Caitlyn Clark polarization among WNBA peers and fans

[KingsFanSince85]

I'm just wondering what everyone's thoughts are on this. I didn't spot an existing thread about Miss Clark and this hot topic, which very much surprised me.

There was a lot of negativity about Caitlyn Clark from former WNBA players (e.g. Sheryl Swoopes) and even current ones (e.g. Diana Taurasi) before Clark even set foot into the league. There was already hostility and hatred from collegiate peers (e.g. Angel Reese) over the past year or two, due to the overwhelming attention Caitlyn has received due to her collegiate prowess and breaking of records. But over the past few months, and even more so the past week, it has escalated to even higher, more ridiculous levels.

I'm assuming anyone that bothers to read this thread is fully aware of the most recent incident where it was clearly obvious that Clark was targeted in a non-basketball play when the ball had yet to be inbounded. It was bush league. What was even more bush league is the offender and her teammate, whom already has a history of vitriol toward Clark (Reese), celebrating the cheap shot hit as it happened and then while they retreated to the bench for a timeout.

Despite visual and audio evidence to the contrary, these people deny and feign that there's any personal agendas going on here. And not at all surprising to me is that many in the media (including former players) are also either denying or worse yet excusing what's going on with a bunch of delusional nonsense.

Facts are facts, no matter how much they hurt someone's feelings.

Average attendance for Indiana Fever games are up "around" 400% from last season. From the 4K range to over 16-17K so far this season. Attendance is also up in various other places in the league, but primarily when those teams face Indiana and Caitlin Clark. For example, average attendance for the Chicago Sky, who Reese plays for, is only up marginally from where it was last season. Attendance for last season's back-to-back WNBA champ, Las Vegas, is roughly the same as it has been.

Viewership is also up similarly to attendance. But, again, largely for the games Caitlin Clark plays in. The naysayers can deny it all they want, but Clark's fandom from college is following her to the WNBA. Which helps all involved. It certainly isn't a bad thing, but try telling these entitled players that.

It's beyond laughable that any of these players want to shun Clark when for all of the WNBA's 27 year existence it has been a welfare league relying upon the NBA to subsidize it. With more Caitlyn Clark's in the league it's at least possible for the league to grow and perhaps generate the type of revenue needed to support the increased salaries and travel amenities these players foolishly believe they are being denied.

But at this moment in time it seems many of the players want to cut off their noses to spite their faces. If they aren't more careful they're about to thwart the wave of interest that's come their way the past 15 months.

@iowamcnabb I know you have to have some thoughts on what's been going on not only 15 games into this current season but also toward the end of Clark's collegiate career when she broke long standing records to eventually being drafted into the WNBA. The naysaying reactions have been puzzling but in some ways unsurprising.

 

[Insomniacal Fan]

1. Players are people, and are entitled to carry and share opinions. Since WNBA players seem to be constantly asked their opinion on Clark, there is obviously public interest in those opinions (suddenly) Do you expect players to "delude" others by misrepresenting their opinions?
2. Off the court, attendance doesn't translate into players pocket books yet, currently there's no significant revenue sharing between the league and the players. Reporting suggests this will probably change with a new CBA next year, but for now, those two things are not connected.
3. On the court, you want players to be competitive, not cooperative. Clark is just another adversary trying to take money away from their families. If you don't have that dynamic, you get the NBA All-Star Game, and that's not something that's going to lead to sustainable growth.

If one sincerely believes that the WNBA is poised to grow and become lucrative, then the previous years were not "welfare" but instead a wise long-term investment.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

1. Players are people, and are entitled to carry and share opinions. Since WNBA players seem to be constantly asked their opinion on Clark, there is obviously public interest in those opinions (suddenly) Do you expect players to "delude" others by misrepresenting their opinions?
2. Off the court, attendance doesn't translate into players pocket books yet, currently there's no significant revenue sharing between the league and the players. Reporting suggests this will probably change with a new CBA next year, but for now, those two things are not connected.
3. On the court, you want players to be competitive, not cooperative. Clark is just another adversary trying to take money away from their families. If you don't have that dynamic, you get the NBA All-Star Game, and that's not something that's going to lead to sustainable growth.

If one sincerely believes that the WNBA is poised to grow and become lucrative, then the previous years were not "welfare" but instead a wise long-term investment.

#1, I have no idea where you’re coming from or how it relates to anything I said.

#2, Yes it does. More attendance equals more off the court monetary options. That impact was evident even before the season started. But regardless, long term salaries and amenities will be affected if interest continues and all players should be thankful for that. It’s something they’ve been wrongly expecting for years but haven’t been able to generate and realistically justify. Don’t kill the cow generating the milk should be a top priority.

#3, Again, I have no idea where you‘re coming from here. Nobody suggested not competing or letting someone win. However, targeting a player unjustifiably and outside the parameters of “just playing the game“ is a completely unwise tactic to be employing. Not only that, the optics of what appears to be causing the personal vendettas and pettiness against Clark and how they are being carried out can easily stall the momentum that has recently been generated. It’s taken 27 years to get to the point of gaining some traction. It can easily go backward really quickly.

Lastly, the previous years were most certainly welfare. By every right the league should have folded a long time ago. I mean, how many other sports leagues in history can you name that were afforded 27 years time not generating a profit or being able to self-sustain? How many businesses period get that luxury? Be real.

The WNBA is still around because the men’s league was willing to gift it millions and millions of dollars of their own revenue for the past 27 years. Ask all these failed pro football leagues that have come and gone over the past couple decades what that type of support could have done for them.

Point is, at some point the WNBA has to be able to stand on its own two feet. Yet it still can’t. And right when it’s finally (and very, very late in the game I might add) starting to show signs of eventually being able to do just that — they’ve got a bunch of delusional and entitled employees doing their best to thwart the progress.

If the WNBA commissioner is worth their weight, they’d be sending out league wide memos and/or hosting mandatory conference calls to get everyone on the same page and playing nicely (so-to-speak) then suspending/reprimanding those that don’t seem to be on board with what should be the endgame goal.

Play hard and compete hard between the lines. But leave all that other crap at home.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I'm pretty blown away that all the backlash to Clark is coming from "old school fans" and players from the league who will benefit from directly from Clark and I will say no more. It's wild. Take your share of the money and attention she is bringing and embrace it.

 

[QWERTYLICIOUS]

1. Players are people, and are entitled to carry and share opinions. Since WNBA players seem to be constantly asked their opinion on Clark, there is obviously public interest in those opinions (suddenly) Do you expect players to "delude" others by misrepresenting their opinions?
2. Off the court, attendance doesn't translate into players pocket books yet, currently there's no significant revenue sharing between the league and the players. Reporting suggests this will probably change with a new CBA next year, but for now, those two things are not connected.
3. On the court, you want players to be competitive, not cooperative. Clark is just another adversary trying to take money away from their families. If you don't have that dynamic, you get the NBA All-Star Game, and that's not something that's going to lead to sustainable growth.

If one sincerely believes that the WNBA is poised to grow and become lucrative, then the previous years were not "welfare" but instead a wise long-term investment.

Huh???

 

[QWERTYLICIOUS]

People are just jealous at how much having Clark come to the WNBA is, and will continue to, aid in the eventual growth of the league.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

People are just jealous at how much having Clark come to the WNBA is, and will continue to, aid in the eventual growth of the league.

It's just weird because the people who are mad are the ones that have been screaming for equal pay and more money to the sport and more tv coverage. It's not like this is some band playing Sunday matinees at 924 Gilman signing to a major label and yet this feels exactly like what happened to Green Day and Jawbreaker after they signed.

But this was supposed to be the end goal for the league and it might actually happen?

 

[dude12]

Clark brings attention to the league. All the attention the league is getting is good for revenue because quite frankly, I dont watch the league except I have watched Clark to see how she is doing and there are lots of viewers just like me.
Like the NBA, the league is entertainment and these recent incidents are intriguing. Clark has a ways to go before she reaches the level of some of the other stars in the league past and present.
But the old timers need to recognize what Clark brings to the league as it comes across so poorly when they ***** and complain about her.

 

[The_Jamal]

Some of the older fans here might be able to speak to this better, but I've heard she's getting similar treatment akin to what Magic and Bird got when they first got to the league?

Clark is awesome to watch and she's exposing a whole new fanbase to some other pretty great players that people would have never known about before. That's incredible for a league that's struggled to get any sort of foothold for national attention.

The talking point from opposing players should be "It's great what Clark and these rookies have done for exposure of this league and we love the opportunity to show a whole new slew of fans all the talent in this league." It's that easy. Tearing her down is ruining the best opportunity this league has ever had for relevancy

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Some of the older fans here might be able to speak to this better, but I've heard she's getting similar treatment akin to what Magic and Bird got when they first got to the league?

Let's be real, the stuff happening to Clark was nothing in the pre-Showtime NBA, or even the 90s NBA. Not a fair comparison. I saw a funny haha post about Angel Reese (who's awesome too, btw) saying that she's part of the reason everyone is excited too as something that Isiah Thomas would say after the Bad Boys beat MJ's Bulls.

Did LeBron get all this "welcome to the NBA" backlash? I don't think so? I was certainly not rooting for him since he wasn't on our team, and nobody took it easy on him but I don't recall people being extra with him, though he certainly got the TV attention from game 1.

Also I realize looks are a subjective thing, but it's not like Caitlin is only attracting attention in the way Anna Kournikova drew eyes to tennis, she's popular because of her talent. And I love that she did it at Iowa and not at a stacked superteam like UCONN who didn't recruit her.

 

[coolhandluke]

I can understand the current players feeling unappreciated when a rookie is hailed as the savior of the WNBA before she even played a minute in the league. Some media idiots are already hailing her as the GOAT, which is beyond stupid. However, the players should disregard the media nonsense and look at the big picture and appreciate the huge viewership that Caitlin brings to the league. The goal of any business should be to increase the size of the market and there is a huge untapped market for women basketball. WNBA now has a pathway to profitability after all these years and the upcoming new TV deal could be a gamechanger. They are finally getting chartered flights. Do they want to go back to flying coach? Do they want to continue playing in Russia or Europe in the offseason to supplement their insufficient wages?

Playing hard and making a rookie earn their stripes is fine but cheap shots are unacceptable and shows the league in bad light. Who wants to watch this petty nonsense? One bad shove or sucker punch and they might kill the golden goose. It's good that the league upgraded the foul to a Flagrant 1 to send a message. People tune in to watch skilled players and not unsportsmanlike plays.

As a comparison, how was Wemby, a heralded rookie received in the NBA by current players? They were raving about that guy in media but went hard at him on the floor in the spirit of competition. NBA players understand that there is room for more great players as it expands their market and brings in more money for everyone.

 

[ESP47]

Jealousy is a hell of an emotion. Most people tend to realize how pointlessly stressful jealousy is at an early age and learn to control it. I suggest the players that are hating on Caitlin should learn to do that as well.

 

[dude12]

Jealousy is a hell of an emotion. Most people tend to realize how pointlessly stressful jealousy is at an early age and learn to control it. I suggest the players that are hating on Caitlin should learn to do that as well.

It does come across as jealousy. In part, Clark did sign a huge contract with Nike iirc which could be part of the issue that some are having.

 

[iowamcnabb]

I understand some of the old heads bitterness towards the idea of Clark, that was to be expected. What saddens me is the amount of grown folks actively rooting against her ( and I’m not talking about her play on the court or team she plays for) I’ve seen a bunch of posts and likes from people saying they plan to buy a Carter Jersey after what she pulled the other day. The good news is most of this is relatively minor and she has a good head on her shoulders. The animosity is a great thing for the sport and everyone involved is going to come out ahead because of it.

Hope she stays off social media, remembers what her bank account looks like and understands that a ton of people ( young girls and family members of those girls in particular) are rooting for her.

 

[ESP47]

It does come across as jealousy. In part, Clark did sign a huge contract with Nike iirc which could be part of the issue that some are having.

I don't know what their issue would be. She's popular, people like her and Nike realizes she can make them a lot of money. If a player has an issue with that, then be a better player than her, become more popular than her and sign your own deal with Nike once your value escalates.

Lebron signed with Nike and Bagley signed with Puma for a reason. There's levels here.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

Let's be real, the stuff happening to Clark was nothing in the pre-Showtime NBA, or even the 90s NBA. Not a fair comparison.

Anything that's happened in the NBA post MJ and Bird, and certainly post Jordan entering the NBA in 1984-1985, occurred when the league had already taken off and was generating lots of money and fan interest. It wasn't in danger of going out of business.

Meanwhile the WNBA contracted down from 16 teams to 12 about 20 years ago and still hasn't generated a profit in its 27 year history.

It's on shaky ground. If not for the charity and super long patience of the NBA, it would have folded a long while ago.

They are in a position of needing to be super careful to mind their "p's" and "q's" during this unprecedented level of interest. Because if they do anything negative to suppress the interest-- they may never see it again.

And at some point there will be a tipping point where rich owners can no longer justify subsidizing a losing business venture. 27 years is a LONG time to be losing millions of dollars. Many owners and cities have pulled the plug over the years because of it. What happens if the league doesn't prove fruitful by year 30? 35?

Point is, they need to be uber careful during this delicate time.

I saw a funny haha post about Angel Reese (who's awesome too, btw) saying that she's part of the reason everyone is excited too as something that Isiah Thomas would say after the Bad Boys beat MJ's Bulls.

I don't see Angel Reese as awesome at all. I see her as a thug. And a dime a dozen basketball player. She brings nothing special to the table.

Furthermore, what I see is a super jealous, hateful player (watch her indefensible reaction to Clark being knocked to the floor on that bush league cheap shot) that is trying her best to attach her name to Caitlin Clark any way she can in an effort to bring attention to herself.

As the old adage goes "negative press is still press" (or something like that). Well, Reese seems to care so much about attention and fame that she's willing to play villain (and a terrible person) in order to get it. She's even stated as much in interviews (how she embraces the villain role). She's keenly aware that her basketball skills aren't going to garner the same level of fame as Caitlin Clark, so this is how she's going about it. Good, great, grand, wonderful.

Say what you want about that, as perhaps many others would so the same. But let's at least call a spade a spade. There's absolutely no justification for the grotesque reaction from Reese right as Caitlin Clark was being targeted. Imagine the outcry that would be happening right now if somebody did that same thing to Steph Curry or LBJ and the players on the opposing bench were seen celebrating it! However I have yet to see even ONE WNBA talking head or former player acknowledge it, let alone chastize the behaviour.

Did LeBron get all this "welcome to the NBA" backlash? I don't think so? I was certainly not rooting for him since he wasn't on our team, and nobody took it easy on him but I don't recall people being extra with him, though he certainly got the TV attention from game 1.

Yeah, nothing like this happened to LBJ. Nothing like this happened to Victor Wenbanyama this past season either. Because the NBA wouldn't ever allow it.

I'm sure there are veteran players with animosity toward the younger, more hyped up players. But they hide it much better. Because they know they have to. If they act out or target those players, they won't be around long unless they are a super marketable or marquee player themselves. And even in those cases the players typically keep their hatred in check. But when they don't there are typically consequences.

Even still, the NBA can handle the negative publicity and backlash if/when it happens. Because they are a well-established league generating Billions in revenue. The WNBA isn't that.

Also I realize looks are a subjective thing, but it's not like Caitlin is only attracting attention in the way Anna Kournikova drew eyes to tennis, she's popular because of her talent. And I love that she did it at Iowa and not at a stacked superteam like UCONN who didn't recruit her.

Totally agree with this, too.

I'm not suggesting that Caitlin Clark is unattractive, but unlike Kournikova (whom never even won a single tournament during her career), she is garnering the massive attention almost exclusively due to her on-court play and achievements.

That's what makes this seem so freaking crazy! It's not like this young woman is receiving unwarranted attention. She's broken countless records, including many of the most presitgious ones such as All-Time leading scorer in NCAA history.

Even before she officially set the new record there were a puzzling amount of naysayers trying to dis what she was about to accomplish, many of whom were flat out lying. For example, there was a prominent name suggesting that Clark needed an extra year (Covid exemption) and more overall games played to best Kelsey Plum's record. But not a word of that was true. Clark didn't play a 5th season and broke the record in fewer games. The same prominent name lied further by stating that Clark was taking 40 shots per game to get that record when in fact she averaged roughly half that shot volume.

When you see former and current players blatantly lying like that to openly diminish what Caitlin Clark is accomplishing, it's diffcult to come to any other conclusion than these people are jealous and hateful. They deny it, of course, but what other explanation is there? Why throw shade at all, and when you do throw shade why invent lies?

It makes no sense unless those players have an agenda. And they do.

But circling back to Clark and why she's attracting attention, I'm sure there are percentages of fans that are interested in her looks and personality and possibly even her ethnicity. But make no mistake the lion share of the attention is coming from her on-court style of play and accomplishments. If she somehow fizzles out and becomes the Jimmer Fredette of the WNBA, the attention will undoubtedly die down.

However, I just read she's like the 4th WNBA player ever post over 150-50-50 over her first 10 games, so I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that she won't be the WNBA's version of Jimmer Fredette.

She's not shooting the ball well and turning it over far too much, but she's also averaging 15.6-5.1-6.4 as a rookie while being shadowed and harrassed all over the court (along with being targeted). I think she's gonna be ok. Imagine how good she might be once she gets stronger?

 

[KingsFanSince85]

Jealousy is a hell of an emotion. Most people tend to realize how pointlessly stressful jealousy is at an early age and learn to control it. I suggest the players that are hating on Caitlin should learn to do that as well.

I get some level of animosity. Especially from the WNBA veterans. It only makes sense.

However the overwhelming amount of animosity and vitriol is what is puzzling.

It's one thing to be uber competitive and believe you are going to show this rookie that you got skills too versus going out and trying to embarrass and target (possibly injure) that player. Also, all the negative talk about Caitlin in the press by current and former players is crazy and counterproductive too.

These women have all been whining and crying about viewership and salaries for years and years. And while most in the general public understand the basic ecomics of how revenue is generated and how it dictates salaries and amenities (such as chartered/private flights), these WNBA players clearly do not. Furthermore they clearly aren't seeing that Caitlin Clark is a gateway for them to possibly get some of these things.

Each and everyone of them should be grateful for the enormous attention Caitlin is bringing to their business. Bust her butt on the court best you can, but each of them should be, at the very least, refraining from bashing Caitlin Clark in the media (see Chennedy Carter's comments about "what does she bring to the table besides 3 point shooting"). However if they were super smart, they'd be giving Caitlin props for what she's accomplished so far in the game. Doing so only helps market their game in a positive light which can go a long way toward growing their sport as they've long desired.

To me what they're doing is akin to having a huge stake in Apple products but telling the media you hate Apple products and think they're junk! Nobody in their right mind would do that and no sponsor would put up with that. As I stated before, if I'm the WNBA commissioner I'm educating these women ASAP and putting a stop to it.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

I understand some of the old heads bitterness towards the idea of Clark, that was to be expected. What saddens me is the amount of grown folks actively rooting against her

As stated in another reply, it's completely counterproductive. I'm having to bite my tongue, as there are lots of things I have say on this topic that I know I can't say because this site is uber senstive to truth telling and crossing lines they've set. But, yeah, IMO these current and former players would be best served taking a remedial crash course on ettiquette and business economics and ethics.

I’ve seen a bunch of posts and likes from people saying they plan to buy a Carter Jersey after what she pulled the other day.

Sorry, but anybody with that POV is a vile and disgusting person. Something is wrong with them.

Imagine people championing what Mike Tyson did to Evander Holyfield's ear (I'm sure there were some somewhere. SMH). While what Carter did to Clark was nowhere near as offensive and egregious, it comes from the same bushleague tactic handbook.

I doubt even Draymond Green would say he approved of what Carter did.

I do know, however, that if Draymond had been one of Caitlin's teammates on-court (or even on the bench) at that moment in time, he would have given Chennedy Carter the Rudy Gobert treatment without hesitation. The fact that none of Clark's teammates stood up for her then or really even after the fact is most troubling and also quite disgusting. I know it's not because Caitlin is a terrible or unlikeable teammate. The reasons for the lack of support is quite pathetic, really.

 

[Insomniacal Fan]

#1, I have no idea where you’re coming from or how it relates to anything I said.

Here's what ChatGPT has to say

Point 1 in the reply refers to the parts of the original post where the author expresses surprise and disapproval at the negativity and hostility directed at Caitlyn Clark by other WNBA players. Specifically:

• "There was a lot of negativity about Caitlyn Clark from former WNBA players (e.g. Sheryl Swoopes) and even current ones (e.g. Diana Taurasi) before Clark even set foot into the league."
• "There was already hostility and hatred from collegiate peers (e.g. Angel Reese) over the past year or two, due to the overwhelming attention Caitlyn has received due to her collegiate prowess and breaking of records."
• "I'm assuming anyone that bothers to read this thread is fully aware of the most recent incident where it was clearly obvious that Clark was targeted in a non-basketball play when the ball had yet to be inbounded."
• "Despite visual and audio evidence to the contrary, these people deny and feign that there's any personal agendas going on here. And not at all surprising to me is that many in the media (including former players) are also either denying or worse yet excusing what's going on with a bunch of delusional nonsense."

One of the legitimate positive uses of LLMs, is they can help summarize and abstract. If you need any help comprehending some text, I actually recommend giving it a run through an LLM to see if it can break it down for you. I use this function frequently myself. If I can make an AI understand it, I'm confident it's accessible to anyone.

#2, Yes it does. More attendance equals more off the court monetary options. That impact was evident even before the season started. But regardless, long term salaries and amenities will be affected if interest continues and all players should be thankful for that. It’s something they’ve been wrongly expecting for years but haven’t been able to generate and realistically justify. Don’t kill the cow generating the milk should be a top priority.

Yeah, I don't think anybody else is getting those endorsement dollars in the short term. Could change in the long run, but if Indiana's games really have outlier attendance as you say, then the lift isn't relevant to most other players.

#3, Again, I have no idea where you‘re coming from here. Nobody suggested not competing or letting someone win. However, targeting a player unjustifiably and outside the parameters of “just playing the game“ is a completely unwise tactic to be employing. Not only that, the optics of what appears to be causing the personal vendettas and pettiness against Clark and how they are being carried out can easily stall the momentum that has recently been generated. It’s taken 27 years to get to the point of gaining some traction. It can easily go backward really quickly.

I'm willing to expand on this one. Dozens of flagrant fouls happened last season, (I quickly counted 40) It's not basketball, but it's enough a part of the WNBA (and the NBA) that there are specific rules for it. Professional sports are not games, they are competitions, and sometimes ultra competitive people flip out and lose their crap. That's why there are written rules for handling that eventuality. Nothing's particularly impressive about the Clark flagrant.

Lastly, the previous years were most certainly welfare. By every right the league should have folded a long time ago. I mean, how many other sports leagues in history can you name that were afforded 27 years time not generating a profit or being able to self-sustain? How many businesses period get that luxury? Be real.

A significant proportion of family farms in the US take assistance to break even most years. Are farms real businesses to you?

The NBA's first decade was pretty sketchy, with massive expansions and a crushing contraction. The WNBA seems to have been well managed for its time. It was never envisioned to be a get rich quick scheme.

When you
- put money into a business that isn't immediately profitable
- maintain equity and fund operating costs
- sell after the business grows
Then you're an investor, not a provider of charity. It's a fairly popular path to becoming wealthy.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

Some of the older fans here might be able to speak to this better, but I've heard she's getting similar treatment akin to what Magic and Bird got when they first got to the league?

I was young when Bird and Magic entered the league (8-9 years old) so my recollection likely isn't going to be complete considering brain development and perspective at that age, but I do remember that time.

I recall Bird being tested heavily by veteran players with the "ethnicity" thing being a big factor why. But it didn't take long for Bird to earn his respect via his other-worldy play.

I don't recall Magic being questioned or doubted near as much, although behind the scenes I'm sure Kareem and other vets had some issues deferring to or trusting a rookie.

At that time I was a Showtime Lakers fan and a HUGE Celtics hater (especially Kevin McHale) hahaha.

Anyway, IMO, I think the jealously and hatred toward Clark exceeds whatever was directed toward Bird and/or Magic during their first few seasons. But we also live in a different time with the Internet, 24-hour TV sports coverage, and social media. It's just much easier to see the hate and disdain than ever before. It's also easier to see all the love and support, too.

Also, the NBA in the 80's was a much more physical league. So the physicality and hits on players like Bird weren't viewed the same then as they would be in today's game of basketball. That's what makes what's happening to Clark much more noticable and egregious IMO. Then you add in the verbal hate in the press and social media and it takes it to a different level IMO.

I recall Dennis Rodman making a controversial statement about Larry Bird in the media during the late 80's early 90's, but he was just one knucklehead. Clark has a lot more current and former players taking shots at her. The Angel Reese hate is even more puzzling, because Reese isn't an established WNBA vet and doesn't play the same position as Clark nor have to matchup against her. She's just been hard after any attention she can get and involving Clark in any way, shape, or form accomplishes that goal.

I suppose it would be akin to some middling celebrity talking trash about Taylor Swift. It's going to get them attention.

 

[Warhawk]

I'm having to bite my tongue, as there are lots of things I have say on this topic that I know I can't say because this site is uber senstive to truth telling and crossing lines they've set.

No, we aren't. But we are sensitive to boundaries that keep this site manageable and PG to PG-13 rated, with certain topics not allowed. There's a difference. And if anyone has questions on that, feel free to PM the mods as we aren't going to sidetrack this thread to discuss it.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Also, the NBA in the 80's was a much more physical league. So the physicality and hits on players like Bird weren't viewed the same then as they would be in today's game of basketball. That's what makes what's happening to Clark much more noticable and egregious IMO. Then you add in the verbal hate in the press and social media and it takes it to a different level IMO.

This is the main thing, as well as the UConn players from the days where they won 150 games in a row and half their roster would go on to the WNBA throwing a bunch of shade because Caitlin "hasn't won anything" when half of them are far worse than KD in terms of coattail riding. (someone will call me out for hyperbole because they went 150-3)

Who cares why she is the transcendent star, you've waited a quarter century for one after many "female Jordans" have came and went, you have one and she can get every one of you richer than you would have been 2-3 years ago.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

Hope she stays off social media, remembers what her bank account looks like and understands that a ton of people ( young girls and family members of those girls in particular) are rooting for her.

Full disclosure: I was a regular follower of the WNBA from inception (1997) until the Sacramento Monarchs folded after the 2009 season. I was a big fan of Ticha Penicheiro, Yolanda Griffith, and Mighty Ruthie Bolton. But w/o a team I lost interest.

Fast-forward to 2022-2023 and I keep hearing over and over about Caitlin Clark. I saw some highlights and thought to myself, "here's a young woman capitalizing by emulating Steph Curry's game and the AWE from today's stereotypical fan seeing players pull up from 28-30 feet".

I thought nothing much more about it, except to get slightly annoyed whenever the news jumped on the bandwagon during Iowa's Final Four run during Clark's Junior season.

I suppose it was fair to say that I wasn't much of a fan, and was more of hater wrt being annoyed by all the hype and attention.

Fast forward again to this past Spring when Clark was approaching breaking the women's all-time D1 scoring record. Again, I didn't much care and was slightly annoyed by all the coverage. I was even more annoyed when they started comparing her to Pete Maravich, as firmly believe it's asinine to compare all-time scoring between men and women's sports. They aren't the same. The level of competition isn't the same.

Nobody talks about Jake Browning's 91 TD's in 16 games as a high school senior breaking Peyton Manning's 55 during the 2013 NFL season because, again, they aren't the same. The level of competition isn't the same, even though they were technically playing the same sports. Same logic applies to Clark vs. any men's records. But I digress.....

Then a funny thing happened. I started seeing current and former players attacking and diminishing what Clark was about to accomplish. Former great Sheryl Swoopes was one in particular. Basically out and out lying by suggesting that Clark had an extra season due to COVID and needed more games played to break Kelsey Plum's record. WRONG!

There were numerous other instances of shade being thrown and it got me thinking -- WHY?! Anyway, I suddenly found myself defending and lobbying for Clark. Because I believe in truth, facts, and being realistic. And we weren't getting that.

The point of full disclosure is, while it may now appear that I'm a Caitlin Clark homer or apologist -- it is far from the truth. If anything I am a former skeptic turned semi-fan due to the puzzling polarization over the mere mention of her name, along with the disdain of former players outright lying about her accomplishments or lack-there-of.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

This is the main thing, as well as the UConn players from the days where they won 150 games in a row and half their roster would go on to the WNBA throwing a bunch of shade because Caitlin "hasn't won anything" when half of them are far worse than KD in terms of coattail riding. (someone will call me out for hyperbole because they went 150-3).

^^The UCONN thing is actually a great point.

A huge problem with rating and comparing players is judging them largely by "team" accomplishments. And unfortunately far too many fans (I'd argue the vast majority) don't understand this.

It's easy to judge titles in individual sports, although there still are apples-to-orange comparisons to be had between eras and level of competition at the times. However "team" sports are a different animal. Especially the more players that are involved in the particular team sport.

An all-time great, one to be considered for GOAT discussions, are almost assuredly to have won at least one or more titles, trophies, medals, whatever. Because it was 100% within their control wrt their abilities, skillset and performance.

But team sports do not work that way. Ask Dan Marino. Ask Charles Barkley. Ask Mike Trout. Ask a myriad of college basketball stars that never were part of a collegiate title (Larry Bird, Steph Curry, Caitlin Clark).

As you point out, there are a myriad of role players that were part of championship teams, even multiple championship teams, that couldn't carry a team and, in many cases, couldn't even make a team on the next level.

That's precisely why "championships" or "rings" are VASTLY overrated when comparing individual players. Because they weren't playing golf or singles tennis and had to rely on numerous others to achieve "team" goals.

I'll compare Caitlin Clark to Larry Bird from the standpoint of carrying what was NOT a perennial power program to a Final 4 and even further to a championship game. How many NBA players over the past 45-46 years could have switched places with Bird and carried that Indiana State team to the Finals. You could likely only count them on one hand.

Same goes for Clark and Iowa. How many players from all those great UCONN teams could have switch places with Clark and carried that Iowa team to back-to-back Final appearances? I'd argue possibly NONE. But at the most, maybe a couple. But ALL of those young UCONN women would be ringless, too, and having "not won anything".

I've made a similar argument toward Tom Brady. As great as Brady was, you switch him with Dan Marino placing Brady on the Dolphins from 1983 - 1999 and Brady would be ringless, too. Because the Dolphins never had teams good enough, deep enough, or balanced enough to win a title during that era. The closest they came was 1984-85 when they lost to a superior 49ers team that only lost 1 game by 3 points (near perfect season). Brady behind center that day for Miami wouldn't have made a lick of difference.

Conversely, you place prime Dan Marino on the Patriots from 2001 - 2019 and there is at least a title to be won. We couldn't say it would be 6, for sure. Or possibly even more. But it doesn't take a great leap of faith to say that with all those great teammates surrounding him over 18 years (great defenses, clutch special teams, kicker) that the Patriots led by Marino win at least one Superbowl, if not many more.

Surrounding cast matters. Front offices and ownership matters. In indivdual sports, those factors are all pretty much taken out of the equation.

Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, Novak Djokovic, Steffi Graf and Serena Williams ALL won over 20 grand slam singles titles. They didn't have to rely upon a GM making the right draft decisions. Or coaches making the right game day or halftime adjustments or play calls. They didn't have to rely upon any teammates making plays. They didn't have to rely upon an owner's willingness to invest money in the roster and facilities.

Why so many cannot make this distinction when discussing and comparing team sports forever baffles me.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

"The reason why we're watching women's basketball is not just because of one person," Reese said. "It's because of me, too. I want y'all to realize that." -- Angel Reese

LMFAO.

And WE want you to realize this:

2023 Attendance Averages:

Chicago Sky -- 7,242
Las Vegas Aces -- 9,551
Indiana Fever -- 4,067

2024 Attendance:

Chicago Sky -- 6,251; 6,251; 12,049; 9,025; 7,807; 7,911; 17,274; 8,277 = Average; 9,355
Las Vegas Aces -- 10,419; 10,286; 10,374; 10,399; 7,409; 4,015 = Average: 8,817
Indiana Fever -- 8,910; 17,274; 17,735; 17,274; 18,343; 19,103; 10,399; 16,013; 15,022; 17,274; 17,401 = Average: 15,886


SO, what does the above tell us? They ain't watching because of Angel Reese. The one significant attendance outlier for Chicago is when they played Caitlin Clark's team. Otherwise Chicago's average is only marginally better than what it was last season.

Same goes for the back-to-back champion Las Vegas Aces, whose average attendance is actually down a bit from the previous season.

Meanwhile, the Indiana Fever's attendance has improved by 391%.

Take that for data, Angel.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

If I was the Indiana Fever's GM, I'd strongly consider bringing in this former player. Unlike Clark's current teammates -- she seems to get it. And she was a pretty good scorer while she was in the league

https://www.tmz.com/2024/06/05/ange...lark-chennedy-carter-indiana-fever-teammates/

 

[dude12]

Yeah, Indiana needs to surround Clark with some more talent and some bigs who won’t allow this stuff to happen to their young star.

 

[PorchSurfin]

I feel like there is a lot of tip toe-ing around a certain thing in this topic and I'm not cool with it. Caitlyn Clark is like Sue Bird but with the media attention and Capt Save-An-Iowan's.

Shes a tough chick and she isn't going to shy away from it so just chill out.

Respect is earned and just like Larry Legend, she will earn hers. Homegurl has a target on her back, justifiably so, and she can handle it. She ain't hooping in a dress. She's a tough chick and she will be aight.

This is much ado about nothing, other than her being indoctrinated and another player continuing a rivalry in the big leagues.

Was the play in question dirty? Yeah, it was. Is Caitlyn whining? No, y'all are. Quit acting like these women are soft, they MUCH harder than any of us are, Caitlyn included.

Caitlyn is a special player destined for great things. The last thing she wants, and I can guarantee this, is anybody trying to "protect" her from going thru this kind of adversity.

Let them women hoop. They gave birth to all of y'all. They way tougher than you give them credit for.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I assure you the last thing I am worried about is Caitlin or if she can handle it. I'm extremely puzzled by why people who have been screaming for attention for years are mad that they are finally getting it.

 

[PurpleHaze]

And maybe most controversial part that some in media mention but seem to tip-toe around is reportedly up to half or more of WNBA players are lesbians. Clark has long time boyfriend and is heterosexual. I'm not homophobic at all but some of these lesbians might just not like rookie Clark out of not only simple jealous (really it's obvious) but despise the all-American roots, soaring professional stature and her race.