Imagine a team starting their season with a crushing defeat, only to rise like a phoenix (pun intended) and nearly clinch a playoff spot. That’s the story of the 2006 Phoenix Mercury, a team that defied early setbacks to finish with an impressive 18-16 record in one of the WNBA’s most competitive conferences. But here’s where it gets controversial: Was it their veteran starters or sheer determination that brought them so close to postseason glory? Let’s dive in.
The Western Conference in 2006 was a battleground, with the Los Angeles Sparks dominating at 25-9 and the Sacramento Monarchs trailing closely at 21-13. The Mercury, alongside the Houston Comets and Seattle Storm, found themselves in a tight race for playoff contention. Despite missing the cut, Phoenix’s journey was nothing short of remarkable, especially considering their rocky start.
Their season opener against Sacramento was a humbling 105-78 loss. And this is the part most people miss: Even in defeat, key players like Diana Taurasi and Tamicha Jackson showed glimpses of brilliance. Taurasi, a starter, led with 14 points, complemented by three steals, two blocks, an assist, and a rebound. Jackson, off the bench, mirrored her effort with 14 points, three steals, three assists, a rebound, and a block. Ann Strother and Kamila Vodichkova also contributed, but the team’s chemistry was still a work in progress.
The Mercury’s starting lineup—Taurasi, Vodichkova, Jennifer Lacy, Cappie Pondexter, and Kelly Miller—faced another setback in their next game against the Storm, losing 94-81. With Miller sidelined, Jackson stepped in, and the team saw three starters score in double figures. Taurasi’s 28 points, Pondexter’s 21, and Jackson’s all-around effort hinted at the potential this squad possessed.
A surprising loss to the struggling San Antonio Silver Stars (82-76) followed, despite Taurasi’s 28 points and Pondexter’s double-double (26 points, 10 rebounds). Here’s a thought-provoking question: Did Phoenix’s inconsistent lineup changes early in the season cost them crucial wins, or was it simply a matter of finding their rhythm?
Eventually, the Mercury turned the corner, securing their first win against the Monarchs and building momentum. Their starters began to gel, and the team’s resilience became their defining trait. While they fell just short of the playoffs, their 2006 campaign laid the foundation for future success.
Controversial take: Some argue that the Mercury’s near-miss was a result of the Western Conference’s brutal competition, while others believe their slow start was the real culprit. What do you think? Was it the conference’s toughness or their early struggles that kept them out of the playoffs?
To explore more about the Mercury’s 2006 season, including their thrilling overtime games, follow us on X right here: https://x.com/MercuryOnSI. Let’s keep the debate going in the comments—did Phoenix’s starters deserve more credit for their playoff push?
