OT: How long can the WNBA pump up Clark?

[Blacketh’D]

It’s driving me nuts. Every other thread on the other board becomes a Caitlin thread. I don’t understand the fixation on this woman - or on Nika, either. Nika was a lightning rod for criticism as a Husky now she’s the board darling. I don’t get it

Nika was always both. There’s no reason to be negative now because she doesn’t play for us anymore. It’s pretty simple.

 

[DRR25]

Sometimes I think that the reason the announcers are hyping CC to the seeming exclusion of everyone else is that most of them don't know anyone else, and it's easier for them to focus on just one player than to actually learn about the league. This is not to say that there aren't some knowledgeable announcers and analysts out there, it's just that they are few and far between.

I think this is more a factor than people realize. A large segment of sports media (media in general) is very lazy.

 

[maple]

Seriously, we're still going with this? Remind me again which team appeared in the last 2 National Championship games.

And they didn’t win, so what’s your point?

 

[Alydar]

"How long can the WNBA pump up Clark?"​

I think you got that backwards. And I think that the "Clark Effect" will diminish in a direct ratio to her made logo 3's. The mass audience wants to see unique play and Clark gave it to them but if she blends into the league then that mass crowd will find something else to ooh and aah over.

 

[Aluminny69]

So, Indiana Fever wins their first game on the road at the L.A. Sparks before over 19,000 fans. (Lakers averaged 18,900 fans by comparison.) After starting 0 for 7 for most of the game, Clark hit two logo threes in the last 2 minutes to help win the game. Unfortunately she shot both over Kia Nurse, who looked helpless to stop Clark. Fever had four players in double figures.They are still trying to figure how to play together despite minimum practice. Fagbenle needs more time, Smith less. Mitchell starting and playing major minutes has made a significant difference.

Personally, I believe Clark has shown remarkable maturity for a 22 year old, handling both the over the top hype as well the undeserved negativity. Both her parents and Iowa should be proud of the way she has handled herself through all this attention.

 

[Rowdy831]

Clark has benefited the WNBA by bring unprecedented publicity to the league.
It is pretty clear that she can be a good pro, but she is no Stewart, Bird, Taurasi, etc.

When you listen to the announcers, it is clear that the league is still trying to play the Clark card.
Eventually, this will backfire as new fans start to ask themselves what all the fuss is about and tune out.

She is way better than Bird and statistically Taurasi has been a good but not great player. I think that a lot of people have this thought of players who played but when you look at just the stats you find a much different player. If you haven't watched Clark play you might think she isn't playing good but so far the league is letting the defense foul her anytime she has the ball and she is getting very few calls. She is rebounding and assisting and a lot of her great passes aren't being converted by her teammates.

The fact is SHE is propping up a failed WNBA, not the opposite. She is clearly the best player on the court every night and if you need proof watch how she is defended and watch how they defend other so called stars of the league. When her team starts to play at the same level as CC she will get her points too and be the player you think she needs to be to be great.

 

[cancontent]

She is way better than Bird and statistically Taurasi has been a good but not great player. I think that a lot of people have this thought of players who played but when you look at just the stats you find a much different player. If you haven't watched Clark play you might think she isn't playing good but so far the league is letting the defense foul her anytime she has the ball and she is getting very few calls. She is rebounding and assisting and a lot of her great passes aren't being converted by her teammates.

The fact is SHE is propping up a failed WNBA, not the opposite. She is clearly the best player on the court every night and if you need proof watch how she is defended and watch how they defend other so called stars of the league. When her team starts to play at the same level as CC she will get her points too and be the player you think she needs to be to be great.

How is she propping up a league that has seen growth in media viewership over several years prior to her arrival?

Per Chine Ogumike's opinion piece in the Player's Tribune "If I told you that you had a business that experienced a $140-million jump in revenue over five years … and now, on its own, was valued at over $1 billion? You would be jumping for joy.".

Yes, Clark's having impact on the league, but don't assume interest has spiked solely because of her. The efforts the WNBA has made in advance of her joining the league has had impact as well.

Allow Us to Reintroduce Ourselves | By Chiney Ogwumike

From being the target of jokes, to putting up juggernaut numbers. Women’s basketball is shining.

www.theplayerstribune.com

 

[DRR25]

She brings people to the games, and gets more people watching on TV.
But that also exposes that the Referees
Need to get better, the rough play of teams like Connecticut, and Miller as coach of Los Angeles needs to be corrected.
Let the people see how well the game can be played, on both ends of the floor.
Watch players like Stewie, and it's too bad EDD isn't playing
Parker at her best played a beautiful brand of basketball.

I don't get what "Miller as a coach of Los Angeles needs to be corrected" means. Can you explain?

 

[triaddukefan]

Ha.

 

[ConnManFan]

She is way better than Bird and statistically Taurasi has been a good but not great player.

Pretty bold statement backed up by nothing but hot air and bluster. Im willing to give Clark a benefit of a doubt, so let's start comparing when Clark is a WNBA Champ 3 times (her failure to win a championship in college we'll give a pass.), 1st team all WNBA 5 times, and all-WNBA 8 times. Those are all things those two all-time great players have accomplished that Clark can only hope to duplicate right now. It's simply not fair to compare Clark to all-time greats. She isnt that. A more fair comparison would be to Kelsey Plum or Sabrina Ionescu. High volume scorerws who are very good.

 

[Aluminny69]

Three WNBA games this year have drawn 1+ million viewers:
1. Fever vs Sun - 2.12M (5/14, ESPN2)
2. Fever vs Liberty - 1.71M (5/18, ABC)
3. Sparks vs Aces - 1.34M (5/18, ABC)
From 2009-23, the WNBA had zero (0) games with 1+ million viewers.
There’s now been 3 in one week.
This is crazy!

USA Today Sports

 

[BigTenGuy]

"How long can the WNBA pump up Clark?"​

I think you got that backwards. . . .

I hadn't opened this thread before today, but I do see it every time I check The Boneyard for commitments from the portal, and I agree that the thread title has it exactly backwards. The real question is How Long Can Caitlin Clark Pump Up the WNBA? It also seems illogical to me that many WBB fans seem to hope the answer is not very long.

Clark’s first six WNBA games include the top 3 WNBA TV audiences since 2002, the largest revenue game in WNBA history (at the Barclays Center), the largest home crowd in the storied history of the Seattle Storm (18,343), the largest LA Sparks home crowd in their 28-season history (19,103) etc. Can't find the effective date for this quote, but "according to ticketing company TFL (as reported on sportsbusinessjournal.com), the Fever had accounted for 65% of leaguewide ticket sales." How long can Clark keep pumping up the fortunes of the WNBA? Long enough for a bigger than expected financial bump from a new TV contract set to begin in the 2025-26 NBA/WNBA season?

How many WNBA boats Clark can lift, and for how long and how high, will depend on whether, and how fast, Clark can become a legitimate top 20 or so player in the WNBA. Can she do that? That remains to be seen. She is small (her reported 152 pounds seems inflated) and a very good, but not freakish athlete. Clark’s early WNBA experience has already highlighted flaws and shortcomings in her game. Her WNBA competitors are treating her exactly as they should on the court, harsh and physical, and making her earn everything (whether the league should lessen the physicality and bludgeon style of players like Alyssa Thomas are separate questions). At least early on, the Fever and Clark are getting every opponent's best effort, while the WNBA mistakenly over-schedules Clark for TV, with the Fever set to become the only team to play 7 games as of May 25. Tonight's game against the Aces will be the Fever's 3rd game in 4 days, while Las Vegas is coming off 3 days of rest. Good for ratings, I guess, at least in the short term.

Off the Court, it would be in the interests of WNBA fans and other WNBA players to be thankful for Caitlin Clark, even if silently. Some of the WNBA vets clearly get this, e.g., Jonquel Jones. Good for those that do.

 

[DRR25]

"Aces' Becky Hammon on narrative that WNBA players hate Caitlin Clark: 'Knock it off, it's not there'"​

Aces' Becky Hammon on narrative that WNBA players hate Caitlin Clark: 'Knock it off, it's not there'

Hammon and the Aces will host Clark and the Fever on Saturday night

www.cbssports.com

 

[cancontent]

I hadn't opened this thread before today, but I do see it every time I check The Boneyard for commitments from the portal, and I agree that the thread title has it exactly backwards. The real question is How Long Can Caitlin Clark Pump Up the WNBA? It also seems illogical to me that many WBB fans seem to hope the answer is not very long.

Clark’s first six WNBA games include the top 3 WNBA TV audiences since 2002, the largest revenue game in WNBA history (at the Barclays Center), the largest home crowd in the storied history of the Seattle Storm (18,343), the largest LA Sparks home crowd in their 28-season history (19,103) etc. Can't find the effective date for this quote, but "according to ticketing company TFL (as reported on sportsbusinessjournal.com), the Fever had accounted for 65% of leaguewide ticket sales." How long can Clark keep pumping up the fortunes of the WNBA? Long enough for a bigger than expected financial bump from a new TV contract set to begin in the 2025-26 NBA/WNBA season?

How many WNBA boats Clark can lift, and for how long and how high, will depend on whether, and how fast, Clark can become a legitimate top 20 or so player in the WNBA. Can she do that? That remains to be seen. She is small (her reported 152 pounds seems inflated) and a very good, but not freakish athlete. Clark’s early WNBA experience has already highlighted flaws and shortcomings in her game. Her WNBA competitors are treating her exactly as they should on the court, harsh and physical, and making her earn everything (whether the league should lessen the physicality and bludgeon style of players like Alyssa Thomas are separate questions). At least early on, the Fever and Clark are getting every opponent's best effort, while the WNBA mistakenly over-schedules Clark for TV, with the Fever set to become the only team to play 7 games as of May 25. Tonight's game against the Aces will be the Fever's 3rd game in 4 days, while Las Vegas is coming off 3 days of rest. Good for ratings, I guess, at least in the short term.

Off the Court, it would be in the interests of WNBA fans and other WNBA players to be thankful for Caitlin Clark, even if silently. Some of the WNBA vets clearly get this, e.g., Jonquel Jones. Good for those that do.

This is what I don't get. Where has it ever been explicitly said by a WNBA veteran that they're aren't happy to have Clark part of the league? This talking point is just as perplexing as those who thought Clark going to the WNBA was going to be a pay cut.

Just let them play the game and battle for a championship. We've seen some great games already this early into the season, with or without Clark being involved. Can't we just be grateful for the upswing and see where things go?

 

[omshanti]

She is way better than Bird and statistically Taurasi has been a good but not great player. I think that a lot of people have this thought of players who played but when you look at just the stats you find a much different player. If you haven't watched Clark play you might think she isn't playing good but so far the league is letting the defense foul her anytime she has the ball and she is getting very few calls. She is rebounding and assisting and a lot of her great passes aren't being converted by her teammates.

The fact is SHE is propping up a failed WNBA, not the opposite. She is clearly the best player on the court every night and if you need proof watch how she is defended and watch how they defend other so called stars of the league. When her team starts to play at the same level as CC she will get her points too and be the player you think she needs to be to be great.

There is a lot to unpack here. My question is how is ‘a failed WNBA’ failed? The WNBA has been around for years in case you haven’t noticed. The league is a PRO league. PROS play the game. in defense of CC… she is a rookie and media darling. So I guess CC was the best player on the court yesterday. Keep blaming Indiana players for CC’s turnovers. That’s classic.

 

[Bjbod]

I hadn't opened this thread before today, but I do see it every time I check The Boneyard for commitments from the portal, and I agree that the thread title has it exactly backwards. The real question is How Long Can Caitlin Clark Pump Up the WNBA? It also seems illogical to me that many WBB fans seem to hope the answer is not very long.

Clark’s first six WNBA games include the top 3 WNBA TV audiences since 2002, the largest revenue game in WNBA history (at the Barclays Center), the largest home crowd in the storied history of the Seattle Storm (18,343), the largest LA Sparks home crowd in their 28-season history (19,103) etc. Can't find the effective date for this quote, but "according to ticketing company TFL (as reported on sportsbusinessjournal.com), the Fever had accounted for 65% of leaguewide ticket sales." How long can Clark keep pumping up the fortunes of the WNBA? Long enough for a bigger than expected financial bump from a new TV contract set to begin in the 2025-26 NBA/WNBA season?

How many WNBA boats Clark can lift, and for how long and how high, will depend on whether, and how fast, Clark can become a legitimate top 20 or so player in the WNBA. Can she do that? That remains to be seen. She is small (her reported 152 pounds seems inflated) and a very good, but not freakish athlete. Clark’s early WNBA experience has already highlighted flaws and shortcomings in her game. Her WNBA competitors are treating her exactly as they should on the court, harsh and physical, and making her earn everything (whether the league should lessen the physicality and bludgeon style of players like Alyssa Thomas are separate questions). At least early on, the Fever and Clark are getting every opponent's best effort, while the WNBA mistakenly over-schedules Clark for TV, with the Fever set to become the only team to play 7 games as of May 25. Tonight's game against the Aces will be the Fever's 3rd game in 4 days, while Las Vegas is coming off 3 days of rest. Good for ratings, I guess, at least in the short term.

Off the Court, it would be in the interests of WNBA fans and other WNBA players to be thankful for Caitlin Clark, even if silently. Some of the WNBA vets clearly get this, e.g., Jonquel Jones. Good for those that do.

Caitlin has better skills than most of the WNBA players, but as Big Ten Guy points out, she suffers from being over matched physically. The League knows this, and they're taking advantage of this every night. I don't see the same amount of physicality imposed on any other player. Hammons knows this: last night they had a defensive player bumping her and leaning on her before she crossed half court, even when she didn't have the ball. Who else gets that treatment?

I don't think there's a conspiracy to humble CC. I think the opposing coaches are wise enough to recognize what's she's capable of and are just doing what it takes to counter her talents. But, CC is smart and driven to succeed. We won't see this in the 2024 season because she simply doesn't have the time to retool, but next season I think we'll see a physically stronger Caitlin with some new offensive tricks up her sleeve.

 

[ISUnorth]

Caitlin has better skills than most of the WNBA players, but as Big Ten Guy points out, she suffers from being over matched physically. The League knows this, and they're taking advantage of this every night. I don't see the same amount of physicality imposed on any other player. Hammons knows this: last night they had a defensive player bumping her and leaning on her before she crossed half court, even when she didn't have the ball. Who else gets that treatment?

I don't think there's a conspiracy to humble CC. I think the opposing coaches are wise enough to recognize what's she's capable of and are just doing what it takes to counter her talents. But, CC is smart and driven to succeed. We won't see this in the 2024 season because she simply doesn't have the time to retool, but next season I think we'll see a physically stronger Caitlin with some new offensive tricks up her sleeve.

Like this take. After her rookie year my Cyclones Bridget Carleton managed to hang onto a roster spot in WNBA and make a career after getting leaner and better shape than she ever was playing at Iowa State. Think maybe the same for the Hawks Gustafson. Clark is probably going to need some muscle.

Hawk sidebar: I flipped into the Fever/Aces game the other night. Hope Hawkeye fans were watching because Clark, Gustafson and Martin were all in the game at the same time. Bluder and Jensen were in the crowd. Throw in Iowan Kia Stokes and it was quite the Iowa Fest. Martin guarding Clark was fun and Martin's 12 pts and 7 rb proves she isn't just a token 12th player on the roster. (There are spots on rosters for Swiss Army Knife or "glue" players.) And the expressive Kelsey Plum was on the court, was pretty good viewing the first half.

 

[CalWBBfan]

Given this thread is about Clark I came across this column from The Guardian today which I thought worth sharing:
Caitlin Clark’s toxic cultists are ruining things for the WNBA’s longtime fans

If there’s been a downside to the WNBA’s influx of new fans, it’s the phenomenon best described as Caitlin Clark derangement syndrome. And it needs to stop.

 

[Bigboote]

Given this thread is about Clark I came across this column from The Guardian today which I thought worth sharing:
Caitlin Clark’s toxic cultists are ruining things for the WNBA’s longtime fans

This pretty much sums up my excitement and trepidations at the new WNBA fans Clark would draw in. On the one hand, excited for the increased revenue. On the other hand, trepidations as the possibility of a bunch of yahoos who come in and discover that the whole game isn’t about Caitlin. That can goe a few different directions.

It could go the way that every influx of fans has gone, with a huge increase one year that ebbs and disappears within two years or so.

It could lead to a sustained increase in attendance and viewership, partly as a result of the new fans becoming genuinely interested and learning about the league.

The ”cultists” (and the media for that matter) could keep it up and drive long-time fans away.

 

[iri10]

As others have already implied, it's important to separate Caitlin Clark from the circus that follows Caitlin Clark. I feel pretty confident that Caitlin knew what she was getting into when she entered the WNBA. That she would not be treated with kid's gloves, that she would have the privilege and the challenge of having to prove that she can hang with anyone at this level. And she will prove it. I feel that quite strongly.

Many people who are suddenly following women's basketball because of Caitlin are seemingly not aware of the challenges Clark has/will face. And some of them are not merely unaware of this, but seemingly act with hostility at the very idea of it. Not the Caitlin fans here, so far as I can tell, but hordes of the more casual viewers (and non-viewers in some cases) on the larger social media sites.

I don't follow Caitlin closely, but it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if Caitlin were embarrassed by the antics of some of the frothing social media fans. It may be that these fans have taken it personally. That they perceive Caitlin as aligning with them, and most of the rest of the players and long term fans are part of the "Others" group. That when the old timers don't genuflect for Clark, they're disrespecting her -- and by implication, also disrespecting the new fans for helping make their league "relevant."

I don't think Clark is interested in Othering all of her colleagues for the same reasons the circus is.

 

[cancontent]

As others have already implied, it's important to separate Caitlin Clark from the circus that follows Caitlin Clark. I feel pretty confident that Caitlin knew what she was getting into when she entered the WNBA. That she would not be treated with kid's gloves, that she would have the privilege and the challenge of having to prove that she can hang with anyone at this level. And she will prove it. I feel that quite strongly.

Many people who are suddenly following women's basketball because of Caitlin are seemingly not aware of the challenges Clark has/will face. And some of them are not merely unaware of this, but seemingly act with hostility at the very idea of it. Not the Caitlin fans here, so far as I can tell, but hordes of the more casual viewers (and non-viewers in some cases) on the larger social media sites.

I don't follow Caitlin closely, but it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if Caitlin were embarrassed by the antics of some of the frothing social media fans. It may be that these fans have taken it personally. That they perceive Caitlin as aligning with them, and most of the rest of the players and long term fans are part of the "Others" group. That when the old timers don't genuflect for Clark, they're disrespecting her -- and by implication, also disrespecting the new fans for helping make their league "relevant."

I don't think Clark is interested in Othering all of her colleagues for the same reasons the circus is.

There definitely is a lot of that, but it doesn't explain those who have played the sport and are in the media industry who have made similar comments.

For example, Barkley chastising WNBA vets on TV, calling them "petty". Does he not work with Candace Parker? Could he not have reached out to his colleague and asked for her insight before spouting off? He used to detest that type of attitude from media when he played and now he's doing the same.

Or others like Marcellus Wiley who have mused the WNBA is screwing things up by not "making it easier for Clark to win games". Really? Didn't see this type of wailing for Wemby this season coming into the NBA and he's supposedly this potential unicorn himself.

That's probably what frustrates me more than new fans. The media knows better but aren't doing their job so they can get more engagement through these same social media channels.

 

[WBBTakeover]

I personally hope that people come to see Clark and then stay to watch Stewie or someone else in their prime. The rising tide (i.e. the Clark hype) raises all ships. I don't see it as a bad decision.

A'ja Wilson

 

[WBBTakeover]

Who are we protecting Caitlin Clark from exactly?

This article hits at the heart of the issue with the Caitlin Clark narrative and hints to the group of men that may now be the biggest culprits for actively promoting said narrative. No surprise that Charles Barkley was involved.