WNBA is better basketball
- Thread starter ppine
- Start date
I’ve really enjoyed watching the WNBA this year but I’d still watch NBA over any other basketball league or college simply because it’s the absolute best of the best talent in the world. The shot making of the NBA is second to none. Still, I have adopted the Fever as my WNBA team and have found myself catching other games , especially the Sun and Liberty. Insane talent on those teams.
I still and for long time like NCAA March Madness as most thrilling, do or die, highly entertaining, with all its pageantry, amateur basketball competition. I rate regular college basketball season about the same way rate regular NBA season. I watch it with interest but even NBA playoffs don't quite match March Madness. Besides NBA has become rather boring over the last few years with endlessly jacking up threes by some teams as their primary offense set. I do like WNBA a lot. Much more passing, set plays, fundamentals and now one Caitlin Clark, a name known by just about everyone to lift formerly obscure league into the bright lights.
Ok, since you’re begging for an antagonistic view, I’ll be your huckleberry.
You’re not right. There’s a myriad of examples to prove it, but I’ll just cite three. Revenue, attendance, and ratings. The NBA has all three in spades, the WNBA doesn’t. Which means the vast, vast, vast majority do not agree with you otherwise it’d be the NBA complaining about attendance, salaries and attention and not the other way around.
Game, set, match.
The above said, I’m not oblivious to the fact that the WNBA is seeing massive increases in attendance and viewership this season. But anybody really paying attention knows that it’s due to Caitlin Clark and not the masses suddenly coming to their senses and seeing the women’s game as more entertaining or better to watch. Because it’s not. Not even close.
If you study the rise in attendance and viewership, the vast majority of games setting records are the games Caitlin Clark is playing in. For example, the Fevers recent game in Vegas was the 2nd highest attendance in league history. Further, the Fever have quadrupled home attendance from “around” 3-4K in 2023 to “around” 15-17K in 2024.
No other WNBA franchise has seen a spike like that, though some have definitely had spikes in home attendance. When teams host the Fever — the attendance doubles or triples (or more). Teams like Atlanta moved their home game from their usual 3K capacity arena to the NBA Hawks arena so they could accommodate 17K+. When they play any other team, it’s back to the small venue.
Circling back to the WNBA vs NBA game — while I do agree that the NBA game has become more predictable and boring due to the volume 3 point shooting, it’s still worlds more interesting and exciting than the WNBA.
Full disclosure: You’re talking to someone that started following the WNBA during its inception in 1997 then lost interest when the Monarchs folded in 2009. I’ve only ”loosely” followed since but started heavily watching again this season due to Caitlin Clark. Point is, I’m not a women’s basketball hater and have supported it for many years. But I still can recognize it’s shortcomings and inadequacies.
I’m super glad it exists, for many different reasons, and hope it one day can stand on its own two feet (versus being subsidized). The league has a real shot going forward if they don’t keep self-sabotaging. But I digress.
The “W“ can be a hard watch due to the lack of speed and athleticism, something its parent league has in droves. It’s akin to watching car races where the cars are traveling over 150 mph then watching the same thing but only traveling at half that speed. It’s a let down.
The players hardly get off the floor and even struggle to convert easy layups at times. The shooting, dribbling, and overall skillsets of the players has improved since the early days of the league, but it still isn’t good enough to seriously be compared to the men’s game.
The depth of talent is terrible. While there are some really, really good players, it’s not drastically different than the college game where there are huge gaps and disparities in talent. There are only 12 teams now yet still not enough good talent to go around. There are a lot of slow-footed, unathletic players that really shouldn’t be in the league. But they still have jobs due to the dearth of talent. That needs to drastically improve, and likely will if the league continues to ascend and inspire more young women to follow that path. But it’s not there yet.
WRT the style of game, I feel like that has changed as well. It used to be more of a pure and fundamental style, but has also been infected by the 3 point madness to a degree. While I agree that their game (stylistically) is more like where the NBA was around the early to late 2000’s, it’s still not more entertaining to watch than the men’s game. They just don’t have the “splash” plays. There’s no “home run” play. And that really limits it, along with the dearth of talent and depth.
I know the women hate the idea, and it will likely never happen, but I do believe the idea of lowering the rim has merit. And I really don’t understand why they get so agitated and insulted when the idea is floated — especially considering they already play with a smaller ball and a shorter 3 point line.
They also play half the number of games and less minutes per game. So why adapting the rim height to fit their average physical height/reach attributes is so insulting to them escapes me. I mean, why aren’t they equally insulted that they play with a smaller ball to fit their average hand size (which also makes it easier for the ball to fit inside the hoop)? Or less minutes? Or far less games?
Watching these women play near the basket with little-to-no lift off the floor is eerily similar to watching youth basketball and the kids struggling to get the ball up to the rim. It’s not entertaining to watch. Lowering the rim a bit would really help in that regard.
In closing, most local high schools also play a more traditional midrange game with no lift off the floor. So does your average rec game. Nobody ever claims that’s easier to look at. Because the average person can do it or has done it also (even if not as well). Instead the masses marvel at what they can’t do or could never do. It’s the elite athleticism, skill, and physical traits that draws the mass interest and “AWE”. And nobody can compete with the NBA’s men in that regard.
You’re not right. There’s a myriad of examples to prove it, but I’ll just cite three. Revenue, attendance, and ratings. The NBA has all three in spades, the WNBA doesn’t. Which means the vast, vast, vast majority do not agree with you otherwise it’d be the NBA complaining about attendance, salaries and attention and not the other way around.
Game, set, match.
The above said, I’m not oblivious to the fact that the WNBA is seeing massive increases in attendance and viewership this season. But anybody really paying attention knows that it’s due to Caitlin Clark and not the masses suddenly coming to their senses and seeing the women’s game as more entertaining or better to watch. Because it’s not. Not even close.
If you study the rise in attendance and viewership, the vast majority of games setting records are the games Caitlin Clark is playing in. For example, the Fevers recent game in Vegas was the 2nd highest attendance in league history. Further, the Fever have quadrupled home attendance from “around” 3-4K in 2023 to “around” 15-17K in 2024.
No other WNBA franchise has seen a spike like that, though some have definitely had spikes in home attendance. When teams host the Fever — the attendance doubles or triples (or more). Teams like Atlanta moved their home game from their usual 3K capacity arena to the NBA Hawks arena so they could accommodate 17K+. When they play any other team, it’s back to the small venue.
Circling back to the WNBA vs NBA game — while I do agree that the NBA game has become more predictable and boring due to the volume 3 point shooting, it’s still worlds more interesting and exciting than the WNBA.
Full disclosure: You’re talking to someone that started following the WNBA during its inception in 1997 then lost interest when the Monarchs folded in 2009. I’ve only ”loosely” followed since but started heavily watching again this season due to Caitlin Clark. Point is, I’m not a women’s basketball hater and have supported it for many years. But I still can recognize it’s shortcomings and inadequacies.
I’m super glad it exists, for many different reasons, and hope it one day can stand on its own two feet (versus being subsidized). The league has a real shot going forward if they don’t keep self-sabotaging. But I digress.
The “W“ can be a hard watch due to the lack of speed and athleticism, something its parent league has in droves. It’s akin to watching car races where the cars are traveling over 150 mph then watching the same thing but only traveling at half that speed. It’s a let down.
The players hardly get off the floor and even struggle to convert easy layups at times. The shooting, dribbling, and overall skillsets of the players has improved since the early days of the league, but it still isn’t good enough to seriously be compared to the men’s game.
The depth of talent is terrible. While there are some really, really good players, it’s not drastically different than the college game where there are huge gaps and disparities in talent. There are only 12 teams now yet still not enough good talent to go around. There are a lot of slow-footed, unathletic players that really shouldn’t be in the league. But they still have jobs due to the dearth of talent. That needs to drastically improve, and likely will if the league continues to ascend and inspire more young women to follow that path. But it’s not there yet.
WRT the style of game, I feel like that has changed as well. It used to be more of a pure and fundamental style, but has also been infected by the 3 point madness to a degree. While I agree that their game (stylistically) is more like where the NBA was around the early to late 2000’s, it’s still not more entertaining to watch than the men’s game. They just don’t have the “splash” plays. There’s no “home run” play. And that really limits it, along with the dearth of talent and depth.
I know the women hate the idea, and it will likely never happen, but I do believe the idea of lowering the rim has merit. And I really don’t understand why they get so agitated and insulted when the idea is floated — especially considering they already play with a smaller ball and a shorter 3 point line.
They also play half the number of games and less minutes per game. So why adapting the rim height to fit their average physical height/reach attributes is so insulting to them escapes me. I mean, why aren’t they equally insulted that they play with a smaller ball to fit their average hand size (which also makes it easier for the ball to fit inside the hoop)? Or less minutes? Or far less games?
Watching these women play near the basket with little-to-no lift off the floor is eerily similar to watching youth basketball and the kids struggling to get the ball up to the rim. It’s not entertaining to watch. Lowering the rim a bit would really help in that regard.
In closing, most local high schools also play a more traditional midrange game with no lift off the floor. So does your average rec game. Nobody ever claims that’s easier to look at. Because the average person can do it or has done it also (even if not as well). Instead the masses marvel at what they can’t do or could never do. It’s the elite athleticism, skill, and physical traits that draws the mass interest and “AWE”. And nobody can compete with the NBA’s men in that regard.
Last edited:
I get what you’re saying. I have watched large parts of about 6 games this year, and these are Fever games, and I get what you’re saying. I don’t hate what I’m watching. I’ll say this, the W is trending the right way and a big factor for me is Caitlin Clark. I think it’s the whole story around her. If they can continue to add more intriguing storylines and or players they got something cooking. I know I’m not going to watch Reese or Taurasi or Plum or whomever. They don’t intrigue me.
That’s the real issue. They don’t have enough Caitlin Clark’s. Which is precisely why there’s so much attention on Clark.
There are some really good players, such as A‘ja Wilson, Alyssa Thomas and Breanna Stewart (just to name a few), but not many that really move the needle of excitement like Clark does.
The NBA always has players that draw fan interest even if those players are flawed, not among the best in the game, or on losing teams. Think Jason Williams (White Chocolate), Vince Carter, Blake Griffin, Zion Williamson, etc.
When a player like LeBron first came into the league, as well as Wembanyama last season, they didn’t draw ALL of the attention because there were already so many other interesting and flashy players in the league. The “W” just doesn’t have that yet.
There’s some hype building around Paige Bueckers, who will be in the league next season. If they keep adding players like Caitlin and Paige, over time it might really start to mean something.
You’re not alone. Reese is “meh”. Her name and the hype surrounding her has all been manufactured off Caitlin’s name. She’s a solid player, no doubt, but not many are going to get excited over double double streaks.
The fact that they are pushing 14 consecutive double doubles as some monumental things is laughable. Domas nearly went an entire 82 game season posting double doubles, set a record, and also posted close to 26 triple doubles last season (most in the league) yet hardly anyone outside of the Sacramento area knows about it. It was covered, but more so on the backpages so-to-speak, not major headlines.
Reese‘s game doesn’t spark major interest or excitement. If she hadn’t waved her ring finger at Caitlin Clark and continued to leverage Caitlin’s name to draw attention toward herself every chance she gets, most people wouldn’t even know who she is. She’s gained fame for the wrong reasons.
Taurasi used to be a super star, but is in her 40’s now and far past her prime. Even in her prime, as good as she was, even she didn’t garner near the level excitement we see Caitlin generating.
Kelsey Plum is also a really, really good player, but, yeah, I understand why you don’t find her exciting or intriguing either. Still, if the “W” had a few more Kelsey Plum’s in the league they’d be a lot better for it.
There are some really good players, such as A‘ja Wilson, Alyssa Thomas and Breanna Stewart (just to name a few), but not many that really move the needle of excitement like Clark does.
The NBA always has players that draw fan interest even if those players are flawed, not among the best in the game, or on losing teams. Think Jason Williams (White Chocolate), Vince Carter, Blake Griffin, Zion Williamson, etc.
When a player like LeBron first came into the league, as well as Wembanyama last season, they didn’t draw ALL of the attention because there were already so many other interesting and flashy players in the league. The “W” just doesn’t have that yet.
There’s some hype building around Paige Bueckers, who will be in the league next season. If they keep adding players like Caitlin and Paige, over time it might really start to mean something.
You’re not alone. Reese is “meh”. Her name and the hype surrounding her has all been manufactured off Caitlin’s name. She’s a solid player, no doubt, but not many are going to get excited over double double streaks.
The fact that they are pushing 14 consecutive double doubles as some monumental things is laughable. Domas nearly went an entire 82 game season posting double doubles, set a record, and also posted close to 26 triple doubles last season (most in the league) yet hardly anyone outside of the Sacramento area knows about it. It was covered, but more so on the backpages so-to-speak, not major headlines.
Reese‘s game doesn’t spark major interest or excitement. If she hadn’t waved her ring finger at Caitlin Clark and continued to leverage Caitlin’s name to draw attention toward herself every chance she gets, most people wouldn’t even know who she is. She’s gained fame for the wrong reasons.
Taurasi used to be a super star, but is in her 40’s now and far past her prime. Even in her prime, as good as she was, even she didn’t garner near the level excitement we see Caitlin generating.
Kelsey Plum is also a really, really good player, but, yeah, I understand why you don’t find her exciting or intriguing either. Still, if the “W” had a few more Kelsey Plum’s in the league they’d be a lot better for it.
Last edited:
