Geno On Caitlin Clark

[RoadMaster]

Geno Auriemma says Caitlin Clark is being 'targeted' in WNBA | FOX Sports

Legendary UConn coach Geno Auriemma weighed in on the Caitlin Clark debate, saying she is being "targeted" thus far in the WNBA.

www.foxsports.com

 

[GoUconn7961]

This is one ocean I have no interest in wading in...

 

[nwhoopfan]

Very very interesting. I think the debate about her is going to keep raging all season. I'm also in the camp that this is beyond the normal "welcome to the pros, kid" kind of behavior going on.

 

[DEpup]

And I'll also say as long as CC keeps up with that extreme arm bar that refs have decided to let her get away with, WNBA guards are going to react. I know everyone does it but in my opinion, her space creating arm bar while she is dribbling can often go beyond legal.

 

[cancontent]

Geno: Hardships expected, but Clark 'targeted'

UConn's Geno Auriemma said that while "rookie hardships" are expected in the WNBA, he thinks No. 1 pick Caitlin Clark has been "targeted" with physical play.

www.espn.com

It's interesting how it differs from some of his former players. What still confuses me are the following:

1). Other than the Carter hit and her tweet, everything about the implied "hate" is anecdotal at best. Where's the proof versus assumptions based on gut feelings?

2). Why is it necessary to lecture the players? They're intelligent business savvy people who also know their collective bargaining agreement is coming up soon. They're very aware of how this could impact their future earnings. They're not stupid.

 

[cancontent]

The 5 minute clip does so much better on providing context. Worth watching. FYI - there is some bleeping towards the end because they touch on McAfee, but it's brief.

 

[DRR25]

Geno Auriemma says Caitlin Clark is being 'targeted' in WNBA | FOX Sports

Legendary UConn coach Geno Auriemma weighed in on the Caitlin Clark debate, saying she is being "targeted" thus far in the WNBA.

www.foxsports.com

The Fox article didn't include all of Auriemma's comments, doesn't include the full context of what he's said, including calling out the "delusional fanbase that follows" Clark.

 

[DRR25]

Geno Auriemma says Caitlin Clark is being 'targeted' in WNBA | FOX Sports

Legendary UConn coach Geno Auriemma weighed in on the Caitlin Clark debate, saying she is being "targeted" thus far in the WNBA.

www.foxsports.com

Whether you agree with him or not, the Fox article didn't include all of Auriemma's comments, didn't include the full context of what he's said. The article made it sound like Auriemma was saying only that Clark was targeted by W players when what he said was that Clark was "Targeted by society," "Targeted by her looks. Targeted by her reputation. Targeted by the disrespect that (some fans have) shown to the WNBA. There's a huge target on this kid's back." He also called out the "delusional fanbase that follows" Clark.

 

[TN-Gamecock]

I like him a lot. The part I don't get is that, he states that Caitlin is on the wrong team. She had no choice. So my question to him is, where would she thrive? I wish he would've answered that.

All that said, I am a huge Caitlin fan!! She is good for the women's game due to the class that she exudes. She never has a bad thing to say about a player that has literally rung her neck. I would tell Caitlin just keep doing what you're doing cause America is behind her. I would be willing to bet she has more fans than all the WNBA teams combined.

She's also good for TV, sponsorships (been in the WNBA less than 2 months and already has a 5 million dollar net worth), and society as a whole.

 

[nwhoopfan]

The more I heard of that interview, the more I disagreed. He was overstating as far as having a WNBA type of body. Look around the league. Players come in all shapes and sizes. There are some extremely lanky players who have thrived. Sure she could get a little stronger, but that's pretty normal.

And what the heck with already judging this rookie class and their place in history. They are 8-10 games into their careers. You CANNOT determine how any class is ultimately going to turn out after such a brief period. That's just silly.

 

[TN-Gamecock]

The more I heard of that interview, the more I disagreed. He was overstating as far as having a WNBA type of body. Look around the league. Players come in all shapes and sizes. There are some extremely lanky players who have thrived. Sure she could get a little stronger, but that's pretty normal.

And what the heck with already judging this rookie class and their place in history. They are 8-10 games into their careers. You CANNOT determine how any class is ultimately going to turn out after such a brief period. That's just silly.

And Sue Bird is not really an adonis...but all in all, I do like his commentary even though he can be a little gruff...

 

[cancontent]

The more I heard of that interview, the more I disagreed. He was overstating as far as having a WNBA type of body. Look around the league. Players come in all shapes and sizes. There are some extremely lanky players who have thrived. Sure she could get a little stronger, but that's pretty normal.

And what the heck with already judging this rookie class and their place in history. They are 8-10 games into their careers. You CANNOT determine how any class is ultimately going to turn out after such a brief period. That's just silly.

Re the class comment, I agree but I think he's trying to temper what has been said about the class in comparison to other classes. Others have tried to place them in a category as one of the "strongest" or "best" classes.

 

[nwhoopfan]

Re the class comment, I agree but I think he's trying to temper what has been said about the class in comparison to other classes. Others have tried to place them in a category as one of the "strongest" or "best" classes.

Agree it's too early to declare how great they are as well.

 

[DRR25]

I like him a lot. The part I don't get is that, he states that Caitlin is on the wrong team. She had no choice. So my question to him is, where would she thrive? I wish he would've answered that.

All that said, I am a huge Caitlin fan!! She is good for the women's game due to the class that she exudes. She never has a bad thing to say about a player that has literally rung her neck. I would tell Caitlin just keep doing what you're doing cause America is behind her. I would be willing to bet she has more fans than all the WNBA teams combined.

She's also good for TV, sponsorships (been in the WNBA less than 2 months and already has a 5 million dollar net worth), and society as a whole.

I think he may have said that a better fit would be on a more veteran team. Clark came in with a ton of pressure on her to be the savior of the Fever and that is a hard place for a rookie to be, especially on a team so young like the Fever.

 

[WBBTakeover]

So my question to him is, where would she thrive?

Las Vegas. She'd have to become a more consistent defender, but she'd develop well under Becky Hammon's tutelage.

 

[Striper69]

If I were the Fever coach I would've have thrown her directly into the fire. Noone in their right mind would think that she was ready right off the bat to start. She just came off a long college season and took a lot of physical abuse. Give her a chance to rest and ease her into being the leader of the team. I would play her a few minutes here and there and let my vets run the show.
In my opinion she's like what Stewie and Delle Donne are to scoring forwards. She is the best point guard, male or female since Bobby Hurley. She needs time to practice with the team and the coaches must make changes, if needed to best take advantage of her talents. Once that happens no teams will be able to double team her and she can foul out anyone who tries to play her too rough.

 

[bballnut90]

The more I heard of that interview, the more I disagreed. He was overstating as far as having a WNBA type of body. Look around the league. Players come in all shapes and sizes. There are some extremely lanky players who have thrived. Sure she could get a little stronger, but that's pretty normal.

And what the heck with already judging this rookie class and their place in history. They are 8-10 games into their careers. You CANNOT determine how any class is ultimately going to turn out after such a brief period. That's just silly.

100% same reaction here. I didn’t agree with most of what he said.

 

[JellyBean]

Coach is like the rest of us, just making a comment. I disagree with his comments, but he is just expressing his opinion.

 

[RockyMTblue2]

This interview is by a Geno who had time to process his mess of an interview on the Dan Patrick Show. No, no, you say. Geno didn't make mess. Okay, maybe it is just my opinion that he embarassed himself there. Question: who set her up for failure Geno. Why doesn't her game fit? There is more. I was shocked. He wasn't called on his reckless statements. You don't call out Hall of Fame coaches.

But it isn't there first time that Geno put his foot in his mouth. As much as he has been interviewed, he is bound to screw up now and again. And, Geno likes the sound of his own voice too much. I love the guy, but he does.

This one he just should have demurred on.

 

[diggerfoot]

If I were the Fever coach I would've have thrown her directly into the fire. Noone in their right mind would think that she was ready right off the bat to start. She just came off a long college season and took a lot of physical abuse. Give her a chance to rest and ease her into being the leader of the team. I would play her a few minutes here and there and let my vets run the show.
In my opinion she's like what Stewie and Delle Donne are to scoring forwards. She is the best point guard, male or female since Bobby Hurley. She needs time to practice with the team and the coaches must make changes, if needed to best take advantage of her talents. Once that happens no teams will be able to double team her and she can foul out anyone who tries to play her too rough.

With a great player like Clark there will be hyperbole on both sides. The “haters” do not affect a great one’s game, indeed, they often thrive on it. More of a burden to a player are unrealistic expectations generated by the hype of fans.

Elite point guards like Bird and Vandersloot have A/T ratios around the 2.5 range; Clark‘s currently sits at 1.2, which is less than the 1.3 of the team as a whole. That’s definitely not what qualifies as an elite point guard, no matter what the assist total is. In order for Clark to live up to such hyperbole one of three things need to happen.

1. Clark needs to become a better decision maker as a point guard. She should improve upon her 1.2 A/T ratio, but her college career suggests a low ceiling for a point guard. She went from 1.5 as a freshman to 1.9 as a senior, with a slight climb above 2.0 her junior year. Her problem has always been high turnovers. There is a big reason why she is not likely to reach 2.0 with the Fever …

2. Clark needs to be on a team that shoots better. Clark’s Iowa teammates shot over 53% her junior and senior years. In fact, last year Clark’s teammates shot 8% better than her. For perspective, the Hoosiers were the best shooting team overall in wcbb at a little over 50%. There is no way the Fever will average as high as 50%, let alone a phenomenal 53%.

3. Clark needs to be used as an off guard or shooting guard where the decisions she needs to make are not the same. Playing a position currently better suited for her should help both her A/T ratio and her currently low shooting percentages. Playing off guard won’t do much for a reputation as the ”best point guard … since Bobby Hurley,” but neither will an A/T ratio that struggles to get near 2.0.

Again, the haters will not hurt a great one’s game. Unrealistic expectations however …

 

[Gamecockfan77]

I enjoy Geno.

 

[packwrap]

2. Clark needs to be on a team that shoots better. Clark’s Iowa teammates shot over 53% her junior and senior years. In fact, last year Clark’s teammates shot 8% better than her. For perspective, the Hoosiers were the best shooting team overall in wcbb at a little over 50%. There is no way the Fever will average as high as 50%, let alone a phenomenal 53%.

This point gets brought up often. A huge part of why those Iowa teammates shot well was the attention Clark got from the defense. Those teammates had mostly wide open layups or uncontested 3pt shots.
Similarly, it's said Clark has no mid range game, but that's not true. At Iowa they focused hard on only shooting 3s or layups, so deliberately there was no mid range. I'm not sure if that strategy is the same for the Fever.

 

[diggerfoot]

This point gets brought up often. A huge part of why those Iowa teammates shot well was the attention Clark got from the defense. Those teammates had mostly wide open layups or uncontested 3pt shots.
Similarly, it's said Clark has no mid range game, but that's not true. At Iowa they focused hard on only shooting 3s or layups, so deliberately there was no mid range. I'm not sure if that strategy is the same for the Fever.

Actually, I believe I am the only one pointing out that her teammates shot 53%. The only other time I heard anyone crediting her teammates was when an announcer claimed Iowa’s graduating class may have been the best ever. Also hyperbole, but at least someone was finally giving her teammates credit.

I do see the narrative you just made often though, how Clark lifted up her average teammates because of the attention she got. Several points here.

Think about how often BYers complain when one of our all-stars miss lay-ups. Charles, Cash, etc, lovingly accused of padding their rebounding stats because of how often they missed bunnies. Open or not, teammates still have to make their shots and …

53% is very rare. We are not even talking 50%, which generally turns out to be tops each year, such as the Indiana Hoosiers. If you want to tell me that Clark lifts her teammates up as high as 50% I would be dubious but I would not object to the point. 53%? 8% better than Clark? No way, no way at all that happens unless those teammates are pretty special in their own right. It really gets me how those teammates have been slighted by the very common narrative that Clark lifted up a bunch of average teammates. This was not Larry Bird playing with a mid-major Indiana State,

As to that last point surprise has been expressed at how well Martin from Iowa is doing in the pros. It shouldn’t be a surprise.

Not every team leaves Iowa teammates unguarded to focus on Clark. UConn didn’t, other teams with their own “Muhl” didn’t, yet it was Stuehlke who hurt us more in the FF game than Clark. Can you imagine where Iowa would have been seeded and finished in the tournament if her teammates shot only, say 3% better than Clark? The lifting up went both ways.

Maybe, just maybe, a coach and a team that had already produced a recent scoring champ in Gustafson knows what they are doing on offense. It’s a shame Bluder is retiring.

 

[visitingcock]

Actually, I believe I am the only one pointing out that her teammates shot 53%. The only other time I heard anyone crediting her teammates was when an announcer claimed Iowa’s graduating class may have been the best ever. Also hyperbole, but at least someone was finally giving her teammates credit.

I do see the narrative you just made often though, how Clark lifted up her average teammates because of the attention she got. Several points here.
, , , ,

Maybe, just maybe, a coach and a team that had already produced a recent scoring champ in Gustafson knows what they are doing on offense. It’s a shame Bluder is retiring.

Here's a Sam Kinnison-like critique of Bluders' Defense.

 

[Cockygirl]

Thats awesome!!!

An while we are on CC I'm so sick of the whining about her being left off of the USA roster.

Bottom line it would not have been fair to pick her over players that attended the mandatory mini camps. Not to mention that people are crying over the fact that her shooting percentages should have gotten her in... yet Arike has better percentages and did not make it either!

Ok ... rant over!!!!