Caitlyn Clark polarization among WNBA peers and fans
- Thread starter KingsFanSince85
- Start date
I think that Team USA, playing at their absolute best and giving their full, 100+% effort, would've easily beaten Team WNBA. But, seeing that the Olympics were a week away from the All-Star game, why risk going all out for an All-Star game, potentially losing one or more of your key players to an injury heading into Olympic competition?
Eh, that's a cop out. Not too mention complete speculation.
If they aren't going to play hard and need to take it "easy" then why play the freaking game in the first place? I mean, did the Soviet hockey team take it "easy" on team USA back in 1980 just a few days before Olympic competition or worry about injury? Nope. So stop with that nonsense.
Yeah, yeah, this is different because it wasn't the "cold war". But it isn't different from the standpoint that the best of the best never wants to lose to anyone and is typically uber competitive even if the game is checkers. In this case it was one team wanting to validate their selection versus one team that felt slighted. Did you even watch the game? The intensity on both sides was clearly evident by the overly physical play at times.
Again, I circle back to team USA's two best players and MVP candidates playing an average of 30 minutes between the two, the 1st and 3rd most of any player in the game. If the goal isn't to play 100% and just ease into Olympic competition, then why play those two key players so much? Furthermore, one of those MVP caliber players produced an MVP caliber game posting 31/10 while the other posted 22/6, two of the top 3 point scorers in the game.
The visual and statistical evidence just doesn't support what you're asserting. At all.
IDK why it's so difficult to admit that they just got beat, rather than making unfounded excuses.
If they aren't going to play hard and need to take it "easy" then why play the freaking game in the first place? I mean, did the Soviet hockey team take it "easy" on team USA back in 1980 just a few days before Olympic competition or worry about injury? Nope. So stop with that nonsense.
Yeah, yeah, this is different because it wasn't the "cold war". But it isn't different from the standpoint that the best of the best never wants to lose to anyone and is typically uber competitive even if the game is checkers. In this case it was one team wanting to validate their selection versus one team that felt slighted. Did you even watch the game? The intensity on both sides was clearly evident by the overly physical play at times.
Again, I circle back to team USA's two best players and MVP candidates playing an average of 30 minutes between the two, the 1st and 3rd most of any player in the game. If the goal isn't to play 100% and just ease into Olympic competition, then why play those two key players so much? Furthermore, one of those MVP caliber players produced an MVP caliber game posting 31/10 while the other posted 22/6, two of the top 3 point scorers in the game.
The visual and statistical evidence just doesn't support what you're asserting. At all.
IDK why it's so difficult to admit that they just got beat, rather than making unfounded excuses.
Didn't they press the f out of Clark the same way teams have been covering her far more aggressive than any rook in history, despite the fact that they all called her a girl amongst women heading into the league?
I'm just going to enjoy the pig headedness of keeping her off the roster. Angel too I know she's equally polarizing but I still think it behooves Team USA to have both of them in the system as early as possible instead of giving victory laps to women with 4 or 5 medals already.
I'm just going to enjoy the pig headedness of keeping her off the roster. Angel too I know she's equally polarizing but I still think it behooves Team USA to have both of them in the system as early as possible instead of giving victory laps to women with 4 or 5 medals already.
From the standpoint of not resting players or being worried about injury mere days before the Olympic games — yes, I did.
Were two people unable to understand a relevant and accurate example? A big “yes” to that as well. SMH.
My guess is that neither of you are aware that the US hockey team played the USSR in an exhibition like 3 days before the start of the Olympics and lost 10-3 to a team that wasn’t coasting or worried about injuries.
Explain to me how that isn’t relevant with regard to dismantling the awful take from @QWERTYLICIOUS who seems to be under the delusion that the US women’s basketball team wasn’t playing hard despite numerous pieces of evidence cited to demonstrate otherwise (which were ignored by qwerty due to confirmation bias).
Lastly, why is that people have to jump off the deep end and engage in reductio ad absurdum? Nobody claimed the recent exhibition between team USA and the WNBA all-stars was remotely comparable wrt historical significance and impact.
Surely the two of you are smart enough to see it as a factual example of a historically dominant olympic team/program giving 100% mere days before the Olympic games kickoff. That where the example begins and ends.
But rather than acknowledge that, you’d rather twist it into something else entirely. Good, great, grand, wonderful. I’ll take that as a ”tap out” on your part and move on.
Were two people unable to understand a relevant and accurate example? A big “yes” to that as well. SMH.
My guess is that neither of you are aware that the US hockey team played the USSR in an exhibition like 3 days before the start of the Olympics and lost 10-3 to a team that wasn’t coasting or worried about injuries.
Explain to me how that isn’t relevant with regard to dismantling the awful take from @QWERTYLICIOUS who seems to be under the delusion that the US women’s basketball team wasn’t playing hard despite numerous pieces of evidence cited to demonstrate otherwise (which were ignored by qwerty due to confirmation bias).
Lastly, why is that people have to jump off the deep end and engage in reductio ad absurdum? Nobody claimed the recent exhibition between team USA and the WNBA all-stars was remotely comparable wrt historical significance and impact.
Surely the two of you are smart enough to see it as a factual example of a historically dominant olympic team/program giving 100% mere days before the Olympic games kickoff. That where the example begins and ends.
But rather than acknowledge that, you’d rather twist it into something else entirely. Good, great, grand, wonderful. I’ll take that as a ”tap out” on your part and move on.
Last edited:
This happened in the last cycle but I think the major difference this time was that the WNBA All Stars weren't the only team with a chip on their shoulders. I'm guessing the USA women are still probably 2-3 cycles and a decade away from the reckoning the US soccer women have been enjoying, and the snubbed women will probably have played for the team by then. With any luck they will not be the gatekeeping jerks the current crop of aging players are.
First of all, nowhere in any of my comments, did I say that the US women's basketball team wasn't playing hard. You're, falsely, assuming that is what I said and you are, again falsely, accusing me of being "under the delusion". I said that they weren't playing as hard as they probably could have played, seeing that they were a week away from entering Olympic competition, a competition that probably means much more to the gals than beating a team consisting of those who are just outside of the bubble looking in when it comes to their spot on the national team.
And I still stick to my claim. An all out, 100%, effort by the US team would've easily beaten the WNBA team any day of the week.
Congratulations to the WNBA All-Stars for beating the Olympic National Team. And for living up to their "label" as being the team with a huge chip on their shoulders by being the ones not going to Paris. They deserved the win (again, something that you are implying I don't believe to be true, but again...).
Moving on...
And I still stick to my claim. An all out, 100%, effort by the US team would've easily beaten the WNBA team any day of the week.
Congratulations to the WNBA All-Stars for beating the Olympic National Team. And for living up to their "label" as being the team with a huge chip on their shoulders by being the ones not going to Paris. They deserved the win (again, something that you are implying I don't believe to be true, but again...).
Moving on...
Last edited:
With the WNBA starting again, Olympic snub Clark rolls again. The video clip making the rounds is of Taurasi talking about how Clark did great things while playing 18 year olds but coming into the W she would be going against grown women and there would be a learning curve.
Actually think Taurasi has been correct but the stats show Clark hasn’t lost to Taurasi’s W team or the Olympic team. Seems like Clark raises her game with any bulletin board material.
And yeah, she should have been on the Olympic team. Would have had the best floor vision on that team from what I saw.
Actually think Taurasi has been correct but the stats show Clark hasn’t lost to Taurasi’s W team or the Olympic team. Seems like Clark raises her game with any bulletin board material.
And yeah, she should have been on the Olympic team. Would have had the best floor vision on that team from what I saw.
The biggest thing that has clicked for her is finding chemistry with her teammates. Those laser dimes in transition are finding hands now instead of being a turnover. Next step for her is dialing in the 3 pointer and being a bit more aggressive in getting to the rack. She could be 23 10 and 6 next season
Just watched the 2nd half of the Fever and Seattle game. Clark overcomes rough first half to catch fire as well as the remainder of her team. Seattle coach chewing out Fever coach for not emptying her bench at what she thought the correct time should have been (Fever coach did empty the bench just not when Seattle did). Clark and the Fever are out There now just breaking the mental will of teams in the W lol.