forums

OT: Caitlin Clark

Advertisement
Rellyrell said:
Yeah, she’s really struggling w/ this WNBA game. Lol

Lol

bleacherreport.com

Fever's Caitlin Clark Named WNBA's Eastern Conference Player of the Month for August

It didn't take Caitlin Clark long to figure out the WNBA game. The Indiana Fever star has guided her team into playoff position thanks to a recent hot streak…
bleacherreport.com bleacherreport.com
Click to expand...
Ill be honest...I follow the WNBA just a touch more than I follow the MLS. Which is none. But Clark def makes you want to look...and then basically creating some sort of comp between Reese and her makes it even a bit more interesting. The WNBA just seems to be dropping the ball (like most of the players do when they get a tough pass...sorry I had to get one in). While I am not saying Clark could be their 80's MJ it feels like they are dividing the fan base and just creating drama when they have a star who is making non WNBA fans tune in or at least check box scores. Clark is so far superior and 100% the reason the sport is so popular now. Angel Reese is ok...but watch a game and ignore the rebound stat and you will see she is just another player right now. Needs a lot of work.
 
HurricanePhilly said:
Ill be honest...I follow the WNBA just a touch more than I follow the MLS. Which is none. But Clark def makes you want to look...and then basically creating some sort of comp between Reese and her makes it even a bit more interesting. The WNBA just seems to be dropping the ball (like most of the players do when they get a tough pass...sorry I had to get one in). While I am not saying Clark could be their 80's MJ it feels like they are dividing the fan base and just creating drama when they have a star who is making non WNBA fans tune in or at least check box scores. Clark is so far superior and 100% the reason the sport is so popular now. Angel Reese is ok...but watch a game and ignore the rebound stat and you will see she is just another player right now. Needs a lot of work.
Click to expand...
www.outkick.com

Charles Barkley Says WNBA 'F***ed' Up Caitlin Clark Situation

Charles Barkley told Bill Simmons that the WNBA could not "have f***ed this Caitlin Clark thing up any worse if they tried."
www.outkick.com www.outkick.com
 
Canedude08 said:
And THIS is what happens when people that haven't watched a minute of women's college basketball or WNBA in their entire lives before last spring start flapping their gums. Guess what? A lot of the things Caitlin does that she gets away with at the college level won't fly in the W. In other words, those touch fouls she got called in her favor today, when people were like "Where's the foul"? They don't call those in the W, it's always been a more physical league, in regards to what is allowed. It's been a more physical league than the NBA(In regards to how it is refereed) for decades. I never said she couldn't play, I took great pains to point out that she will be dynamite(Shooting tends to translate well, and barring her having some kind of insane injury that saps her athletic ability, she should be at worst an extremely dangerous volume scorer).

That said, the cultists that think that she is going to come in and immediately dominate, are unrealistic and honestly, are showing their ignorance about the WNBA. Caitlin, if she is going to be what people think she is going to be has to be a better driver of the basketball(Be able to get separation without consistently pushing off or chicken winging people), shot selection has to improve and honestly, her handle has to tighten up. Raven had her flustered for the final 3 quarters, she was getting deflections almost at will. Her handle is loose, it is what it is, and honestly, I don't think teams in the B1G were talented or athletic enough to make her pay for it. We saw the same thing against UConn and WVU. Teams that can throw athletic, quick guards at her and get in her face, that's when she had problems on the handle.

Yes, she can make passes, there won't be nearly as many free runners at the next level, and she will be making passes into even tighter windows, due to the increase in athleticism. In college, she didn't see teams like South Carolina often, the B1G has relied on bulk for **** near ever. When someone like Stuelke dove to the rim, it was very rare that there was anyone to affect the pass usually because 1)Hannah was the open person due to a double coming for Cait and 2)Most teams Iowa faced didn't have anyone that could cover that ground and force the issue. A classic case of how athleticism can affect passes happened today. Cait thought she had a gimmie layup by throwing one to Affolter in transition, SC had someone come out of nowhere to deflect the pass. That window closed extremely fast and Clark reacted on screen. You could see her think "Where did she come from". She's going to see that in the WNBA a lot more often. I look at a team like Las Vegas, where you have athletes all over the place, and that's just at the upper end. Due to the lack of teams, you have deep squads all over the place, it's akin to what you'd see in the NBA if you got rid of 5 teams.
Click to expand...
Canedude08 said:
Breanna Stewart is a unique physical specimen that is a multi level scorer, she's basically a female version of Kevin Durant. Aja is unique as well, she's a dominant player on both ends, she's one of the few that can win games without scoring, just from her defensive impact. Look at Kelsey Plum, who would be extremely similar to Cait, except that Kels can't shoot like Clark. Her adjustment was far tougher, mostly because ball dominant guards aren't nearly as dominant at the WNBA level as they are at the collegiate level.

Also keep in mind, defensively, Clark is mediocre at best. They are going to make her work in the W on that end, something that will likely wear her down on the offensive end. That's why efficiency matters more, because you aren't going to be fresh as a daisy jacking up logo threes. Being able to take advantage of open lanes and finishing will help, she also has to be a more efficient scorer in the midrange, develop a nice runner, because that shot will be there from people closing out very strong.

By the way, no one is asking her to have Steph's handle, I'm not even asking her to have Dawn Staley's handle, just have a handle that isn't a walking TO. Again, no one is saying that she can't play, I took great pains to note that she's going to be a dynamite player, her floor is higher than **** near any other prospect I've seen in my 20 years of watching WNBA basketball. I know that in this world of "If you don't think Clark is the best player anyone has ever seen, EVER, you are a hater", that honest analysis is a problem, but come on. There are obvious issues in her game, especially when one looks at how the WNBA operates. She's going to be a star, but if you expect her to be the Lebron/Jordan of the women's game, she's going to have to develop some additional skills. Nothing wrong with that, Jordan couldn't go left or shoot when he first hit the league.
Click to expand...
So is it safe to say that you watching WNBA games in the past didn't help and you lost this debate?
 
Advertisement
johnnytsunami01 said:
So is it safe to say that you watching WNBA games in the past didn't help and you lost this debate?
Click to expand...
What debate? I pointed out that the transition may be jarring, and that it was unrealistic to think that she was going to come in and dominate grown women and immediately be the best player in the best women's league on the planet. Guess what happened? She had to adjust and after some early struggles, established herself as a top end player. She's started to adjust her game, and honestly, the Olympic break gave her some much needed time off, and you can see the physical difference.

That said, the MVP talk is a joke, you can't say with a straight face that Clark is the best player. You have a player in Aja Wilson putting up generational numbers. You probably never heard of her, because she isn't someone's great hope. This is a big part of the issue about Caitlin, and it has nothing to do with her as a player. A lot of her fans have flocked to her not because she's a great player, but because they think she represents something that is akin to their own personal beliefs. Therefore, well reasoned, intelligent criticism is seen as "Hating", because people tied their self worth and identity to this athlete. We saw this same thing play out during Tebow's run with the Broncos.

A perfect example is your post. I took great pains to note in MULTIPLE posts that I believe that she is going to be a dynamite player and barring injury is going to be a star. None of that registered with you, what did register was me discussing challenges Caitlin was likely going to face and weak points in her game. I used similar players as comparison points, and despite a lot of what I noted actually happening, you came back here to crow.
 
Canedude08 said:
What debate? I pointed out that the transition may be jarring, and that it was unrealistic to think that she was going to come in and dominate grown women and immediately be the best player in the best women's league on the planet. Guess what happened? She had to adjust and after some early struggles, established herself as a top end player. She's started to adjust her game, and honestly, the Olympic break gave her some much needed time off, and you can see the physical difference.

That said, the MVP talk is a joke, you can't say with a straight face that Clark is the best player. You have a player in Aja Wilson putting up generational numbers. You probably never heard of her, because she isn't someone's great hope. This is a big part of the issue about Caitlin, and it has nothing to do with her as a player. A lot of her fans have flocked to her not because she's a great player, but because they think she represents something that is akin to their own personal beliefs. Therefore, well reasoned, intelligent criticism is seen as "Hating", because people tied their self worth and identity to this athlete. We saw this same thing play out during Tebow's run with the Broncos.

A perfect example is your post. I took great pains to note in MULTIPLE posts that I believe that she is going to be a dynamite player and barring injury is going to be a star. None of that registered with you, what did register was me discussing challenges Caitlin was likely going to face and weak points in her game. I used similar players as comparison points, and despite a lot of what I noted actually happening, you came back here to crow.
Click to expand...
No one is stating that she is the MVP get out of here with that, Wilson is far and away the winner there. Very clear she is the ROTY and anyone arguing otherwise is a hater.

You stated she would struggle and she wouldn't be able to be one of the top players in the "W," well she is. Read your posts: She wasn't going to be able to make the passes she makes in college: leads the WNBA in assists. (and should have plenty more if not for countless missed layups by her teammates) You stated, she wasn't going to be able to handle the physicality and the refs not blowing the whistle.

Are you going to say you were right because in her first 10 games she had three games where she scored 11 points or less? Even though she ended up averaging 17 ppg and 6.5 assists through those 10 games?

Your messages were not stating that she would struggle for 10 games stop that. You stated it would take her time, you mentioned Kelsey Plum who averaged under 10 ppg her first three years in the WNBA. You said she was in no way going to be able to have rookie years like Wilson or Stewart because they are "physical specimens" yet her numbers are nearly identical to those two that didn't see much of a drop of, if any, from last year of college to the first year of the WNBA.

You did state she was going to be a star, but it would take time. You referenced a similar start to the career like Plum, not Stewart or Wilson, and you were wrong. Take the L, you didn't need to be a diehard fan of WNBA to see this coming.
 
HurricanePhilly said:
Ill be honest...I follow the WNBA just a touch more than I follow the MLS. Which is none. But Clark def makes you want to look...and then basically creating some sort of comp between Reese and her makes it even a bit more interesting. The WNBA just seems to be dropping the ball (like most of the players do when they get a tough pass...sorry I had to get one in). While I am not saying Clark could be their 80's MJ it feels like they are dividing the fan base and just creating drama when they have a star who is making non WNBA fans tune in or at least check box scores. Clark is so far superior and 100% the reason the sport is so popular now. Angel Reese is ok...but watch a game and ignore the rebound stat and you will see she is just another player right now. Needs a lot of work.
Click to expand...
They didn’t really create the comp between her and angel, it came naturally and blew up because of other obvious reasons or “drama” i wont mention. The media just did what they always do and it has worked tremendously well for the whole league

Also you cant just say take out rebounding lol wtf she is a power forward and as a rookie has broken the single season rebounding record lmao..Thats just not something to push to the side at all, and she is a great defender, and offensively she is solid but needs work.

Clark is clearly the superior player but u don’t have to downplay angel to big her up.
 
Advertisement
Advertisement
Back
Top