WNBA Legend Sheryl Swoopes has been hating on PAWG superstar Caitlin Clarke for some reason

[Biscayne]

I'm not gonna act like I'm a WNBA super fan, but I have watched a couple games with my step daughter from the Fever and Sky and I will say the main problem with the Sky is the same problem that Clark fixed with the Fever, the Sky have no playmaker. Also Angel Reese is nowhere close to being the tallest player on the court, she is really playing out of position, considering she actually has a decent handle(I've seen videos of her crossing folks up in the rec) she really should be a point forward. Don't get me wrong her post game does need some work, but let's not get out of hand here. I'm suprised she doesn't miss more of her put backs, she is undersized to be in the paint bruh and she gets battered down there look at the videos she is literally 1 v 3 in the paint cause opponents don't respect anyone else on that squad and just crowd her down there. Clark's biggest strength is her playmaking ability, not her 3 point shooting. She is playing on a team with high draft picks that had no playmaker. Angel Reese did always have a better team around her in college, the roles have just flipped now. I think people really need to be patient with both of them because neither is nowhere close to their final form as players yet, granted I will admit offensively Clark is further ahead than Reese is atm.

The real issue with the Sky nobody brings up is that Cardoso is a #3 pick who doesn't play up to how high she was drafted. If she was better at what she is supposed to do Reese wouldn't have to be down there getting banged up to get rebounds and put up 1v3 contested put backs.

Exactly. Reese is doing what she can at her height and position. Cordoso should be banging downlow and drawing the defense away from Reese. Calling Reese trash is absurd and premature.

 

[Heavy_Handz]

Clark been hooping hard and her team has been winning games down the stretch. Skin tone means way too much on planet earth. Such a DUSTY place in the Universe.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

There haven’t been that many flagrant fouls in the first place so this is incredibly misleading but on brand for you. The number of flagrant fouls on her does not differ drastically than the number of flagrant fouls on the person who lead the league in flagrant against them last year and the majority of those flagrant are literally from one team.

Nothing I posted was misleading, let alone "incredibly".

I'm here purely to speak as an arbiter. I'm not here for this stan wars bullshyt about some broads. Y'all can have that.

Don't pound your chest in front of these folks thinking you can get one up on me, with whatever this bullshyt is. I haven't engaged with you once since I've been back, nor have I participated in any discussion that you've been involved in, so leave this "on brand for you" hoe talk out of it. The fact you'd even start off your post like this means you a fan.

But I digress.

If there haven't been many flagrant fouls in the first place, that only adds weight to my argument; it means that kind of activity isn't normal, it means that the flagrant fouls committed against her are even more of an anamoly. Instead of twisting yourself in knots with this bullshyt justification, tell me, which other player this season or last season has or had comparatively the same amount of flagrant fouls purposefully committed on them?

If there isn't a player, then what I'm illustrating isn't misleading.

What I'm pointing is out that there's naturally a response equal in tone to this treatment, especially since she has all eyes on her, it's only going to amplify that, even if the specific number of flagrant fouls or the select amount of teams isn't that large in a vacuum. I'm not speaking from my POV, I'm speaking from the POV of how the public is reacting to this.

No one is watching her get roughed up more than other players who watched more than just the Indiana Fever. The Pistons literally had Jordan Rules and that had no effect on the growth of the game.

Well, quite clearly she has been getting more roughed up, hence the number of flagrant fouls on her. You even admit yourself that those type of fouls are uncommon, so how could you possibly be of the belief there's relatively the same amount of those fouls on other players?

The Jordan Rules had no effect on the growth of the game because MJ didn't get injured because of it.

If she does get injured as a result of these actions, then it will effect the WNBA's growth, dependent on how prolonged her absence is.

No, the folks getting behind her are disproportionately her fans from her Iowa days that transferred over to the WNBA the way college fans used to follow their favorite players who spent 3 years on campus and then went to the league. To the contrary, these people don’t actually watch hoops besides her and their entire existence is antagonizing anyone seemingly opposed to her. For example, the nonsense about most of Reese’s rebounds being from her own misses that occurred once she made rookie of the year a competition.

This isn't really true anymore.

They're the ones who initially powered the fanfare, but the more she got national recognition, the more other demographics checked in. The folks that followed her every step through three years of college would only be a certain portion. No different to those who followed MJ at Chapel Hill over the same time frame, they were ultimately a drop in the ocean once he became a household name in the NBA.

And that's the precise reason why the WNBA has more eyes on it than ever before. Folks who never really cared for the league are now checking in.

Take this board for example -

There's literally a sticked thread with 19,000 replies about the WNBA. You've got countless amount of threads centered around her, just like this one, that the whole damn subforum is engaged in. You can't escape it. Trying to get posters to talk about the WNBA prior was like trying to pull teeth, now you can't keep them away.

Sure, bringing eyes helps grow the game - o question. But it has led to unnecessary hate their way. It is no different than the hate any white person who has had a critique has faced. The league is just mostly black and gay so they get it the most. It’s essentially how you dare you be aggressive towards her on the court or not kiss her ass or act like she is God’s gift to earth.

Quite literally no different to the adornment of other transcendent stars in other sports and the lore that folks are swept up in. Hell, even 20 years after his retirement, if you dare criticize MJ, in any way, shape or form, the pitchforks will be out for you. Two cotdamn decades after he's played.

What made every other face of a sport great is that their opponents wanted to beat their ass out there and they talked like it too. Anyone who has any competitive energy towards Clark it becomes how dare you say anything about her ever.

It's not really the same thing though, because beating someone's ass has always been exclusive to men, and the same machismo doesn't exist in women non-combat sports. As much as the story around her fandom is all too familiar, there's still uncharted territory, because of how women are feminized in sports, especially straight white women, and even more so during this day and age - just look at all the criticism around how the physicality in sports has been b*stardized now.

The hunger for wanting brutality in the NFL has been drained out and replaced with the monition of a penalty, both in literal and moral form.

You simply have this purest arrogance about yourself and so you ignore the obvious because you like Caitlin’s game.

Nxgga.

You better check yourself.

I haven't participated in these stan wars. I've been bystander, watching all this shyt play out. The only times I've really posted about this is commenting on how wild the discourse around the league has become. I'm not here to take sides, mostly because it's corny and I don't really care for it. Don't confuse me with whatever drama you've got yourself caught up in with other posters on this board.

Next time you quote me, address me like you're a grown ass man, and not a hoe.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

Box score terminology as if CC’s triple doubles records and 20/10 isn’t constantly thrown in our face with absolutely no context.

Selective context and nuance is being used constantly when it comes to CC vs the field.

Let me just scale back to your initial statement -

"Angel Reese is setting double-double records, and it’s been reduced to “see now bagless she is!!! Look at her shooting percentage!!”"

Now, if Caitlin had the same comparative stats for a guard, where she was drastically inefficient, and barely scoring 10 points, and her apologists were hyping up whatever arbitrary box score records she was setting, are you telling me your response wouldn't be similar? You wouldn't be calling her bagless and pointing out how poor her shooting percentages are?

Point being, Angel's double doubles are nothing to hang your argument on.

Not only are they not moving the needle, but they're not even meeting efficiency of what is league-average, so they can hardly be reduced like you believe cats are doing. You don't need to die on that hill because you want to fight on the lie of the principle of defending her. In time, she will sink or swim, and if it's the former, there are plenty other Black players in the league who'll warrant more attention and support because of their gameplay.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

At 6'3, Angel Reese is STILL(YES even in the WOMENS GAME) not that tall at her position, and is nowhere near being the tallest WNBA player in 2024. She's battling for every rebound while being basically Steph Curry's height. This chick is playing in the same league as Brittney fukkin Griner!!!

How do you expect to have your argument taken seriously with this disingenious shyt?

The average height in the WNBA is 6-0; the average height in the NBA is 6-6.

Angel Reese is notably taller/bigger than the average player in her league, whereas Steph is notably shorter/smaller than the average player in his league, and yet here you are making up some bullshyt about how she has to overcome a size disadvantage.

The downplaying of an undersized player battling for every rebound and averaging a double-double, perfectly encapsulates what I've been talking about. "She's JUST ANDRE DRUMMOND!!!!" when in reality, she's basically like Thaddeus Young averaging a double-double.

You want cats to hype up the Thaddeus Young of the WNBA now?

This ain't it.

 

[ECA]

Double doubles are rather meaningless if you're scoring 10+ points as a 4 at 38%.

Let me put it like this, if she wasn't getting double doubles, but instead was shooting 54% and getting 7-8 boards instead, that would be whole a lot more impactful. Y'all really need to stop letting box score terminology fukk with your ability to judge players and the game.

Isaiah Hartenstein numbers . Thats who she needed to study this summer. Floater game and passing ability

 

[Big Boss]

How do you expect to have your argument taken seriously with this disingenious shyt?

The average height in the WNBA is 6-0; the average height in the NBA is 6-6.

Angel Reese is notably taller/bigger than the average player in her league, whereas Steph is notably shorter/smaller than the average player in his league, and yet here you are making up some bullshyt about how she has to overcome a size disadvantage.



You want cats to hype up the Thaddeus Young of the WNBA now?

This ain't it.

At least Andre Drummond was a 2 time all star and avg a double double multiple times

 

[Big Boss]

My nikka she is third on the career 20 and 10 list and hasn't even played a full season yet.

She is the only rookie to ever record a triple double in league history, and she has done it twice.

She is 30 assists away from setting the single season record.

The girls talent is UNDENIABLE at this point. The ONLY reason anyone could have to descredit her on the court achievements now is if they have an agenda. Which you obviously do Cheryl.

There is no logical argument for her being overhyped. NONE!

Yea she if she was averaging 8 points and 4 assists then it would be a different story

 

[The_Sheff]

Fact of the matter is people just need to stop bringing up Angel Reese in conversations with CC, that includes the media. The only thing it's doing is bringing more criticism to Reese.

You would never compare Draymond Green or Andre Drummond to LeBron James in a ROY or any other comparison. It would be asinine. Those guys are good at what they do but they aren't top tier players.

What Angel Reese is doing is a nice story but she needs serious offensive development and they need some players to accommodate whatever Reese can become proficient at.

 

[LV Koopa]

The female Thaddeus Young.

@Biscayne inadvertently bodied the chick he was hyping up

 

[aceboon]

I'm not gonna act like I'm a WNBA super fan, but I have watched a couple games with my step daughter from the Fever and Sky and I will say the main problem with the Sky is the same problem that Clark fixed with the Fever, the Sky have no playmaker. Also Angel Reese is nowhere close to being the tallest player on the court, she is really playing out of position, considering she actually has a decent handle(I've seen videos of her crossing folks up in the rec) she really should be a point forward. Don't get me wrong her post game does need some work, but let's not get out of hand here. I'm suprised she doesn't miss more of her put backs, she is undersized to be in the paint bruh and she gets battered down there look at the videos she is literally 1 v 3 in the paint cause opponents don't respect anyone else on that squad and just crowd her down there. Clark's biggest strength is her playmaking ability, not her 3 point shooting. She is playing on a team with high draft picks that had no playmaker. Angel Reese did always have a better team around her in college, the roles have just flipped now. I think people really need to be patient with both of them because neither is nowhere close to their final form as players yet, granted I will admit offensively Clark is further ahead than Reese is atm.

The real issue with the Sky nobody brings up is that Cardoso is a #3 pick who doesn't play up to how high she was drafted. If she was better at what she is supposed to do Reese wouldn't have to be down there getting banged up to get rebounds and put up 1v3 contested put backs.

Huh?

 

[Biscayne]

Let me just scale back to your initial statement -

"Angel Reese is setting double-double records, and it’s been reduced to “see now bagless she is!!! Look at her shooting percentage!!”"

Now, if Caitlin had the same comparative stats for a guard, where she was drastically inefficient, and barely scoring 10 points, and her apologists were hyping up whatever arbitrary box score records she was setting, are you telling me your response wouldn't be similar? You wouldn't be calling her bagless and pointing out how poor her shooting percentages are?

Point being, Angel's double doubles are nothing to hang your argument on.

Not only are they not moving the needle, but they're not even meeting efficiency of what is league-average, so they can hardly be reduced like you believe cats are doing. You don't need to die on that hill because you want to fight on the lie of the principle of defending her. In time, she will sink or swim, and if it's the former, there are plenty other Black players in the league who'll warrant more attention and support because of their gameplay.

Since when did Double-Doubles become arbitrary? That's the point. She's an undersized(YES even in the WNBA) big who is battling 2 to 3 bodies a night on the boards averaging a double-double in her rookie season. This wouldn't be scoffed at in the NBA, nor would it be scoffed at if she wasn't viewed as the "foe" of CC. Why would a rookie doing what she's doing, need apologist in the first place? That's the point. What she's doing is solid given her positional circumstance and her age.

How do you expect to have your argument taken seriously with this disingenious shyt?

The average height in the WNBA is 6-0; the average height in the NBA is 6-6.

Angel Reese is notably taller/bigger than the average player in her league, whereas Steph is notably shorter/smaller than the average player in his league, and yet here you are making up some bullshyt about how she has to overcome a size disadvantage.



You want cats to hype up the Thaddeus Young of the WNBA now?

This ain't it.

Dude claimed she was "the tallest players", when at her position she's not. At 6-3 she's not even the tallest player on her team. I wasn't comparing her game to Thadeus Young. I was saying it would be like if a player of his height, at his position, was averaging a double-double as a rookie. Because everyone seems to be making these dumbass Andre Drummond comparisons, to downplay what Angel Reese's tenacity.

@Biscayne inadvertently bodied the chick he was hyping up

Read the above.

 

[Biscayne]

At least Andre Drummond was a 2 time all star and avg a double double multiple times

Oh brother....The purposeful misreading of what I wrote...

 

[Biscayne]

Nothing I posted was misleading, let alone "incredibly".

I'm here purely to speak as an arbiter. I'm not here for this stan wars bullshyt about some broads. Y'all can have that.

Don't pound your chest in front of these folks thinking you can get one up on me, with whatever this bullshyt is. I haven't engaged with you once since I've been back, nor have I participated in any discussion that you've been involved in, so leave this "on brand for you" hoe talk out of it. The fact you'd even start off your post like this means you a fan.

But I digress.

If there haven't been many flagrant fouls in the first place, that only adds weight to my argument; it means that kind of activity isn't normal, it means that the flagrant fouls committed against her are even more of an anamoly. Instead of twisting yourself in knots with this bullshyt justification, tell me, which other player this season or last season has or had comparatively the same amount of flagrant fouls purposefully committed on them?

If there isn't a player, then what I'm illustrating isn't misleading.

What I'm pointing is out that there's naturally a response equal in tone to this treatment, especially since she has all eyes on her, it's only going to amplify that, even if the specific number of flagrant fouls or the select amount of teams isn't that large in a vacuum. I'm not speaking from my POV, I'm speaking from the POV of how the public is reacting to this.

Well, quite clearly she has been getting more roughed up, hence the number of flagrant fouls on her. You even admit yourself that those type of fouls are uncommon, so how could you possibly be of the belief there's relatively the same amount of those fouls on other players?

The Jordan Rules had no effect on the growth of the game because MJ didn't get injured because of it.

If she does get injured as a result of these actions, then it will effect the WNBA's growth, dependent on how prolonged her absence is.

This isn't really true anymore.

They're the ones who initially powered the fanfare, but the more she got national recognition, the more other demographics checked in. The folks that followed her every step through three years of college would only be a certain portion. No different to those who followed MJ at Chapel Hill over the same time frame, they were ultimately a drop in the ocean once he became a household name in the NBA.

And that's the precise reason why the WNBA has more eyes on it than ever before. Folks who never really cared for the league are now checking in.

Take this board for example -

There's literally a sticked thread with 19,000 replies about the WNBA. You've got countless amount of threads centered around her, just like this one, that the whole damn subforum is engaged in. You can't escape it. Trying to get posters to talk about the WNBA prior was like trying to pull teeth, now you can't keep them away.

Quite literally no different to the adornment of other transcendent stars in other sports and the lore that folks are swept up in. Hell, even 20 years after his retirement, if you dare criticize MJ, in any way, shape or form, the pitchforks will be out for you. Two cotdamn decades after he's played.

It's not really the same thing though, because beating someone's ass has always been exclusive to men, and the same machismo doesn't exist in women non-combat sports. As much as the story around her fandom is all too familiar, there's still uncharted territory, because of how women are feminized in sports, especially straight white women, and even more so during this day and age - just look at all the criticism around how the physicality in sports has been b*stardized now.

The hunger for wanting brutality in the NFL has been drained out and replaced with the monition of a penalty, both in literal and moral form.

Nxgga.

You better check yourself.

I haven't participated in these stan wars. I've been bystander, watching all this shyt play out. The only times I've really posted about this is commenting on how wild the discourse around the league has become. I'm not here to take sides, mostly because it's corny and I don't really care for it. Don't confuse me with whatever drama you've got yourself caught up in with other posters on this board.

Next time you quote me, address me like you're a grown ass man, and not a hoe.

It is misleading. You basically took some uncontextualized popular internet stat, and posted it like you dropped some sort of bomb. This "I'm NOT part of ya'lls little stan wars" schtick is stupid, when you're running with the same cherrypicked stats that every other agenda pushing CC fan on the web is running with. YES, a grand total of 5 flagrant fouls(most of which were committed by one team) is a misleading stat when it's presented as "She receives 17% of all flagrants in the league". It flames the conspiratorial anti-field non-sense that these crazed white fans want so badly to believe about "the field" vs CC.

As much as the story around her fandom is all too familiar, there's still uncharted territory, because of how women are feminized in sports, especially straight white women, and even more so during this day and age - just look at all the criticism around how the physicality in sports has been b*stardized now.

^^^NO shyt! That's the heart of the bulk of this discourse. And alot of brothers have these same biases when it comes to how they judge and watch women's ball. Brittney Griner discourse and jokes were a thing for ages. Whether consciously or subconsciously "Big mean dykes want to play the game rough because they're JEALOUS" is where alot of this animosity comes from.

This isn't the same as MJ, because there weren't crazed fans looking for conspiratorial angles as to why Jordan wasn't winning in the 80s. He didn't have the pride of middle-America or a race of people rooting for him against the field. He got tougher and the 80s faded away, and his day came. The growth of the jordan craze was based(even if NBC and Stern were part of making it happen) were NOT based on the same reasoning as CC.

 

[Biscayne]

You got a dude in here comparing CC to tiger woods and the Williams sisters, and that post got 30 daps. How is that not disrespectful?

The coliseum really is the “what about anti white racism!!” section of the coli. Holy shyt.