in that how good they are or may be is yet to be answered. For some reason, I was also thinking that Whitney was 5'9", which if I had stopped to think, I would have realized I wasn't really thinking.
Good point, if that is all they are. I thought Whitney did a little more than shoot. And, yes, bigs who are athletic would be nice. Still, are they good enough to go to a good Division I school or is it too early to tell?
Anyway, thanks for your reply. Nice to know what others are thinking.