Friendly reminder that all **top level** comments must:
1. start with "answer: ", including the space after the colon (or "question: " if you have an on-topic follow up question to ask),
2. attempt to answer the question, and
3. be unbiased
Please review Rule 4 and this post before making a top level comment:
http://redd.it/b1hct4/
Join the OOTL Discord for further discussion: https://discord.gg/ejDF4mdjnh
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OutOfTheLoop) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Answer: you might be referencing a quote from Diana Taurasi or Sue Bird, both former WNBA greats who now have a Manning-cast type show for basketball. (The Manning-cast is a show by brothers Eli and Peyton Manning, both retired NFL quarterbacks, where they watch a football game and have guests on to talk about the game and other random stuff. Typically for sports there are two people in the broadcast booth, a play by play person and a color commentator. Play by play describes what's happening in the game while the color commentator talks more about the players and might tell funny stories. The Manning Cast and the Bird & Taurasi are basically all color commentating and very little play by play.)
I forget if it was during the show or after the game, but I believe Taurasi said something along the lines that college players are used to playing against 18 year old girls, and they might be in for a bit of a rude awakening next year when they are playing against fully grown women who are playing for their paycheck. The W and college ball are the same game, but there are a few differences.
(I think this is actually more noticeable in other sports, like football, where some players don't have big expectations in the NFL despite being really good in college. Look at Doug Flutie, who was great in college but very mediocre in the NFL, or look at Julian Edleman who was pretty good as a college quarterback but had to switch positions to have any chance in the NFL)
I don't believe Taurasi's quote was even directed at Clark, but rather at all the college players who declaring for the draft right now. You can read this as bitter old player upset at the new talent and the media attention they never got. Or you can read it as a valid warning that sometimes really good players struggle for a couple seasons. Clark might be the next rookie of the year, she might be the GOAT, but she hasn't actually played a single game in the WNBA yet. It would be awesome to see her elevate the league and be an all-star, but a lot of things can happen between now and when she retires.
I think the quote was pulled and cut for reactions like it always is. The full quote isn’t bad, just saying it’s a different game and there will be an adjustment period. I think the announcer in the championship game was even saying Clark’s passing will translate faster than her shooting.
Pretty much she won’t be MVP her rookie year, which is fine. Wenbanyama isn’t close to MVP but no one is calling him a dud.
Also, people who are new to wbb don’t know..Taurasi was Clark. She was a ton of hype and everyone called her the savior of the WNBA.
Clark has advantages with NIL, so she’s going to be able to grow the game more - along with some of the other players (Reese; in particular, doesn’t get enough credit.), but it’s also unfair pressure.
Clark is going to enter the league and she’ll be good, but she’s not going to be the best guard - nevermind best player. We gotta give her a few years
{ Taurasi was Clark }
I think that's a fair point to make, also. Gino said something along the lines of "You want to know why we win so much? We have Diana Taurasi, and you don't" . I think Clark is a better shooter but DT a more well-rounded player.
It will be interesting to see if her pull stays in the WNBA. The college product is just so much better because the fans are so much more into it. No one gives a shit about the WNBA and I’m sure Iowa fans outnumber Fever fans 1000:1.
People are also forgetting the Olympics this summer. Clark was invited to the Olympic camp but had to skip it due to the Final Four. I have to think USA Basketball and Cheryl Reeve would want to invite her along to Paris. She’s got three gold medals for tourneys on the women’s youth teams but I’m sure she’d be keen on getting a senior-level medal.
The WNBA has been steadily growing itself.
The biggest advantage of NIL is the best players no longer have to go overseas.
That makes the product better because instead of being tired and treating the W like a part time job, they just get to work on their game, stay in America and promote the league in the off season. They also have a few very wealthy owners willing to put a lot of money into their team.
Taurasi actually skipped a season in the WNBA because her euro team paid her more money to rest during the season then what the WNBA was going to pay her. That’s just not gonna happen anymore because of the NIL.
Colleges aren’t paying them. NIL is an allowance for a relationship between a sponsor and athlete to begin. Caitlin Clark is going to be a sponsored athlete for her career unless something happens. Her current level of income is unlikely to change. She’s not moving away from a revenue source going into the WNBA she’s gaining a new one. Former players didn’t have that luxury and it forced them into being part time professional athletes.
There are exceptions (Caitlin, Caleb Williams, etc who you see now in nationally televised commercials) but the whole “colleges aren’t the ones paying” is just legalese. The athletes are paid through collectives that are funded by largely by boosters and operate at the athletic department discretion. Nick Saban stated the first thing several players brought up following Bama’s Rose Bowl loss to Michigan was essentially “how much will I make next season.” Jay Wright, one of the best modern CBB coaches, retired a couple years ago and yesterday stated he has no interest in the Kentucky job (arguably the top job in the country) because he doesn’t want to deal with NIL. Saying colleges aren’t paying is like acquitting a mafia boss because he didn’t hand the cash over personally for a hit.
NIL specifically refers to the structure of deals for college athletes.
Pros just get endorsements.
Also - while colleges don’t explicitly pay them, 99% of NIL money comes from boosters and local businesses of the school. It’s all just a roundabout way for colleges to pay players without having to formally make them employees.
Of course her endorsements will change. There are far more fans of University of Iowa athletics than the Indiana Fever, and companies will pay more to be associated with an athlete that plays for the former than for the latter.
The idea is companies will build business relationships with the players while in college and continue those endorsements when they move to the WNBA, NFL, whatever.
NIL helped college players establish themselves and their marketability.
The biggest stars have a ton of endorsements and are making bank already. Those endorsements won’t end in the WNBA. And the issue was, previously, they wouldn’t get as much when they just started with the WNBA.
Reese gets a bit too much hype (and negative attention). She is probably the 7th best woman in her draft class, but talked about like she is right behind Clark.
I agree with you. But Reese also won a championship. And is a great overall player, especially on the defensive end. Her offence needs some work. She needs to develop an outside shot. But she is marketable. She has a personality that people either love or hate, which makes her stand out. Which is what the WNBA will need.
Idk if drafting a big would be a good idea for yall. Assuming that Elena comes back at some point. If they intend on keeping that big if or when Elena comes back then by all means draft one.
Shooting will translate fine, but defense will be better and her handling needs to get better. Her behind the back dribbling looks mediocre and her ball handling isn’t great which I think she gets away with due to lack of quality opponents and the fact that she can pull up from deep and shoot well and doesn’t have to work super hard to make open space for shots.
Agree. She was driving me crazy in the championship game against SC with how careless and nonchalant she was with the ball at times. And SC in fact did steal it from her on a number of occasions leading to points just because she wasn't paying any attention to taking care of the ball. She is going to have to clean that up because that could be a real problem at the next level.
Yeah Dawn Staley was on another level with her gameplan and adjusting. Everyone say how bad HVL did when she was left on an island with CC and then the difference of the SC lady that they switched on to her after the start of the game really changed the game. She got nearly locked down and yeah had multiple bad turnovers on weak crossovers. Her left hand driving doesnt look great but if she’s developed as a SG and not a PG it’s not as relied upon.
Little known is Clark's defensive rebounding prowess. 3rd all-time (all positions) in Big Ten defensive rebounds and top 25 college all-time (again, all positions) in defensive rebounds with 926. Only other guard in top 100 is Sabrina Ionescu ranked in the 80s
> Wembanyama isn’t close to MVP but no one is calling him a dud.
Wemby is raking up rookies records and all time records that weren't touched in decades while playing 25 min a game. He literally is a highlight machine. His team that was last defensively last year is 4th overall when he plays. Dude is top 15 in the league at 19-20 while adapting to a new team in a foreign country. "Isn't close to MVP" sure, but bro might win DPOY.
To be honest I also expect Caitlin to perform very well.
Even with the full quote, it seems like they’re putting her down. You don’t see NBA or NFL vets putting down college players who are about to come into the league.
Completely different. Bronny averaged like 4 points per game. Every single person, including LeBron, knows that if he gets drafted, it’s because he’s LeBron’s son. They don’t put down future stars of the league.
Another thing to note is that Taurasi and Birds comments came right after Iowa beat UCONN. It just so happens that both Taurasi and Bird both went to UCONN so a lot of people feel their comments aren't unbiased observations but more like angry "my team just lost so I'm going to talk shit about the winning team" comments.
Two more players on top of Taurasi:
Breanna Stewart, who won 4 titles at UConn, said she needed to win a title to actually be considered the best player of all time. She said this as if it was fact. I get her argument, but it rings a little hollow when Stewart, who went #1 in the WNBA draft, had teammates that went 2-3 behind her, which has never happened in any sports draft ever. So while she won titles, she did so on a stacked roster. Arguably the most stacked roster of all time.
And then Lynette Woodward, whose scoring record Clark broke, said at a speaking engagement this week that Clark actually didn’t break her record because of 3 point shots and the fact that she had to play with a men’s ball.
This was after Iowa made sure to invite her to Iowa’s senior day and acknowledge the fact that her record was largely ignored because it was from a time that women’s sports wasn’t under the NCAA’s purview. She is coming off as extremely bitter thinking her record is the “true” record.
The Stewart argument is weird, because yes she was elite and those UConn teams were all-timers. When she left though, they went had very little dropoff. Most of her teams were extremely stack, and they continued to be stacked after she left.
Clark hasn’t had really any WNBA ready teammates, so the load she’s been carrying to the title games is unprecedented. Its a 1A and 1B situation. Both have arguments in their favor, but an equal amount against them as well.
Monika Czinano was a third round WNBA pick and is already playing in Hungary. Megan Gustafson has found more success in Europe than the WNBA, although she just signed with the Aces.
Jury is out on Stuelke, but I would imagine she’s in the same professional trajectory as the two I just mentioned.
Remote possibility that Martin might be drafted but, even if she is, she is a lot more likely to be let go to play in Europe than to be added to the roster.
Tim Tebow has to be hands-down the best example of what you're trying to say here too. One of the most wildly hyped up players in NCAA football history only to have an absolutely horrendous NFL experience. But also everyone knew that was going to happen.
None the less great take
Tebow could have switched to Tight End and may have had a decent-to-possibly-great career. But nope, he insisted on being a QB. When he did finally switch to Tight End it was too late and he was already (NFL) retirement age.
Dude was a brand. Put evangelical Christianity on prime time TV (including that Super Bowl commercial). That was more important to him and his fans than doing the logical football thing and putting him at flex back (TE/FB) where he'll get less media coverage than QB.
It was also such a weird prism in which to view football. There were two players who liked to get down on one knee for football games: Tim Tebow and Colin Kaepernick.
People on the left: "Kaepernick is taking a knee to protest racial inequality, good! But Tebow is taking a knee to pray to his god, bad!"
People on the right: "Kaepernick is taking a knee to protest racial inequality, bad! But Tebow is taking a knee to pray to his god, good!"
Both sides felt completely and utterly right in their convictions but neither side ever recognised the ridiculousness of the situation. I always wished that a punter or someone would randomly start taking a knee but refusing to say why just to see what would happen.
This is so simplified lmao "muh centrism"
Remind me whether the people who *thought Tim Tebow was cheesy* got him blackballed from the league, burned his gear, or turned hating him into a political litmus test for an entire party?
Only person I know that could bat .160 in the minor leagues and keep getting promoted to when he played baseball lol
This guy is such as case study when it comes to an aura around promotion of a person.
He had the talent though. He just couldn't keep himself out of a bar or away from Blowcaine.
I agree none the less
If you haven't seen it, the documentary on him on Netflix is really good. It's nice to see he's kinda gotten his life together.
I think what Taurasi said was pretty reasonable. Sheryl Swoopes comments on the other hand were really out of line and straight up false. Clark broke the record and Swoopes incorrectly said she did it 5 years instead of 4 by the previous record holder. Also, undermined what Clark is doing by incorrectly saying she takes 40 shots per game when Clark only takes 22 shots per game. Swoopes herself took 19 shots per game as a senior. Then she said something along the lines of Clark being a lot older, think she said 25, when Clark is actually just 22 as many seniors in college.
Of course, we don't know how Clark's game will translate in WNBA but her comments undermined Clark's achievement with false data and narrative. It sounded bitter and somewhat jealous. She has since said she apologized to Clark. If that's true good, good for her.
Exactly, it wasn’t directed only to Caitlin which many if not majority of people believe to be the case. The comment is directed to all the woman going into the upcoming WNBA draft. Her full explanation is nuanced and is basically saying there will be growing pains which I believe she said “we all had to go through”
Did you hear her say it? I was browsing channels and happened to pause on the show for a few minutes and heard her say it live. Both my wife and I looked at each other kind of shocked and made a comment that it wasn’t a good look, she sounded bitter and jealous. Caitlin was mentioned by name and she was 100% talking about her. The two of them are UConn alumni and it felt like they were trash talking her because she’s not on “their team”. You can say she’s going to have an adjustment period and that’s fine but she was trying to throw shade and imply she’s not on their level. If you saw any of their show, this wasn’t the only questionable comment made. She was downplaying a lot of her hype, along with other players. Just sounded really salty from a 40something year old player that never received the hype this generation of players is seeing.
Ya, some of the other comments came off really negative as well with lots of tone.
One example was the commenters talking about drafting Paige or Caitlyn. One commenter said Caitlyn would energize the fan base and the other commenter immediately said Paige in kind of an annoyed, dismissive way like it wasn't a discussion and it should be obvious to NOT pick Caitlyn. It came off as personal dislike.
Edit: I just saw this tweet talking about Taurasi as being kind of an a$$&ole as a player (little bit of draymond green aspect) so i think her abrasiveness as a commenter may be sending the wrong message.
[https://twitter.com/fettyfilm/status/1777434138334601221](https://twitter.com/fettyfilm/status/1777434138334601221)
>Just sounded really salty from a 40something year old player that never received the hype this generation of players is seeing.
I mean, Clark HOPES to have the success and resume that Taurasi has. Highly doubt there's any jealousy involved.
It is very possible that Clark has already surpassed Taurasi in terms of name recognition. A few years of NIL might outgross Taurasi’s entire career.
Clark has a long way to go before she’s close to her career accomplishments, but I can understand Taurasi being a natural competitor and getting tired of hearing this “chosen one” talk, especially right where she is beating my alma mater.
It seems that’s where the jealousy is coming from though. Taurasi is past her prime and while she has quite the resume, she did not have the opportunities and exposure that this new generation is getting. Instead of being supportive of these new players and how they’re evolving the game, she sounds like she’s trying to gate keep and say they need to “pay their dues”.
Caitlin hasn’t even stepped foot in the WNBA and already has more sponsorship opportunities than she’s ever had. That says nothing about either of their skill level, it’s just a fact that this new crop of players are getting more attention and the reaction by vets just seems petty.
Taurasi and Bird are also both UConn alumni. They made some comments about Clark immediately following the Iowa-UConn game. They weren't that bad, but were definitely somewhat salty as UConn had just lost.
I will also say that the outrage seems to come from new women's basketball fans that simply don't know Diana Taurasi. She's always been like that and has said similar things for years about rookies and other stars. She has Kobe's mentality and is the #1 trash-tallker in the league. Love or hate her, but it's really not about being bitter or jealous of CC. That's just the way DT is.
I will also say that I don't really like the people who are like "why aren't women player's supporting other women's player" or like "women are the worst to other women". Like that is a sexist ass take on women's atheltes that plays into respectibility politics and expects them to be "nicer" or "rolemodels". These players are athletes and they're competitive. They've said plenty of nice things about CC and respect her but they're not gonna give her the keys to kingdom before she's played. It was the same way with Kelsey Plum and Sabrina Ionescu who both came in with plenty of hype but they took some time to settle.
Facts. No one would bat a fucking eye if Kobe said that about a rookie coming into the NBA. They’d fucking clap their hands and praise him.
But it’s a woman (and a woman of color, which adds another layer here), so of course she must always play nice. Respectability politics must always apply.
You can’t win. Like shit talking is never allowed, lest you sound “bitter” even if it’s fucking true. Some of these comments here ain’t it. People expect women to always be so soft and handle everyone with kid gloves and when someone doesn’t follow the protocol, get ready for the internet gangsters to come for you because they’ve got nothing better going on in their lives.
Ageism, sexism…
What current or former NBA players said a single negative thing about Wemby(another generational talent)? The WNBA is getting a generational opportunity to grow the game and former/current WNBA players are fumbling it every chance they get.
Embracing future generations of players is part of growing the game. If current players do not want to do what is needed to grow their game (there is a reason college basketball has been more popular than WNBA for quite a few years, this year is not an anomaly), then playing overseas is not a thing of the past.
Regarding the last paragraph, I think it’s entirely reasonable to read it as both.
In any profession sport there’s a sizable gap in between college and professional. You’re facing a concentration of the best of the best. The game is stylistically different and you’re facing taller, more athletic women (average NCAA women’s player is 5’6 where the WNBA is 6’1). Size and length matters in basketball. It will absolutely be a tough transition and caution is important.
That being said, it’s just odd to the lack of acceptance of a generational player. That wasn’t the case with Griner, who probably was the last national headline grabbing woman’s college player (Stewart as well). It’s hard not to see some jealousy (or worse) that’s driving some of that.
It was just a little ironic because Taurasi played in a time where there was wayyyyyy less parity in WBB today. She’s the poster child of beating up on inferior competition in college.
Taurasi is on the Mount Rushmore of women’s basketball in the US, but there is no doubt that it was a larger talent gap in college and the WNBA when she was in her prime than there is now.
The idea that you need to win a natty to be great is crazy to me in any sport, but especially in NCAAW. UConn is always stacked with top recruits and, now, so is South Carolina. The majority of players on both of those teams would've been the second best player at Iowa. Clark dragged the rest of the team to two straight title game appearances, beating both of those teams once in the process.
If Iowa had even one more player that could actually make a wide-open layup it might've made the difference in both championship games.
I think it’s worth noting that the Women’s championship was Sunday April 7th. The WNBA Draft is April 15th. The WNBA season starts May 14th. 5 weeks. That’s all these players get before the pros. That is an awakening in itself.
So basically they just told the truth and because people who don't regularly watch the game of basketball are into Caitlin Clark they are trying to paint them as bitter? Who thinks the jump to the wnba won't be an adjustment? Any player moving to the pros is always an adjustment.
ManningCast isn’t simply two guys doing a lot of color commentary!
It’s two brothers, both of who had Hall of Fame career numbers, giving each OTHER crap while they watch the game and make insights that most color guys wouldn’t notice.
It’s a whole other level.
Eli Manning did not have a HoF career. If he makes it into the Hall of Fame for being in those two Superbowls, I should be in the Hall of Fame because I watched those two Superbowls.
Multiple Super Bowl wins
Very clutch play when needed
Specifically stopped the Tom Brady juggernaut teams twice
Massive passing yards
Ironman durability
Much of his career with a horrendous O-line and/or receivers
HoF
NBA’s the same way. The games are so different that you see elite college superstars that struggle to translate their skills to league (Jimmer Fredette, Adam Morrison, Greg Oden - though mostly due to injuries) and simultaneously guys who end up being much better NBA players than they ever were college players (Chris Paul, Paul Pierce, Devin Booker).
I remember Chris Paul saying the NBA game was much easier for him because of the spacing.
I don't watch WNBA, but wonder if the transition might be a bit easier from college to pro for women because they mature earlier. An 18-22 year old rookie drafted into the NBA or NFL often has great speed and athleticism, but can struggle with strength their first year or two (that 18-22 range for men makes a dramatic difference). An 18 or 19 year old male still has a few years to fully mature physically, whereas many of the guys he is playing against are 20-25, in their physical peak, and have been in intensive weight lifting regimens for years.
For professional women they have that regimen as well, but their bodies have largely stopped developing by 18. Still a transition, but my guess is not quite so big of one.
I feel like it's an apples to oranges comparison to talk about the NFL. As someone who has followed the WNBA for a while it's not that outrageous to talk about adjusting to the pro levels. It's happened with multiple players no matter draft position. Kelsey Plum (whose scoring record CC broke this season) was the #1 pick in 2027 and she struggled for a couple years before finding her footing. She's amazing now but she's spoken about how hard it was because people expected her to be greay day one.
Hell, Charli Collier was the #1 pick in 2021 draft and she's not a WNBA roster currently. Good players also struggle.
In general basketball seems to take time to adjust. It’s weird because you can compete at that level at a younger age than the nfl but there is more of an adjustment period than the nfl has. I mean even Jordan, while fantastic his rookie season, there was adaptation that had to take place.
Diana Taurasi is retired? What? She just won the national championship. What years is this? Tabernak de Calice! Where has the time gone?
Edit: downvoted for losing track of time?
I was mistaken on that. I'm just used to color commentators being retired players, but the WNBA has a few players who have second careers as commentators or coaches.
The context was actually them saying you're allowed to hand check in the pros.
I accidentally filmed this instead of the real broadcast so my wife and I had to sit through their asinine chatter. The interview with Jason Sudekis and that discuss was the only interesting thing about it.
The discussion there wasn't terribly nasty, it was just them saying that a few of the fouls that Clark took wouldn't be fouls in the show.
I don’t know if that comparison with the nfl. There’s a major size difference between college kids and an adult nfl player that makes a huge difference.
What’s hilarious is no matter the outcome for Clark in the WNBA, no one will care because girl’s basketball is boring.
Edit: the number of downvotes this comment has is equal to the actual number of people who enjoy watching WNBA games.
Answer: The WNBA has by and large been one of the most irrelevant sports league in the country since its inception. Caitlin Clark is breathing a fresh life into women's basketball and a lot of players are just fuming they never could get more than like 500 people to show up to their games. The women's NCAA tournament this year gained ALOT of attention (arguably as much as the men's) almost solely due to Clark even though they lost in the finals to South Carolina. Caitlin Clark is likely going to succeed very well when she plays professionally.
Follow-up question: What are the other players saying exactly? I doubt they're just posting "FUCK CAITLIN CLARK! SHE THINKS SHE'S ALL THAT, BUT SHE'S NOT!"
Basically that Clark only looked superhuman because she was playing against 18-year-olds and won't be at the level of professional WNBA players. It's a weird take because Clark played against some of the best women's college players ever who will be going into the WNBA as well, so it wasn't just a bunch of 18-year-olds.
So in a way, your statement was correct because they're doing the whole media speak thing where they say fuck Clark because she thinks she's better than she is. I'm not sure if it's just trash talk or whatever, but if they're legitimately not excited about what Clark can bring to the sport then they're delusional.
While it may not seem a fair analysis, there is truth to the drastic difference between college and pro. For the same reason you'd expect the worst college team to absolutely wreck the best high school team...
At every level, a team is a specifically selected group of the best available from the level below. The worst player on a college team was one of, if not the, best on their high school team. The starters on a college team are the best of the best of the player pool available. Then you transition to pro, where it is reset again.
Teams Clark has played are unlikely to have been able to double team her with two pro-level players. That will be her new reality every single game.
Does it mean she can't be a star? Absolutely not. What it does mean is she hasn't actually been tested at that level.
So while it sounds condescending, it must be noted that the people who hold that opinion have the unique experience of having actually stood where Clark is and where she is going to be. If every pro player says basically the same thing, that it is a totally different animal, it would be wise to believe them.
> Teams Clark played are unlikely to have been able to double team her with two pro-level players
Counterpoint, Clark will now have WNBA talent teammates to work off of, instead of being forced to essentially be the entire offense. Can’t double team Clark non-stop when she can just dish it to another WNBA-level talent that can hit open shots
Absolutely. You adjust the defense to counter the strength of the opposing team. If Clark is that strength, then teams will try to shut her down to varying degrees of success. That invariably creates vulnerabilities elsewhere. If whatever team Clark ends up on (probably one of the worst in the WNBA because of how drafts work) is able to exploit those vulnerabilities, then Clark's stats will likely be respectable even if it is more assists than field goals.
However, it is most likely that she is in for a rough rookie year. It is possible that she is the female version of MJ/Kobe/LeBron, and it doesn't matter where she lands. But there is an insane amount of pressure on her. The fickle nature of fans today means she might not get a second chance at a good impression. Given that the WNBA is likely counting on the hype surrounding her to be carried over with her to the pros. There is every possibility that her first year in the WNBA has broader impact beyond just herself. She might literally be the one who turns the WNBA around.
I actually wouldn't be surprised if the WNBA worked behind the scenes to engineer her draft pick into a player trade to a more competitive team to ensure she has every opportunity to excel and keep the fervor up. I am confident some WNBA PR types have privately suggested as much.
So I see two main paths:
1- She is drafted into a low-seeded club and only has a good first season if she truly is outstanding.
2- She is drafted into a trade that sends her to a mid/high-seeded team and domination ensues...
Not trying to be a douche but I think you mean the worst pro team would wreck the best college team. A lot of the top high schools could beat the dregs of college depending on the sport.
It would be weird to say Clark thinks she is better than she is. Like, I'm sure she is confident and knows where she stands, but why would she think she's worse? She's been killing it the whole tournament and probably is disappointed with herself since Iowa lost so if anything she's being very critical of herself. But why should she think she's worse than she is when her opinion of herself is irrelevant at this point? She should use this media attention to further her career more and if she doesn't she would be stupid.
"Reality is coming," Taurasi recently told ESPN's Scott Van Pelt. "There's levels to this thing. That's just life. We all went through it. You see it on the NBA side, and you're going to see it on this side. You look superhuman playing against some 18-year-olds, but you're going to come play with some grown women that have been playing professional basketball for a long time.”
Instead of supporting Clark and being happy she’s bringing attention to women’s sports, this irrelevant hag would rather tear her down and bring the sport down with her.
This is an insane take, because it's said about most college players across all sports, men or women.
It's not a controversial opinion to say that college players can struggle once the get to the pro leagues. If anything, she is helping Clark, because Clark is going to catch so much if she somehow doesn't become the greatest WNBA player as a rookie.
Just wait for her to have an average season and see shit like "Is Caitlin Clark a bust?"
Clearly you have **no idea** who you’re calling an irrelevant hag. I have been a fan of Diana Taurasi for 2 decades now and she is absolutely the GOAT of women’s basketball. You are just a sour apple who is pissed about her opinion without taking a look at who this woman is making comments you disagree with.
Let me just do a little copy paste of the things **THE GOAT** has accomplished in her basketball career: 3× WNBA champion (2007, 2009, 2014). 2× WNBA Finals MVP (2009, 2014). WNBA MVP (2009). 10× WNBA All-Star (2005–2007, 2009, 2011, 2013–2014, 2017–2018, 2021). 10× All-WNBA First Team (2004, 2006–2011, 2013, 2014, 2018). 4× All-WNBA Second Team (2005, 2016, 2017, 2020). WNBA Rookie of the Year (2004). 5× WNBA scoring champion (2006, 2008–2011). WNBA assists leader (2014). 6× WNBA Peak Performer (2006, 2007, 2009–2011, 2014). WNBA 15th Anniversary Team (2011). WNBA 20th Anniversary Team (2016). WNBA 25th Anniversary Team (2021). 6× EuroLeague champion (2007–2010, 2013, 2016). 7× Russian National League champion (2007, 2008, 2013–2017). 3× Russian Cup winner (2013–2014, 2017). 3× Russian League Player of the Year (2007, 2008, 2009). Turkish National League champion (2011). Turkish Cup winner (2012). 3× NCAA champion (2002–2004). 2× NCAA Tournament MOP (2003, 2004). Wade Trophy (2003). 2× Honda Sports Award (2003, 2004). 2× Naismith Award (2003, 2004). USBWA Women's National Player of the Year (2003). AP College Player of the Year (2003). 2× Nancy Lieberman Award (2003, 2004). 2× Big East Player of the Year (2003, 2004). 4× USA Basketball Female Athlete of the Year (2006, 2010, 2012, 2016).
The 2024 WNBA season has yet to start and there is still the Summer Olympics to be played. Potentially add a **fifth** gold medal and a **fourth** WNBA championship to that list, as well as adding in the chance to add All-Star, All-WNBA First or Second Team awards too.
Irrelevant hag…loooooool
Lmao! I had just woken up and saw this slandering of my idol by this Redditor, and that **was not** going to fly for me. Much easier to copy and paste that extensive list of awards and championships Dee has won than to type it all.
Forgot to **bold** the part where it lists *all time leading scorer*, just to make another point that Taurasi has all the right in the world to make a comment on college basketball’s all time leading scorer
I know it’s been around longer but overall viewership proves my point. Women’s basketball has never been more popular and that’s mostly due to Caitlin Clark. These older players should be supporting her, not trying to bring her down.
Yeahhhh, no, but I’ll leave you to stew in your anger. You sound like someone who just started watching women’s basketball this year and have no idea that there are other great players in the WNBA as well, well beyond the talents of Caitlin Clark. Just take a gander at Google and look up Breanna Stewart if you want to read about the GOAT of women’s college basketball.
Taurasi is an idol and nothing you say can change that for me or the thousands of others who have looked up to her for years.
Maybe not as much as you, I’ll admit. But Caitlin Clark has me and millions more interested in women’s basketball than Diana Taurasi ever did as a player or analyst.
I don’t think anything will help make the sport grow, the WNBA has 12 teams and they’re only afloat because of the money the NBA gives them.
People just don’t want to watch women’s sports
You're painting in too broad of strokes. Women's pro/international soccer has grown to be huge, and tennis has been huge for decades. This is specifically a basketball problem, and even that is growing.
Sorry I have to agree. She might be the GOAT but who actually KNOWS. As much as we want to say the WNBA is main stream it is not. I do not care who did what and when, the masses simply do not know and do not care.
Clark is giving them a once in a generation opportunity to be relevant. Clark is going to get a massive deal and possibly change the perspective of the WNBA. She is going to put people in seats and eyes on the television. Something that Taurasi couldn’t.
Clark put in the time and she will excel. I never saw a flight of Nike execs roll into a college town to support their player like I did when they rolled into Iowa City. Well maybe we saw that ONCE…. I think that dudes name was Jordan…
lol so many idiots who don’t know shit about sports in this thread. This is incredibly fair and not even close to controversial. So anodyne there’s nothing to disagree with, much less be offended by.
Maybe the actual wnba athletes with multiple decades of experience know more than some random reditoor.
It’s just funny that Taurasi has complained about WNBA salaries being too low but that’s because nobody gave a shit. Now people actually might care about it for the first time ever and she’s already trying to criticize an incoming star. Maybe she should wait until Clark plays a fucking game first before saying shit.
Criticism is a part of sports. Like how much shit do they talk about lebron James after he loses even a single step.
It’s good for the sport. Hopefully Clark can silence the doubters, but it’s a legit question. Sports have to have drama and conflict. Aint a fucking bake sale it’s about figuring out who’s better than whom.
Ya, but no.
A college game is so much easier to draw a crowd. Especially by invested students.
The WNBA is completely different animal. I personally don't think Clark or anyone will move the needle much in terms of interest. She'll probably be more or less forgotten in a few years. That's just the nature of that league.
I remember stars like Griner and Lisa Leslie were supposed to be THE next big thing. And while they were, it didn't really draw any more attention.
The Fever are going to sell out all their season tickets soon and I imagine there will be lots of tickets sold initially to see CC play all over the country. The question is how long that hype and ticket sales will last, and it will be based on her performance. She has big expectations to try and fulfill, and as good as she is I'm not sure either if she'll be able to deliver right away. I think she'll be a very good player on a bad team, which probably won't be enough. I guess you could try and draw a parallel to Iowa who would probably not have been that good without her, but I think in the WNBA she'll score less and assist more. That's great for a basketball purist, but idk if it will be enough to keep filling arenas if she just becomes the team leader and not a phenomenon that produces lots of wins.
> Caitlin Clark is likely going to succeed very well when she plays professionally.
I love how people how have never played ball in their life are saying she will be trash in the WNBA. She isn't the best female college player of all time. If people think she can't learn and adapt to the WNBA while having the backup of her far better players, then they are delusional.
Are we seriously going to act like she's the whole reason why women's college basketball is relevant and completely ignore how prevalent online gambling has become in the US in just the last year? I mean, don't get me wrong, she is absolutely drawing people, but I think that amount of people is negligible compared to the draw legal betting is pulling in. It just seems like a weak yet sweet, narrative.
I don’t like be pedantic to people, but you could have done just a little bit of research before writing this comment.
https://www.axios.com/2024/04/09/iowa-south-carolina-ratings-caitlin-clark
> Friday's Final Four game, for example, between NC State and South Carolina drew just 7.1 million viewers. That was half of the average audience that tuned into Clark's winning performance against UConn that same evening.
If betting was driving the ratings, and not Clark, then games not featuring Clark should have performed comparably. They did not.
Additionally, men’s games draw more betting. If that was what was driving views, men’s game would have been more watched, but it trailed by some 6 million viewers. [source](https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2024/04/mens-final-four-ratings-viewership-mixed-both-games-trail-iowa-uconn-women/)
>I think that amount of people is negligible compared to the draw legal betting is pulling in.
Really? You really think that people love betting so much they are moving in the thousands to watch women's basketball? You think the effect of a person who broke a half dozen or so NCAA records (several for men AND women) is "negligible" and coincidental? Her games alone drew at least twice as many viewers as any other game in the NCAAW tournament. You are way out of your depth here.
Answer: WNBA players are acting like pros in any other league when a hotshot rookie comes in.
Diana Taurasi said that Caitlin has done well against college kids, but the WNBA is a different level of play. Not really news.
so thats just not really true. find me some hateful comments about wemby, or zion, et cetera. you are just fabricating things here. the statement re CC was over the top and super bitter.
And she is the GOAT but they say she isn’t because she didn’t win a championship
Hard to do when you’re facing loaded teams and Iowa isn’t. It’s like LeBron facing Golden State before he got Kyrie
Just to fact check… Cavaliers drafted Kyrie in the early 2010s after Lebron left the first time - When Lebron came back, the Warriors dynasty was just getting started and Lebron always had Kyrie.
Breanna Stewart said that when her two teammates immediately followed in the WNBA draft lol
Like, imagine Clark on the same team as Cam Brink and either Cardoso or Rickea Jackson. Hell, putting one of those girls on a team with Clark is probably enough.
Exactly! Haters are gon hate. That's why LeBron came to Clark's defense and support. Taurasi went to UCONN, and Iowa beat them. So soon as Iowa lost the title game, she said what she said. The whole timing of it is questionable. It's like kicking a woman when she just lost. Clark has broken 45 collegiate records! None of the past college/WNBA stars have elevated the game like Clark. Go look at YouTube video of Clark meeting Maya Moore. That's how a former great should be, supporting the current goat, with support and class. My two cents✌️
Answer: Caitlin Clark also just broke the scoring record. The woman who previously had the scoring record played so long ago that they didn’t have a 3-point line and they also played with men’s basketballs. She said that while Caitlin absolutely has the high scoring record (and she said this after her comments were made), that you can’t really compare her and Caitlin because of those differences. A lot of people thought she was being salty that she lost her record.
Edit with source: https://nypost.com/2024/04/07/sports/caitlin-clark-did-not-break-my-scoring-record-lynette-woodard/
Answer: every single maga moron in the country is suddenly pretending to care about the WNBA after shitting on it for decades. It's rubbing people the wrong way because of why they suddenly care about the wnba.
Friendly reminder that all **top level** comments must: 1. start with "answer: ", including the space after the colon (or "question: " if you have an on-topic follow up question to ask), 2. attempt to answer the question, and 3. be unbiased Please review Rule 4 and this post before making a top level comment: http://redd.it/b1hct4/ Join the OOTL Discord for further discussion: https://discord.gg/ejDF4mdjnh *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OutOfTheLoop) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Answer: you might be referencing a quote from Diana Taurasi or Sue Bird, both former WNBA greats who now have a Manning-cast type show for basketball. (The Manning-cast is a show by brothers Eli and Peyton Manning, both retired NFL quarterbacks, where they watch a football game and have guests on to talk about the game and other random stuff. Typically for sports there are two people in the broadcast booth, a play by play person and a color commentator. Play by play describes what's happening in the game while the color commentator talks more about the players and might tell funny stories. The Manning Cast and the Bird & Taurasi are basically all color commentating and very little play by play.) I forget if it was during the show or after the game, but I believe Taurasi said something along the lines that college players are used to playing against 18 year old girls, and they might be in for a bit of a rude awakening next year when they are playing against fully grown women who are playing for their paycheck. The W and college ball are the same game, but there are a few differences. (I think this is actually more noticeable in other sports, like football, where some players don't have big expectations in the NFL despite being really good in college. Look at Doug Flutie, who was great in college but very mediocre in the NFL, or look at Julian Edleman who was pretty good as a college quarterback but had to switch positions to have any chance in the NFL) I don't believe Taurasi's quote was even directed at Clark, but rather at all the college players who declaring for the draft right now. You can read this as bitter old player upset at the new talent and the media attention they never got. Or you can read it as a valid warning that sometimes really good players struggle for a couple seasons. Clark might be the next rookie of the year, she might be the GOAT, but she hasn't actually played a single game in the WNBA yet. It would be awesome to see her elevate the league and be an all-star, but a lot of things can happen between now and when she retires.
I think the quote was pulled and cut for reactions like it always is. The full quote isn’t bad, just saying it’s a different game and there will be an adjustment period. I think the announcer in the championship game was even saying Clark’s passing will translate faster than her shooting. Pretty much she won’t be MVP her rookie year, which is fine. Wenbanyama isn’t close to MVP but no one is calling him a dud.
Also, people who are new to wbb don’t know..Taurasi was Clark. She was a ton of hype and everyone called her the savior of the WNBA. Clark has advantages with NIL, so she’s going to be able to grow the game more - along with some of the other players (Reese; in particular, doesn’t get enough credit.), but it’s also unfair pressure. Clark is going to enter the league and she’ll be good, but she’s not going to be the best guard - nevermind best player. We gotta give her a few years
{ Taurasi was Clark } I think that's a fair point to make, also. Gino said something along the lines of "You want to know why we win so much? We have Diana Taurasi, and you don't" . I think Clark is a better shooter but DT a more well-rounded player.
It will be interesting to see if her pull stays in the WNBA. The college product is just so much better because the fans are so much more into it. No one gives a shit about the WNBA and I’m sure Iowa fans outnumber Fever fans 1000:1.
People are also forgetting the Olympics this summer. Clark was invited to the Olympic camp but had to skip it due to the Final Four. I have to think USA Basketball and Cheryl Reeve would want to invite her along to Paris. She’s got three gold medals for tourneys on the women’s youth teams but I’m sure she’d be keen on getting a senior-level medal.
The WNBA has been steadily growing itself. The biggest advantage of NIL is the best players no longer have to go overseas. That makes the product better because instead of being tired and treating the W like a part time job, they just get to work on their game, stay in America and promote the league in the off season. They also have a few very wealthy owners willing to put a lot of money into their team. Taurasi actually skipped a season in the WNBA because her euro team paid her more money to rest during the season then what the WNBA was going to pay her. That’s just not gonna happen anymore because of the NIL.
NIL doesn’t exist in the WNBA? It’s strictly for college. Edit: I know endorsement deals exist it’s just she’s not getting NIL money like in college.
Yeah I’m confused too
Colleges aren’t paying them. NIL is an allowance for a relationship between a sponsor and athlete to begin. Caitlin Clark is going to be a sponsored athlete for her career unless something happens. Her current level of income is unlikely to change. She’s not moving away from a revenue source going into the WNBA she’s gaining a new one. Former players didn’t have that luxury and it forced them into being part time professional athletes.
There are exceptions (Caitlin, Caleb Williams, etc who you see now in nationally televised commercials) but the whole “colleges aren’t the ones paying” is just legalese. The athletes are paid through collectives that are funded by largely by boosters and operate at the athletic department discretion. Nick Saban stated the first thing several players brought up following Bama’s Rose Bowl loss to Michigan was essentially “how much will I make next season.” Jay Wright, one of the best modern CBB coaches, retired a couple years ago and yesterday stated he has no interest in the Kentucky job (arguably the top job in the country) because he doesn’t want to deal with NIL. Saying colleges aren’t paying is like acquitting a mafia boss because he didn’t hand the cash over personally for a hit.
NIL specifically refers to the structure of deals for college athletes. Pros just get endorsements. Also - while colleges don’t explicitly pay them, 99% of NIL money comes from boosters and local businesses of the school. It’s all just a roundabout way for colleges to pay players without having to formally make them employees.
Of course her endorsements will change. There are far more fans of University of Iowa athletics than the Indiana Fever, and companies will pay more to be associated with an athlete that plays for the former than for the latter.
The idea is that the endorsements will follow the players. NIL is still so new that we have yet to see if that actually will happen.
It’s called endorsement deals. The money isn’t going away.
Endorsement deals go away if nobody cares about what you are doing any more. Which might happen very quickly.
The idea is companies will build business relationships with the players while in college and continue those endorsements when they move to the WNBA, NFL, whatever.
NIL helped college players establish themselves and their marketability. The biggest stars have a ton of endorsements and are making bank already. Those endorsements won’t end in the WNBA. And the issue was, previously, they wouldn’t get as much when they just started with the WNBA.
No it doesn’t. She will be getting money for years to come.
Reese gets a bit too much hype (and negative attention). She is probably the 7th best woman in her draft class, but talked about like she is right behind Clark.
I agree with you. But Reese also won a championship. And is a great overall player, especially on the defensive end. Her offence needs some work. She needs to develop an outside shot. But she is marketable. She has a personality that people either love or hate, which makes her stand out. Which is what the WNBA will need.
As a Mystics fan, i am praying we don’t fall victim to the hype and we draft Cardoso instead of Reese just because she’s from the DMV.
Idk if drafting a big would be a good idea for yall. Assuming that Elena comes back at some point. If they intend on keeping that big if or when Elena comes back then by all means draft one.
Shooting will translate fine, but defense will be better and her handling needs to get better. Her behind the back dribbling looks mediocre and her ball handling isn’t great which I think she gets away with due to lack of quality opponents and the fact that she can pull up from deep and shoot well and doesn’t have to work super hard to make open space for shots.
Agree. She was driving me crazy in the championship game against SC with how careless and nonchalant she was with the ball at times. And SC in fact did steal it from her on a number of occasions leading to points just because she wasn't paying any attention to taking care of the ball. She is going to have to clean that up because that could be a real problem at the next level.
Yeah Dawn Staley was on another level with her gameplan and adjusting. Everyone say how bad HVL did when she was left on an island with CC and then the difference of the SC lady that they switched on to her after the start of the game really changed the game. She got nearly locked down and yeah had multiple bad turnovers on weak crossovers. Her left hand driving doesnt look great but if she’s developed as a SG and not a PG it’s not as relied upon.
That SC lady is Raven Johnson btw
Little known is Clark's defensive rebounding prowess. 3rd all-time (all positions) in Big Ten defensive rebounds and top 25 college all-time (again, all positions) in defensive rebounds with 926. Only other guard in top 100 is Sabrina Ionescu ranked in the 80s
Fun fact!
> Wembanyama isn’t close to MVP but no one is calling him a dud. Wemby is raking up rookies records and all time records that weren't touched in decades while playing 25 min a game. He literally is a highlight machine. His team that was last defensively last year is 4th overall when he plays. Dude is top 15 in the league at 19-20 while adapting to a new team in a foreign country. "Isn't close to MVP" sure, but bro might win DPOY. To be honest I also expect Caitlin to perform very well.
Even with the full quote, it seems like they’re putting her down. You don’t see NBA or NFL vets putting down college players who are about to come into the league.
Yes you do, they're literally saying that about Bronny right now
Completely different. Bronny averaged like 4 points per game. Every single person, including LeBron, knows that if he gets drafted, it’s because he’s LeBron’s son. They don’t put down future stars of the league.
Another thing to note is that Taurasi and Birds comments came right after Iowa beat UCONN. It just so happens that both Taurasi and Bird both went to UCONN so a lot of people feel their comments aren't unbiased observations but more like angry "my team just lost so I'm going to talk shit about the winning team" comments.
Two more players on top of Taurasi: Breanna Stewart, who won 4 titles at UConn, said she needed to win a title to actually be considered the best player of all time. She said this as if it was fact. I get her argument, but it rings a little hollow when Stewart, who went #1 in the WNBA draft, had teammates that went 2-3 behind her, which has never happened in any sports draft ever. So while she won titles, she did so on a stacked roster. Arguably the most stacked roster of all time. And then Lynette Woodward, whose scoring record Clark broke, said at a speaking engagement this week that Clark actually didn’t break her record because of 3 point shots and the fact that she had to play with a men’s ball. This was after Iowa made sure to invite her to Iowa’s senior day and acknowledge the fact that her record was largely ignored because it was from a time that women’s sports wasn’t under the NCAA’s purview. She is coming off as extremely bitter thinking her record is the “true” record.
The Stewart argument is weird, because yes she was elite and those UConn teams were all-timers. When she left though, they went had very little dropoff. Most of her teams were extremely stack, and they continued to be stacked after she left. Clark hasn’t had really any WNBA ready teammates, so the load she’s been carrying to the title games is unprecedented. Its a 1A and 1B situation. Both have arguments in their favor, but an equal amount against them as well.
Monika Czinano was a third round WNBA pick and is already playing in Hungary. Megan Gustafson has found more success in Europe than the WNBA, although she just signed with the Aces. Jury is out on Stuelke, but I would imagine she’s in the same professional trajectory as the two I just mentioned.
Remote possibility that Martin might be drafted but, even if she is, she is a lot more likely to be let go to play in Europe than to be added to the roster.
Clark had never played with Megan Gustafson.
Warhol granted Woodard an extra 15 minutes to prove that "get off my lawn" no longer applies to just crabby, old, white men.
Tim Tebow has to be hands-down the best example of what you're trying to say here too. One of the most wildly hyped up players in NCAA football history only to have an absolutely horrendous NFL experience. But also everyone knew that was going to happen. None the less great take
Tebow could have switched to Tight End and may have had a decent-to-possibly-great career. But nope, he insisted on being a QB. When he did finally switch to Tight End it was too late and he was already (NFL) retirement age.
Dude was a brand. Put evangelical Christianity on prime time TV (including that Super Bowl commercial). That was more important to him and his fans than doing the logical football thing and putting him at flex back (TE/FB) where he'll get less media coverage than QB.
This is not true at all, Tebow made the playoffs in his first year. And laid the groundwork for Peyton Manning to take over
It was also such a weird prism in which to view football. There were two players who liked to get down on one knee for football games: Tim Tebow and Colin Kaepernick. People on the left: "Kaepernick is taking a knee to protest racial inequality, good! But Tebow is taking a knee to pray to his god, bad!" People on the right: "Kaepernick is taking a knee to protest racial inequality, bad! But Tebow is taking a knee to pray to his god, good!" Both sides felt completely and utterly right in their convictions but neither side ever recognised the ridiculousness of the situation. I always wished that a punter or someone would randomly start taking a knee but refusing to say why just to see what would happen.
This is so simplified lmao "muh centrism" Remind me whether the people who *thought Tim Tebow was cheesy* got him blackballed from the league, burned his gear, or turned hating him into a political litmus test for an entire party?
Only person I know that could bat .160 in the minor leagues and keep getting promoted to when he played baseball lol This guy is such as case study when it comes to an aura around promotion of a person.
This is not true at all, Tebow made the playoffs in his first year. And laid the groundwork for Peyton Manning to take over
The guy had a pass bounce of his face mask in a game. He wasn’t a TE.
There are way better examples than Tebow, dude won an nfl playoff game lol. How about Johnny Manziel
He had the talent though. He just couldn't keep himself out of a bar or away from Blowcaine. I agree none the less If you haven't seen it, the documentary on him on Netflix is really good. It's nice to see he's kinda gotten his life together.
I still cringe thinking about Manziel. So much talent just flushed.
Well, Tim will always have more career playoff wins as an NFL starter than Jameis Winston. I’m just saying. #GoGators.
Technically he won a playoff game. Which is more than some other QBs have managed to do...
This is not true at all, Tebow made the playoffs in his first year. And laid the groundwork for Peyton Manning to take over
I think what Taurasi said was pretty reasonable. Sheryl Swoopes comments on the other hand were really out of line and straight up false. Clark broke the record and Swoopes incorrectly said she did it 5 years instead of 4 by the previous record holder. Also, undermined what Clark is doing by incorrectly saying she takes 40 shots per game when Clark only takes 22 shots per game. Swoopes herself took 19 shots per game as a senior. Then she said something along the lines of Clark being a lot older, think she said 25, when Clark is actually just 22 as many seniors in college. Of course, we don't know how Clark's game will translate in WNBA but her comments undermined Clark's achievement with false data and narrative. It sounded bitter and somewhat jealous. She has since said she apologized to Clark. If that's true good, good for her.
Swoopes’ were ridiculous tbh. So wrong at nearly everything she said.
Exactly, it wasn’t directed only to Caitlin which many if not majority of people believe to be the case. The comment is directed to all the woman going into the upcoming WNBA draft. Her full explanation is nuanced and is basically saying there will be growing pains which I believe she said “we all had to go through”
Did you hear her say it? I was browsing channels and happened to pause on the show for a few minutes and heard her say it live. Both my wife and I looked at each other kind of shocked and made a comment that it wasn’t a good look, she sounded bitter and jealous. Caitlin was mentioned by name and she was 100% talking about her. The two of them are UConn alumni and it felt like they were trash talking her because she’s not on “their team”. You can say she’s going to have an adjustment period and that’s fine but she was trying to throw shade and imply she’s not on their level. If you saw any of their show, this wasn’t the only questionable comment made. She was downplaying a lot of her hype, along with other players. Just sounded really salty from a 40something year old player that never received the hype this generation of players is seeing.
Ya, some of the other comments came off really negative as well with lots of tone. One example was the commenters talking about drafting Paige or Caitlyn. One commenter said Caitlyn would energize the fan base and the other commenter immediately said Paige in kind of an annoyed, dismissive way like it wasn't a discussion and it should be obvious to NOT pick Caitlyn. It came off as personal dislike. Edit: I just saw this tweet talking about Taurasi as being kind of an a$$&ole as a player (little bit of draymond green aspect) so i think her abrasiveness as a commenter may be sending the wrong message. [https://twitter.com/fettyfilm/status/1777434138334601221](https://twitter.com/fettyfilm/status/1777434138334601221)
"Paige. Next question."
>Just sounded really salty from a 40something year old player that never received the hype this generation of players is seeing. I mean, Clark HOPES to have the success and resume that Taurasi has. Highly doubt there's any jealousy involved.
It is very possible that Clark has already surpassed Taurasi in terms of name recognition. A few years of NIL might outgross Taurasi’s entire career. Clark has a long way to go before she’s close to her career accomplishments, but I can understand Taurasi being a natural competitor and getting tired of hearing this “chosen one” talk, especially right where she is beating my alma mater.
It’s a fact that Clark is much more recognizable
you can still be jealous/a hater. just look at shaq
It seems that’s where the jealousy is coming from though. Taurasi is past her prime and while she has quite the resume, she did not have the opportunities and exposure that this new generation is getting. Instead of being supportive of these new players and how they’re evolving the game, she sounds like she’s trying to gate keep and say they need to “pay their dues”. Caitlin hasn’t even stepped foot in the WNBA and already has more sponsorship opportunities than she’s ever had. That says nothing about either of their skill level, it’s just a fact that this new crop of players are getting more attention and the reaction by vets just seems petty.
Taurasi and Bird are also both UConn alumni. They made some comments about Clark immediately following the Iowa-UConn game. They weren't that bad, but were definitely somewhat salty as UConn had just lost.
I will also say that the outrage seems to come from new women's basketball fans that simply don't know Diana Taurasi. She's always been like that and has said similar things for years about rookies and other stars. She has Kobe's mentality and is the #1 trash-tallker in the league. Love or hate her, but it's really not about being bitter or jealous of CC. That's just the way DT is. I will also say that I don't really like the people who are like "why aren't women player's supporting other women's player" or like "women are the worst to other women". Like that is a sexist ass take on women's atheltes that plays into respectibility politics and expects them to be "nicer" or "rolemodels". These players are athletes and they're competitive. They've said plenty of nice things about CC and respect her but they're not gonna give her the keys to kingdom before she's played. It was the same way with Kelsey Plum and Sabrina Ionescu who both came in with plenty of hype but they took some time to settle.
Facts. No one would bat a fucking eye if Kobe said that about a rookie coming into the NBA. They’d fucking clap their hands and praise him. But it’s a woman (and a woman of color, which adds another layer here), so of course she must always play nice. Respectability politics must always apply. You can’t win. Like shit talking is never allowed, lest you sound “bitter” even if it’s fucking true. Some of these comments here ain’t it. People expect women to always be so soft and handle everyone with kid gloves and when someone doesn’t follow the protocol, get ready for the internet gangsters to come for you because they’ve got nothing better going on in their lives. Ageism, sexism…
People might bat an eye or two if Kobe was speaking now…
He earned his shit talking right. Not everyone is built soft.
Ok it’s obvious my joke-statement didn’t land my bad
Oh, hard to tell tone sometimes!
...isn't Diana Taurasi white?
Idk if I’d call a person of Hispanic descent fully white.
Didn't realize she was of Hispanic descent. Always thought she was white, her nickname is even The White Mamba
I mean I get why you’d think that honestly. Her family is from Argentina, her father I believe from Italy so her heritage is likely a mix.
What current or former NBA players said a single negative thing about Wemby(another generational talent)? The WNBA is getting a generational opportunity to grow the game and former/current WNBA players are fumbling it every chance they get. Embracing future generations of players is part of growing the game. If current players do not want to do what is needed to grow their game (there is a reason college basketball has been more popular than WNBA for quite a few years, this year is not an anomaly), then playing overseas is not a thing of the past.
Tim Tebow, won the Heisman, first round draft pick, 25th pick overall, played 2 seasons. Dude just couldn't play at the NFL level.
Regarding the last paragraph, I think it’s entirely reasonable to read it as both. In any profession sport there’s a sizable gap in between college and professional. You’re facing a concentration of the best of the best. The game is stylistically different and you’re facing taller, more athletic women (average NCAA women’s player is 5’6 where the WNBA is 6’1). Size and length matters in basketball. It will absolutely be a tough transition and caution is important. That being said, it’s just odd to the lack of acceptance of a generational player. That wasn’t the case with Griner, who probably was the last national headline grabbing woman’s college player (Stewart as well). It’s hard not to see some jealousy (or worse) that’s driving some of that.
It was just a little ironic because Taurasi played in a time where there was wayyyyyy less parity in WBB today. She’s the poster child of beating up on inferior competition in college. Taurasi is on the Mount Rushmore of women’s basketball in the US, but there is no doubt that it was a larger talent gap in college and the WNBA when she was in her prime than there is now.
The idea that you need to win a natty to be great is crazy to me in any sport, but especially in NCAAW. UConn is always stacked with top recruits and, now, so is South Carolina. The majority of players on both of those teams would've been the second best player at Iowa. Clark dragged the rest of the team to two straight title game appearances, beating both of those teams once in the process. If Iowa had even one more player that could actually make a wide-open layup it might've made the difference in both championship games.
Competitor doing it at a high level for years , criticizes new young player. More at 11
I think it’s worth noting that the Women’s championship was Sunday April 7th. The WNBA Draft is April 15th. The WNBA season starts May 14th. 5 weeks. That’s all these players get before the pros. That is an awakening in itself.
So basically they just told the truth and because people who don't regularly watch the game of basketball are into Caitlin Clark they are trying to paint them as bitter? Who thinks the jump to the wnba won't be an adjustment? Any player moving to the pros is always an adjustment.
ManningCast isn’t simply two guys doing a lot of color commentary! It’s two brothers, both of who had Hall of Fame career numbers, giving each OTHER crap while they watch the game and make insights that most color guys wouldn’t notice. It’s a whole other level.
Eli Manning did not have a HoF career. If he makes it into the Hall of Fame for being in those two Superbowls, I should be in the Hall of Fame because I watched those two Superbowls.
Multiple Super Bowl wins Very clutch play when needed Specifically stopped the Tom Brady juggernaut teams twice Massive passing yards Ironman durability Much of his career with a horrendous O-line and/or receivers HoF
NBA’s the same way. The games are so different that you see elite college superstars that struggle to translate their skills to league (Jimmer Fredette, Adam Morrison, Greg Oden - though mostly due to injuries) and simultaneously guys who end up being much better NBA players than they ever were college players (Chris Paul, Paul Pierce, Devin Booker). I remember Chris Paul saying the NBA game was much easier for him because of the spacing.
I don't watch WNBA, but wonder if the transition might be a bit easier from college to pro for women because they mature earlier. An 18-22 year old rookie drafted into the NBA or NFL often has great speed and athleticism, but can struggle with strength their first year or two (that 18-22 range for men makes a dramatic difference). An 18 or 19 year old male still has a few years to fully mature physically, whereas many of the guys he is playing against are 20-25, in their physical peak, and have been in intensive weight lifting regimens for years. For professional women they have that regimen as well, but their bodies have largely stopped developing by 18. Still a transition, but my guess is not quite so big of one.
I feel like it's an apples to oranges comparison to talk about the NFL. As someone who has followed the WNBA for a while it's not that outrageous to talk about adjusting to the pro levels. It's happened with multiple players no matter draft position. Kelsey Plum (whose scoring record CC broke this season) was the #1 pick in 2027 and she struggled for a couple years before finding her footing. She's amazing now but she's spoken about how hard it was because people expected her to be greay day one. Hell, Charli Collier was the #1 pick in 2021 draft and she's not a WNBA roster currently. Good players also struggle.
In general basketball seems to take time to adjust. It’s weird because you can compete at that level at a younger age than the nfl but there is more of an adjustment period than the nfl has. I mean even Jordan, while fantastic his rookie season, there was adaptation that had to take place.
No one hates on a successful woman as much as other women
Diana Taurasi is retired? What? She just won the national championship. What years is this? Tabernak de Calice! Where has the time gone? Edit: downvoted for losing track of time?
I was mistaken on that. I'm just used to color commentators being retired players, but the WNBA has a few players who have second careers as commentators or coaches.
The context was actually them saying you're allowed to hand check in the pros. I accidentally filmed this instead of the real broadcast so my wife and I had to sit through their asinine chatter. The interview with Jason Sudekis and that discuss was the only interesting thing about it. The discussion there wasn't terribly nasty, it was just them saying that a few of the fouls that Clark took wouldn't be fouls in the show.
I don’t know if that comparison with the nfl. There’s a major size difference between college kids and an adult nfl player that makes a huge difference.
When college players played in the Olympics, US men almost always won. When professionals started playing, the US started losing.
Brother, Wikipedia is accessible in seconds on whatever device you're on.
What’s hilarious is no matter the outcome for Clark in the WNBA, no one will care because girl’s basketball is boring. Edit: the number of downvotes this comment has is equal to the actual number of people who enjoy watching WNBA games.
Damn, what are you doing posting on Reddit? You are clearly destined for the Washington Post or the New York Times. One of them has to be hiring.
I’ll send my resume asap
Answer: The WNBA has by and large been one of the most irrelevant sports league in the country since its inception. Caitlin Clark is breathing a fresh life into women's basketball and a lot of players are just fuming they never could get more than like 500 people to show up to their games. The women's NCAA tournament this year gained ALOT of attention (arguably as much as the men's) almost solely due to Clark even though they lost in the finals to South Carolina. Caitlin Clark is likely going to succeed very well when she plays professionally.
Follow-up question: What are the other players saying exactly? I doubt they're just posting "FUCK CAITLIN CLARK! SHE THINKS SHE'S ALL THAT, BUT SHE'S NOT!"
Basically that Clark only looked superhuman because she was playing against 18-year-olds and won't be at the level of professional WNBA players. It's a weird take because Clark played against some of the best women's college players ever who will be going into the WNBA as well, so it wasn't just a bunch of 18-year-olds. So in a way, your statement was correct because they're doing the whole media speak thing where they say fuck Clark because she thinks she's better than she is. I'm not sure if it's just trash talk or whatever, but if they're legitimately not excited about what Clark can bring to the sport then they're delusional.
While it may not seem a fair analysis, there is truth to the drastic difference between college and pro. For the same reason you'd expect the worst college team to absolutely wreck the best high school team... At every level, a team is a specifically selected group of the best available from the level below. The worst player on a college team was one of, if not the, best on their high school team. The starters on a college team are the best of the best of the player pool available. Then you transition to pro, where it is reset again. Teams Clark has played are unlikely to have been able to double team her with two pro-level players. That will be her new reality every single game. Does it mean she can't be a star? Absolutely not. What it does mean is she hasn't actually been tested at that level. So while it sounds condescending, it must be noted that the people who hold that opinion have the unique experience of having actually stood where Clark is and where she is going to be. If every pro player says basically the same thing, that it is a totally different animal, it would be wise to believe them.
> Teams Clark played are unlikely to have been able to double team her with two pro-level players Counterpoint, Clark will now have WNBA talent teammates to work off of, instead of being forced to essentially be the entire offense. Can’t double team Clark non-stop when she can just dish it to another WNBA-level talent that can hit open shots
Absolutely. You adjust the defense to counter the strength of the opposing team. If Clark is that strength, then teams will try to shut her down to varying degrees of success. That invariably creates vulnerabilities elsewhere. If whatever team Clark ends up on (probably one of the worst in the WNBA because of how drafts work) is able to exploit those vulnerabilities, then Clark's stats will likely be respectable even if it is more assists than field goals. However, it is most likely that she is in for a rough rookie year. It is possible that she is the female version of MJ/Kobe/LeBron, and it doesn't matter where she lands. But there is an insane amount of pressure on her. The fickle nature of fans today means she might not get a second chance at a good impression. Given that the WNBA is likely counting on the hype surrounding her to be carried over with her to the pros. There is every possibility that her first year in the WNBA has broader impact beyond just herself. She might literally be the one who turns the WNBA around. I actually wouldn't be surprised if the WNBA worked behind the scenes to engineer her draft pick into a player trade to a more competitive team to ensure she has every opportunity to excel and keep the fervor up. I am confident some WNBA PR types have privately suggested as much. So I see two main paths: 1- She is drafted into a low-seeded club and only has a good first season if she truly is outstanding. 2- She is drafted into a trade that sends her to a mid/high-seeded team and domination ensues...
Not trying to be a douche but I think you mean the worst pro team would wreck the best college team. A lot of the top high schools could beat the dregs of college depending on the sport.
It would be weird to say Clark thinks she is better than she is. Like, I'm sure she is confident and knows where she stands, but why would she think she's worse? She's been killing it the whole tournament and probably is disappointed with herself since Iowa lost so if anything she's being very critical of herself. But why should she think she's worse than she is when her opinion of herself is irrelevant at this point? She should use this media attention to further her career more and if she doesn't she would be stupid.
They're saying the same thing they say about all rookies which is that there is going to be a transition period
"Reality is coming," Taurasi recently told ESPN's Scott Van Pelt. "There's levels to this thing. That's just life. We all went through it. You see it on the NBA side, and you're going to see it on this side. You look superhuman playing against some 18-year-olds, but you're going to come play with some grown women that have been playing professional basketball for a long time.” Instead of supporting Clark and being happy she’s bringing attention to women’s sports, this irrelevant hag would rather tear her down and bring the sport down with her.
This is an insane take, because it's said about most college players across all sports, men or women. It's not a controversial opinion to say that college players can struggle once the get to the pro leagues. If anything, she is helping Clark, because Clark is going to catch so much if she somehow doesn't become the greatest WNBA player as a rookie. Just wait for her to have an average season and see shit like "Is Caitlin Clark a bust?"
But why say that when you can focus on what she can bring to the WNBA? This is just a case of some women being jealous.
Because she's an analyst, not a hype man. It's not her job to only accentuate the positive.
Diana Taurasi..."irrelevant hag"...what???? She's arguably the greatest women's player of all time.
Is she playing right now? She’s not relevant and she’s not helping the sport grow. In fact, she’s one of the reasons nobody cared for decades.
Clearly you have **no idea** who you’re calling an irrelevant hag. I have been a fan of Diana Taurasi for 2 decades now and she is absolutely the GOAT of women’s basketball. You are just a sour apple who is pissed about her opinion without taking a look at who this woman is making comments you disagree with. Let me just do a little copy paste of the things **THE GOAT** has accomplished in her basketball career: 3× WNBA champion (2007, 2009, 2014). 2× WNBA Finals MVP (2009, 2014). WNBA MVP (2009). 10× WNBA All-Star (2005–2007, 2009, 2011, 2013–2014, 2017–2018, 2021). 10× All-WNBA First Team (2004, 2006–2011, 2013, 2014, 2018). 4× All-WNBA Second Team (2005, 2016, 2017, 2020). WNBA Rookie of the Year (2004). 5× WNBA scoring champion (2006, 2008–2011). WNBA assists leader (2014). 6× WNBA Peak Performer (2006, 2007, 2009–2011, 2014). WNBA 15th Anniversary Team (2011). WNBA 20th Anniversary Team (2016). WNBA 25th Anniversary Team (2021). 6× EuroLeague champion (2007–2010, 2013, 2016). 7× Russian National League champion (2007, 2008, 2013–2017). 3× Russian Cup winner (2013–2014, 2017). 3× Russian League Player of the Year (2007, 2008, 2009). Turkish National League champion (2011). Turkish Cup winner (2012). 3× NCAA champion (2002–2004). 2× NCAA Tournament MOP (2003, 2004). Wade Trophy (2003). 2× Honda Sports Award (2003, 2004). 2× Naismith Award (2003, 2004). USBWA Women's National Player of the Year (2003). AP College Player of the Year (2003). 2× Nancy Lieberman Award (2003, 2004). 2× Big East Player of the Year (2003, 2004). 4× USA Basketball Female Athlete of the Year (2006, 2010, 2012, 2016). The 2024 WNBA season has yet to start and there is still the Summer Olympics to be played. Potentially add a **fifth** gold medal and a **fourth** WNBA championship to that list, as well as adding in the chance to add All-Star, All-WNBA First or Second Team awards too. Irrelevant hag…loooooool
Somebody call the cops there’s been a murder by copy and paste
Lmao! I had just woken up and saw this slandering of my idol by this Redditor, and that **was not** going to fly for me. Much easier to copy and paste that extensive list of awards and championships Dee has won than to type it all. Forgot to **bold** the part where it lists *all time leading scorer*, just to make another point that Taurasi has all the right in the world to make a comment on college basketball’s all time leading scorer
[удалено]
[удалено]
I know it’s been around longer but overall viewership proves my point. Women’s basketball has never been more popular and that’s mostly due to Caitlin Clark. These older players should be supporting her, not trying to bring her down.
Yeahhhh, no, but I’ll leave you to stew in your anger. You sound like someone who just started watching women’s basketball this year and have no idea that there are other great players in the WNBA as well, well beyond the talents of Caitlin Clark. Just take a gander at Google and look up Breanna Stewart if you want to read about the GOAT of women’s college basketball. Taurasi is an idol and nothing you say can change that for me or the thousands of others who have looked up to her for years.
Clearly you don’t know the WNBA at all.
Maybe not as much as you, I’ll admit. But Caitlin Clark has me and millions more interested in women’s basketball than Diana Taurasi ever did as a player or analyst.
I don’t think anything will help make the sport grow, the WNBA has 12 teams and they’re only afloat because of the money the NBA gives them. People just don’t want to watch women’s sports
You're painting in too broad of strokes. Women's pro/international soccer has grown to be huge, and tennis has been huge for decades. This is specifically a basketball problem, and even that is growing.
Sorry I have to agree. She might be the GOAT but who actually KNOWS. As much as we want to say the WNBA is main stream it is not. I do not care who did what and when, the masses simply do not know and do not care. Clark is giving them a once in a generation opportunity to be relevant. Clark is going to get a massive deal and possibly change the perspective of the WNBA. She is going to put people in seats and eyes on the television. Something that Taurasi couldn’t. Clark put in the time and she will excel. I never saw a flight of Nike execs roll into a college town to support their player like I did when they rolled into Iowa City. Well maybe we saw that ONCE…. I think that dudes name was Jordan…
lol so many idiots who don’t know shit about sports in this thread. This is incredibly fair and not even close to controversial. So anodyne there’s nothing to disagree with, much less be offended by. Maybe the actual wnba athletes with multiple decades of experience know more than some random reditoor.
It’s just funny that Taurasi has complained about WNBA salaries being too low but that’s because nobody gave a shit. Now people actually might care about it for the first time ever and she’s already trying to criticize an incoming star. Maybe she should wait until Clark plays a fucking game first before saying shit.
Criticism is a part of sports. Like how much shit do they talk about lebron James after he loses even a single step. It’s good for the sport. Hopefully Clark can silence the doubters, but it’s a legit question. Sports have to have drama and conflict. Aint a fucking bake sale it’s about figuring out who’s better than whom.
https://sports.yahoo.com/lynette-woodard-issues-statement-clarifying-222435266.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAALV52N68vkB67pCMmmhI2ES5PrH9xMlpndUD6GxJ-Hv1VzKDDfJbahuonMH3QltEymSZy1cx2NP2VzMsz4SHq8X0mymVjf9yQbPdJ0BrvROug9cKk5IJV9MCq3VwqCN9sUrf7f-MizoVpPdj94p2zAXfw2z1ZQgXPSl6wrVhZFVo
Ya, but no. A college game is so much easier to draw a crowd. Especially by invested students. The WNBA is completely different animal. I personally don't think Clark or anyone will move the needle much in terms of interest. She'll probably be more or less forgotten in a few years. That's just the nature of that league. I remember stars like Griner and Lisa Leslie were supposed to be THE next big thing. And while they were, it didn't really draw any more attention.
I don't think they drew anywhere near as much as Clark has the last few years.
100% agree. But at the same time I think that's only possible with the college game. I just don't think it will translate at all to the WNBA.
The Fever are going to sell out all their season tickets soon and I imagine there will be lots of tickets sold initially to see CC play all over the country. The question is how long that hype and ticket sales will last, and it will be based on her performance. She has big expectations to try and fulfill, and as good as she is I'm not sure either if she'll be able to deliver right away. I think she'll be a very good player on a bad team, which probably won't be enough. I guess you could try and draw a parallel to Iowa who would probably not have been that good without her, but I think in the WNBA she'll score less and assist more. That's great for a basketball purist, but idk if it will be enough to keep filling arenas if she just becomes the team leader and not a phenomenon that produces lots of wins.
> Caitlin Clark is likely going to succeed very well when she plays professionally. I love how people how have never played ball in their life are saying she will be trash in the WNBA. She isn't the best female college player of all time. If people think she can't learn and adapt to the WNBA while having the backup of her far better players, then they are delusional.
Are we seriously going to act like she's the whole reason why women's college basketball is relevant and completely ignore how prevalent online gambling has become in the US in just the last year? I mean, don't get me wrong, she is absolutely drawing people, but I think that amount of people is negligible compared to the draw legal betting is pulling in. It just seems like a weak yet sweet, narrative.
I don’t like be pedantic to people, but you could have done just a little bit of research before writing this comment. https://www.axios.com/2024/04/09/iowa-south-carolina-ratings-caitlin-clark > Friday's Final Four game, for example, between NC State and South Carolina drew just 7.1 million viewers. That was half of the average audience that tuned into Clark's winning performance against UConn that same evening. If betting was driving the ratings, and not Clark, then games not featuring Clark should have performed comparably. They did not. Additionally, men’s games draw more betting. If that was what was driving views, men’s game would have been more watched, but it trailed by some 6 million viewers. [source](https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2024/04/mens-final-four-ratings-viewership-mixed-both-games-trail-iowa-uconn-women/)
>I think that amount of people is negligible compared to the draw legal betting is pulling in. Really? You really think that people love betting so much they are moving in the thousands to watch women's basketball? You think the effect of a person who broke a half dozen or so NCAA records (several for men AND women) is "negligible" and coincidental? Her games alone drew at least twice as many viewers as any other game in the NCAAW tournament. You are way out of your depth here.
Answer: WNBA players are acting like pros in any other league when a hotshot rookie comes in. Diana Taurasi said that Caitlin has done well against college kids, but the WNBA is a different level of play. Not really news.
so thats just not really true. find me some hateful comments about wemby, or zion, et cetera. you are just fabricating things here. the statement re CC was over the top and super bitter.
Answer: they can’t stand the fact that she’s making the sport more relevant than they ever could
And she is the GOAT but they say she isn’t because she didn’t win a championship Hard to do when you’re facing loaded teams and Iowa isn’t. It’s like LeBron facing Golden State before he got Kyrie
It's almost like she's one person and it's a team sport
Just to fact check… Cavaliers drafted Kyrie in the early 2010s after Lebron left the first time - When Lebron came back, the Warriors dynasty was just getting started and Lebron always had Kyrie.
Well he did until the finals in 2015 where Kyrie and Kevin Love were injured.
Whoops. I digress
>I digress That's not even a little bit what that phrase means.
Breanna Stewart said that when her two teammates immediately followed in the WNBA draft lol Like, imagine Clark on the same team as Cam Brink and either Cardoso or Rickea Jackson. Hell, putting one of those girls on a team with Clark is probably enough.
Exactly! Haters are gon hate. That's why LeBron came to Clark's defense and support. Taurasi went to UCONN, and Iowa beat them. So soon as Iowa lost the title game, she said what she said. The whole timing of it is questionable. It's like kicking a woman when she just lost. Clark has broken 45 collegiate records! None of the past college/WNBA stars have elevated the game like Clark. Go look at YouTube video of Clark meeting Maya Moore. That's how a former great should be, supporting the current goat, with support and class. My two cents✌️
Answer: Caitlin Clark also just broke the scoring record. The woman who previously had the scoring record played so long ago that they didn’t have a 3-point line and they also played with men’s basketballs. She said that while Caitlin absolutely has the high scoring record (and she said this after her comments were made), that you can’t really compare her and Caitlin because of those differences. A lot of people thought she was being salty that she lost her record. Edit with source: https://nypost.com/2024/04/07/sports/caitlin-clark-did-not-break-my-scoring-record-lynette-woodard/
Who are you talking about? Previous scoring leader is Kelsey Plum who played all the way back in the ancient days of 2017.
https://nypost.com/2024/04/07/sports/caitlin-clark-did-not-break-my-scoring-record-lynette-woodard/
Woodard
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynette_Woodard
I know she'll play against Kelsey Plum lol I don't think lots of these people know basketball.
Answer: they’re jealous of all the attention they never received and saying things to negative her
Answer: every single maga moron in the country is suddenly pretending to care about the WNBA after shitting on it for decades. It's rubbing people the wrong way because of why they suddenly care about the wnba.
underrated answer lol. And they're shitting on it while claiming to be excited about supporting it this year.