Breanna, D and Sue + guests- topic: do you need a natty to be one of the greatest? | The Boneyard

Breanna, D and Sue + guests- topic: do you need a natty to be one of the greatest?

Jaydumo20

Jaydumo20

Joined
Nov 11, 2018
Messages
3,555
Reaction Score
19,047
This was the topic during today's game, if you watched sue and D's espn 2 broadcast.
The knee jerk answer is, yes, you need a natty to be one of the greatest. But slow down, CC has unquestionably taken the game into the stratosphere.
The hosts made a distinction that you can still be great but not one of the greatest, however, it still seems like everyone is dancing around the big question:
Is CAITLIN CLARK the greatest ever?
How bout top 3?
Top 10?
If rings matter, how can you put her in the top ten?
If rings don't matter is she #1?
Note: I know it's tempting to straddle the fence and say "it's not one or the other, it's a combo of both individual talent and wins". I ask you to choose a side, for the sake of argument.


(of course...
We all know Stewie's #1)
 
Last edited:
Whether or not you consider Clark the GOAT comes purely down to the criteria you value. I understand the championship argument, but hypothetically speaking, if she grad transferred to South Carolina and led them to another title next year, would that somehow validate her legacy because she's won a title now?

No knock on Stewart and what she accomplished, but it’s easy to dangle the championship requirement as a precursor to be the best when you’ve played with 10+ WNBA players through college. Clark didn't choose to join a Goliath and took a unique path, leading a slew of players who weren’t McDonald All Americans or future WNBA players, and she came up just short of a championship her last 2 season. You can reward her for coming close, or you can knock her for being unable to get the job done.

I won’t argue that she is or isn’t the GOAT, but I do think she certainly has a legitimate case for it along with many others who have their own unmatched legacies.
 
Last edited:
bballnut90 said:
Whether or not you consider Clark the GOAT comes purely down to the criteria you value. I understand the championship argument, but hypothetically speaking, if she grad transferred to South Carolina and led them to another title next year, would that somehow validate her legacy because she's won a title now?

No knock on Stewart and what she accomplished, but it’s easy to dangle the championship requirement as a precursor to be the best when you’ve played with 10+ WNBA players through college. Clark didn't choose to join a Goliath and took a unique path, leading a slew of players who weren’t McDonald All Americans or future WNBA players, and she came up just short of a championship her last 2 season.

I won’t argue that she is or isn’t the GOAT, but I do think she certainly has a legitimate case for it along with many others who have their own unmatched legacies.
Expand ...
I think she has a case. I do say without a doubt she is an all-time great not necessairly number 1. But I didn't watch her 4 years and I watched her lose to UCONN twice. And as a UCONN fan I can't shake what I saw from Stewart. IMO she also made her teammates much better too. Her mere presence on offense and defense with those long arms catching inside passes for layups (which isn't as fun to watch for a hoop fan vs Ponytail Pete) and her mere intimdation because of her size both offense and defense. I've always had her #1 even over DT and Maya and Parker and Chamique.
 
All round, best ever, Brianna Stewart who lead her team to 4 National Championships, MVP each FF, number 1 draft pick, elevated the game as a 6’5” player who could play every position, making her teammates better! Stewey could have put up 40 every game if that’s what the team needed, but that’s not UCONN ball.

Caitlin is one of the greats although no way is she the best of all time. Is she the best three point shooter, I can get behind that statement indeed!
 
Jaydumo20 said:
This was the topic during today's game, if you watched sue and D's espn 2 broadcast.
The knee jerk answer is, yes, you need a natty to be one of the greatest. But slow down, CC has unquestionably taken the game into the stratosphere.
The hosts made a distinction that you can still be great but not one of the greatest, however, it still seems like everyone is dancing around the big question:
Is CAITLIN CLARK the greatest ever?
How bout top 3?
Top 10?
If rings matter, how can you put her in the top ten?
If rings don't matter is she #1?
Note: I know it's tempting to straddle the fence and say "it's not one or the other, it's a combo of both individual talent and wins". I ask you to choose a side, for the sake of argument.


(of course...
We all know Stewie's #1)
Expand ...
No one said Jackie Styles was the GOAT. No one said Kelsey Plum was the GOAT. Caitlin Clark broke their scoring records. She was part of 2 FF teams. She has no rings. The teams she played on let her do what she did. We all know many other coaches probably wouldn’t have for any number of reasons. Do we disregard those players because their stats don’t measure up? Or is there another measure of greatness?
 
She is one of the all time college greats - note "one of". As they were discussing on today's "pre-game", you can argue Cheryl Miller (in fact, I recently read an article that did). You can argue Stewart. Holdsclaw. Parker. Etc.

In the same way as has been discussed regarding coaches, it is all based on what you value. How much do you include (as someone noted above) the influence of the other members of the team, championships, scoring, etc. And, also like coaches, it is not always possible to translate across eras. It wasn't the same game even 20 years ago - never mind 40 - that it is today. But, what is clear, is she is one of the greatest college players of all time - no question.
 
.-.
KnightBridgeAZ said:
She is one of the all time college greats - note "one of". As they were discussing on today's "pre-game", you can argue Cheryl Miller (in fact, I recently read an article that did). You can argue Stewart. Holdsclaw. Parker. Etc.

In the same way as has been discussed regarding coaches, it is all based on what you value. How much do you include (as someone noted above) the influence of the other members of the team, championships, scoring, etc. And, also like coaches, it is not always possible to translate across eras. It wasn't the same game even 20 years ago - never mind 40 - that it is today. But, what is clear, is she is one of the greatest college players of all time - no question.
Expand ...
Yup. That said, the Championship criterion is much more compelling than the statistical ones. I know Iowa fans are saying that she stayed in Iowa and carried a weaker program far. This is true. But had she gone to SC or UConn, she wouldn't have been able to set those scoring records. The balanced attack of those teams wouldn't have allowed it. So either way, it comes down the the NC, not the stat sheet.
 
National championships with rare exceptions are rarely the function of one player. Caitlin Clark gets my vote because she is not surrounded by future WNBA players. The only singularly dominant player in WCBB to win a national championship is Sheryl Swoopes, but that is going back over 30 years. The game has gown mightily. Tonight's game was a tossup for all but the last three minutes despite the disparity in talent.
 
CC and Stewie are indeed two of the all time greatest. Some make the argument, fairly or unfairly, that you can't give GOAT to Clark because she didn't win a NC and you can't give it to Stewie because of the surrounding talent that helped her win her 4 titles.
Taurasi may have won 4 NC a la Stewie if her team didn't lose 2 AA her freshmen year. Sophomore year, DT was surrounded by one of the most talented teams of all time but they played poorly in the NC game. In the closing minutes while the upperclassmen played tight, it was DT who calmly made the clutch plays to put the game away for UConn.
Then her junior and senior year, DT was surrounded by what I'll say was good but not great talent. I'll go as far to say DT's surrounding talent in 2003 and 2004 was lesser than what Clark had her last two seasons.
DT led very flawed surrounding talent to a NC not once but twice. The second time in an injury riddled season.
DT didn't elevate the popularity of the game to the same extent as Clark but she created a lot if buzz in her own right.
So while you certainly put Clark, Stewie, and some others in the conversation, for my money DT ranks as the greatest of all time for the combination of excitement she brought to the game along with ability to carry a team multiple times to NCs without great surrounding talent.
 
I‘m not sure there is a definitive GOAT, but I‘d feel a lot better about this whole conversation if there wasn’t so much obvious rancor in many of the statements referring to Clark. Regardless of whether you like her personally, or you think she is a whiner, or that she didn’t win a championship, all of which may be at least partially true, it cannot be denied that she has accomplished things on the basketball court that would not have been dreamed of until she came along. Furthermore, largely because of her, women’s basketball has absolutely exploded in popularity during her run of greatness.

For all that, it seems to me that far too many past players, commentators, and surprisingly, as they are certain to materially benefit from this unprecedented upsurge in the game’s popularity, many WNBA players, are coming across as jealous and snarky whenever her name comes up! Rather than being happy and supportive for a fellow basketball player who has worked hard, and built up the game while playing the game the right way, a player who is extremely likely to carry her huge fan base with her to the WNBA, they seem instead eager to find fault, even if that involves making up bald face lies about why her accomplishments should be downgraded! Honestly, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

Don’t they see that an upsurge in attendance leads to more ticket sales, which leads to more food sales, merchandise, parking etc. All of which is taken into consideration when negotiating salaries and CBA deals! You would think they’d be happy as a lark at the prospect of this boost to their league’s popularity! I don’t really care if they want to say she needs a championship. It’s certainly a valid point, perhaps one held by a majority of people. She’s still a great, great player though, one of the greatest ever! Perhaps a little less snarkiness and a smidgeon more acknowledgement is in order. That’s my opinion anyway.
 
.-.
GOAT is singular. Only one person can be the GOAT. This term gets thrown out too liberally. Clark is a great player, greatest scorer for now, great passer and great competitor. Is she the greatest team mate, greatest defensive player, greatest sport, greatest championship winner? GOAT, no way!
 
Lies, damned lies and statistics:

Stewart had a 53% career shooting percentage and Clark 46.3%. Clark’s 3 point percentage is better and she took a lot more shots. Kelsey Plum made 38.2% of her threes and at least mathematically was a better 3 point shooter than Clark, but took less of them.

My opinion is that the media and many fans were in love with those very flashy long distance 3’s and the high point totals that came from volume shooting. I just don’t think that qualifies a player as the greatest of all time.

I’d put Stewie, Taurasi, Parker, Holdsclaw, Miller and others in the conversation. After a few pro years, we’ll see how Clark compares.

IMG_1385.jpeg
IMG_1386.jpeg
 
CC is the all time leading scorer. Pete Maravich was/is the all time leading scorer. He is not the GOAT. Clark had the media darling tab. She has benefited from nil, social media and the officials bending calls to benefit her. No, she is not the GOAT. Next question.
 
Basketball is a team sport. The object of the game is for your team to win. People can argue that she makes deep shots, is a great passer, has the best court vision, attracts the most eyeballs, or turns the ball over too much. But for someone who has not achieved the team objective, I personally feel like it’s a generational exaggeration to project that she is the greatest of all time. Not the greatest winner so far. She’ll have more chances to win in the wba- where she’ll be teamed up with a generational talent. Hopefully these two generational talents have the longevity to play together for a few years.
 
CC is a sharp shooter and a media darling; especially for fans who have never seen the women's game before.
In the GOAT realm of WCBB she doesn't crack the top ten in my opinion.
And yes, Stewie will be #1 until someone can dethrone her, and I think the only way to do that is to be NPOY all 4 years, and MOP all 4 years.
 
Championships matter.

Was Plum the GOAT before this year?

Every sport has great lovable losers, and every sport has superstars, and then there are a few great superstars that get into the conversation for GOAT. Tiger was phenomenal, he personally raise the money, viewership, and participation at all levels of a long established professional game and won lots and lots of tournaments and set records, but he ain't the GOAT of golf. He didn't match Jack or surpass him in majors.
 
.-.
CC can be labeled the greatest scorer, but great scorers are not the GOAT. We wouldn't have considered all the great scorers before her to be the GOAT. What DT did in 2003 and 2004 is more impressive to me.
 
Clark may not be the goat but is the greatest offensive player ever not to mention the greatest passer
 
UcMiami said:
Championships matter.

Was Plum the GOAT before this year?

Every sport has great lovable losers, and every sport has superstars, and then there are a few great superstars that get into the conversation for GOAT. Tiger was phenomenal, he personally raise the money, viewership, and participation at all levels of a long established professional game and won lots and lots of tournaments and set records, but he ain't the GOAT of golf. He didn't match Jack or surpass him in majors.
Expand ...
The Tiger one is tough. He didn't surpass Jack, but is only behind by 3. 18-15. That's not significant enough to tilt the scales Jack's way, IMO.
As with CC, although I don't think she is the GOAT due to lack of a natty, we can't discount the astronomical impact she has/had on the sport.
I think Tiger's impact on the game of golf is unmatched. In my opinion, Tiger so drastically influenced the sports landscape that we can't ignore that. I've never seen that level of influence and greatness, and I lived through Jordan (not Ali though)
That has to count for something. I think phenomenon and influence is enough to propel Tiger past Jack. We can't ignore phenomenon and impact when appraising CC either.
Sports is, after all entertainment. Championships alone, as a stand alone achievement, benefit no one but the athlete or program themselves. It's everything surrounding it: camaraderie, legacy, attitude, flash, media, sensationalism, that makes winning and sports in general, meaningful to the public.
 
Last edited:
At the professional level a title or number of titles might be factored in but in college, no. CC decided to stay home and play at Iowa and when she did she pretty much put herself in an impossible position to win a title. Now she came really close two years in a row but Iowa really had one great player and a bunch of players that were good because of her.

Compare that to Stewie who was also a great college player. She decided to go to a school that had already won 8 championships and quite frankly could have won one or two more without her. She was great but winning championships really didn't make her better in my eyes that what she already was. In the WNBA she has elevated her teams (Seattle) to a championship level so she is currently on the list of best ever players in that group. Clark will have to the same for Indiana to get into all time air in that league.
 
Jaydumo20 said:
The Tiger one is tough. He didn't surpass Jack, but is only behind by 3. 18-15. That's not significant enough to tilt the scales Jack's way, IMO.
As with CC, although I don't think she is the GOAT due to lack of a natty, we can't discount the astronomical impact she has/had on the sport.
I think Tiger's impact on the game of golf is unmatched. In my opinion, Tiger so drastically influenced the sports landscape that we can't ignore that. I've never seen that level of influence and greatness, and I lived through Jordan (not Ali though)
That has to count for something. I think phenomenon and influence is enough to propel Tiger past Jack. We can't ignore phenomenon and impact when appraising CC either.
Sports is, after all entertainment. Championships alone, as a stand alone achievement, benefit no one but the athlete or program themselves. It's everything surrounding it: camaraderie, legacy, attitude, flash, media, sensationalism, that makes winning and sports in general, meaningful to the public.
Expand ...
If Tiger played Jack when both were at their best Tiger would win. He by far the best to ever play the game and easily the most influential too. He was slowed by knee and back issues but that doesn't take away from what he did for the game. By your standard Bill Russell would have to be the best player of all time in basketball and I don't know of anyone who would make that argument.

Now you have a guy like Scottie Scheffler on the scene who gets no real credit for his greatness but is consistently and quickly moving up the list of all time players.
 
As I’ve already said, I don’t really know what the answer to this GOAT question is but there is one thing I find a bit puzzling. If the natty is required, why then are so many people saying that “if only Clark could have won one then she might/would be the GOAT” If the natty is the determinant, which I certainly accept as a premise, why/how then should one natty trump all those players who won multiple ones? Seems a bit of a conundrum. Obviously, not all were saying that but a number were. I jst don’t think it is something that can have a definitive answer. For me, Maya was the greatest physical/athletic/natural player ever, Stewie, the greatest champion, Dee the greatest competitor, and I suppose Clark would be the greatest scorer. How do you choose one? I’m not sure. I suppose if someone forced me, I would choose Maya.
 
.-.
Jaydumo20 said:
The Tiger one is tough. He didn't surpass Jack, but is only behind by 3. 18-15. That's not significant enough to tilt the scales Jack's way, IMO.
As with CC, although I don't think she is the GOAT due to lack of a natty, we can't discount the astronomical impact she has/had on the sport.
I think Tiger's impact on the game of golf is unmatched. In my opinion, Tiger so drastically influenced the sports landscape that we can't ignore that. I've never seen that level of influence and greatness, and I lived through Jordan (not Ali though)
That has to count for something. I think phenomenon and influence is enough to propel Tiger past Jack. We can't ignore phenomenon and impact when appraising CC either.
Sports is, after all entertainment. Championships alone, as a stand alone achievement, benefit no one but the athlete or program themselves. It's everything surrounding it: camaraderie, legacy, attitude, flash, media, sensationalism, that makes winning and sports in general, meaningful to the public.
Expand ...
Maybe you didn't live through the Arnold/Jack, and Jack/Watson, and Jack/_____ era either? While there was no social media and 'influencer' wasn't even a word(:eek:), Saturday/Sunday afternoons in front of the B&W TV were can't miss events and the money and participation exploded.

(I also lived through the Wilt/Russell battles and Russell's 11 of 13 championship seasons dominance of the NBA when defense was actually a thing, so I say Jordon who? :D:cool:

I do agree that Tiger is in the conversation for Goat, just as Jordon and his 6 are. and Jabar and his 6, and Magic and his 5, and Wilt and his 2.

I think we need to wait quite a while before we can put Clark in perspective. The explosion in WBB is an ongoing thing and Clark is just the latest 'part.' It helps that ESPN takes a story and runs it to death with any sport they 'own.' The women's scoring record she broke was Plum's who also put her team on the map when she led them to a FF, but no one ever referred to her as a possible Goat.
 
OviedoFLHusky said:
How about saying that Caitlin may be one of the greatest, if not The GOAT, never to win a national championship?
Expand ...
Sabrina Ionescu, Courtney Vandersloot, Kelsey Plum, and Jackie Stiles say hi

My opinion, FWIW, is that the discussion is premature. Caitlin has done much for women’s basketball, raising its visibility and bringing in new fans, and doing it with class and humility. Her ability is undeniable and though people will quibble over turnovers or whatever, IMO it’s indisputable that Caitlin is one of the greatest women college players to date.

But, there have been many great players that have left their imprints on the game, Cheryl Miller, Sheryl Swoopes, Tina Thompson, Lisa Leslie, Tischa Penechiero…. I could go on and on. Caitlin will leave her mark, to be sure, but it’s part of the tapestry that makes up the game we love. The discussion of “best ever” changes yearly, as it should, because that means the game is still growing and that’s exciting.
 
Last edited:
Rowdy831 said:
If Tiger played Jack when both were at their best Tiger would win. He by far the best to ever play the game and easily the most influential too. He was slowed by knee and back issues but that doesn't take away from what he did for the game. By your standard Bill Russell would have to be the best player of all time in basketball and I don't know of anyone who would make that argument.

Now you have a guy like Scottie Scheffler on the scene who gets no real credit for his greatness but is consistently and quickly moving up the list of all time players.
Expand ...
You misread my post (I think @UcMiami is the one you meant to reply to)
I think Tiger is the best golfer ever and most influential athlete ever. Maybe the best single athlete of all time- ability and public reception.
(And I'd never say russell is the best. I'd say Jordan every time.)
 
Last edited:
Rowdy831 said:
If Tiger played Jack when both were at their best Tiger would win. He by far the best to ever play the game and easily the most influential too. He was slowed by knee and back issues but that doesn't take away from what he did for the game. By your standard Bill Russell would have to be the best player of all time in basketball and I don't know of anyone who would make that argument.

Now you have a guy like Scottie Scheffler on the scene who gets no real credit for his greatness but is consistently and quickly moving up the list of all time players.
Expand ...
If Tiger played with the equipment and the balls available to Jack for his professional career, I think it would be a 50/50 proposition. I love Tiger and at his best he was phenomenal. I also really enjoyed Jordon, and Jabar, and Magic, but wow, was Russell amazing. Comparing between eras is always fraught with issues - the competition, the sports medicine and athletic training, the aids to recovery, and the equipment changes drastically over time. Think about the difference between Air Jordans and Chuck Taylors, let alone whatever is the current rage - make LeBron wear Chuck Taylors and see how special he looks and how long he stays healthy! :eek:
 
HuskyNan said:
Sabrina Ionescu, Courtney Vandersloot, Kelsey Plum, and Jackie Stiles say hi

My opinion, FWIW, is that the discussion is premature. Caitlin has done much for women’s basketball, raising its visibility and bringing in new fans, and doing it with class and humility. Her ability is undeniable and though people will quibble over turnovers or whatever, IMO it’s indisputable that Caitlin is one of the greatest women college players to date.

But, there have been many great players that have left their imprints on the game, Cheryl Miller, Sheryl Swoopes, Tina Thompson, Lisa Leslie, Tischa Penechiero…. I could go on and on. Caitlin will leave her mark, to be sure, but it’s part of the tapestry that makes up the game we love. The discussion of “best ever” changes yearly, as it should, because that means the game is still growing and that’s exciting.
Expand ...
I said "Caitlin may be one of the greatest ...". Does not exclude others from the conversation!
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,535
Messages
4,580,937
Members
10,491
Latest member
7774Forever


Top Bottom