Your comment about the other two less well known gymnasts with better results than Olivia is my point. The "athlete" component is not the most important part of the equation for NIL potential, and in some cases is not even relevant at all. I'm all for Olivia making bank on her brand; more power to her. My point is that her fame and NIL potential has very little to do with her being a good gymnast. It's 95% (probably more) based on her looks. And if she can cash in on it, then there's no reason she should be held back. I used her as an example of who companies want to spend NIL dollars on: it's the marketable players, not necessarily the best ones. So that's why I don't think NIL will move the needle at all with regards to women's basketball, because there aren't that many players...at last yet...who have the right combination of looks and marketing smarts to create a profitable brand for themselves like Olivia has done...and she didn't need gymnastics to do it.
RE: Kournikova. Turning pro at 15 was pretty common in women's tennis: Graf, Evert, Sabatini, Hingis, Serena, Venus, etc. The issue wasn't her age; it's that she wasn't as good as the other players. She was still an extremely good player though, but her endorsements weren't because she was ranked #8 in the world.