Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="diggerfoot, post: 5300058, member: 1673"] Over the course of her first year in the WNBA, my impression of Clark grew more favorably. Initially, I thought she was more suited to be an off guard, now I think she can be an excellent point guard … if she cuts down on turnovers. The obstacle to this lies not so much with her as with her fans. If Pinicheiro, Vandersloot or Bird had the current expanded season at the peak of their careers, Clark would not yet have the season record for assists, yet she would still have the season record for turnovers. No one in the history of the WNBA has been turning the ball over at Clark’s rate. This is due in part to the fast pace in high possession offense she drives, but if you defend her on that, you fairly should consider that in her assist totals. Her fans that consider Clark the GOAT already do not and that contributes to the tail wagging the dog in terms of coaching her to be the best point guard she can be. I also now believe that Clark could be a better defensive player than I previously gave her credit. But why should she? Once again, her fans defend her as GOAT material in the absence of being a two way player. The NBA players in GOAT discussion are all two way players. Only Taurasi in the WNBA might not be considered a two way player, though even she was better than credited, having enjoyed a brief stint in the top ten of career blocks. Moore, Wilson, Catchings, all two way players, but Clark need not be because of the tail wagging the dog. Maybe she could be, but she need not be in the eyes of her fans. I also became increasingly impressed with Clark’s character off the court. It’s not easy for humans to handle being worshipped, a sense of entitlement ever grows. Clark has been worshipped like no other player before her. I think she has handled it well off the court, but on court we see more evidence of the tail wagging the dog, and I will just leave it at that. This begs the question of why she should be worshipped so by her fans (and the predictable counter reaction of being vilified in some quarters). Yes, she is a great passer, but Vandersloot, et al sees the court and passes just as well … without the turnovers. More importantly, she is a spectacular shooter, which is why I originally thought she would be more suited as an off guard. She makes shots from a distance that others would seldom take, most never. Yet she only shoots around 35% from three, respectable but not elite. I suspect if she took 3s from a normal distance her percentages may be elite, but why should she do that when the spectacular is what her fans want? It looks like no coach is going to change that as the tail continues to wag the dog. Meanwhile, her teammates as an upperclassmen to the present on have always had the highest percentages. I arrogantly predicted midseason last year that the Fever’s ceiling for shooting percentage would be 45%, never surpassing the Aces or Liberty. I was wrong. The Fever surpassed 45% and ended at the top. They are even higher if you subtract Clark’s own shooting numbers from the total. In retrospect, why shouldn’t Clark’s teammates have a high shooting percentage when you consider Mitchell’s and Boston’s superstardom in college? Also consider how being teamed up with elite shooters improves Clark’s assist numbers. I had hopes for White resisting the fan tail wagging the dog and simplifying what Clark’s role should be, restricting her in ways that would lead her to be the best superstar she could be, whether at point guard or off guard. Even if she remains a combo guard she could be given more coaching guidance and restriction. Yet in addition to the spectacular the new fandom that Clark has brought to the league seems to thrive on conflict on and off the court. This is not Clark’s fault, it is the tail wagging the dog. Despite the increase in support of the WNBA, I am not sure that is entirely a good thing. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach