Should Clark be on the Olympic team? | Page 5 | The Boneyard

Should Clark be on the Olympic team?

Should CC be on Olympic team?

  • Yes

    Votes: 78 41.1%

  • No

    Votes: 90 47.4%

  • I don’t know

    Votes: 22 11.6%
  • Total voters
    190
Status
Not open for further replies.
Vowelguy said:
So I take it you were against Lobo being on the 96 Olympics?
Expand ...

I'll tell you who wasn't too thrilled Lobo was on the team, the coach Tara Vanderveer. She felt the popularity of the UCONN women and Lobo was forced on that team. But at least in that case Lobo finished her college season in 95 and the Olympics wasn't until 96. There was time to get acclimated. Add to that there was no WNBA yet. And if I recall correctly Lobo didn't play very much at all. I'm not so sure Clark would have played much had she been named to this Olympic team.
 
After seeing a few plays from the CT-IN game last night, here's a thought and eye test on whether she should be on the Olympic squad. First, there are only 144 players in the WNBA, and 12 of them are reported to be on the Olympic team. Last night, in addition to her 3 picks on Clark, DiJonai Carrington had 22 points. Clark had 10 pts, 3 TO. AFAICT, Carrington has never been involved in USAB.

So, as a 4th year pro, if Carrington can lock down Clark, exactly what would happen when the USA goes up against other stronger hoop teams that have mostly experienced players? And, imagine the outrage if/when the US team is in close games vs other countries that are starting to catch up, and Reeves doesn't play Clark? Oh the humanity. And the media outrage of her not getting PT would be disrespectful and distracting to the others on the team.
 
Possible reaction by the causal fan:

"I saw Caitlin at Iowa, and she was very impressive. If she couldn't make Team USA, those other players must be REALLY good. I need to watch them."
 
MilfordHusky said:
Possible reaction by the causal fan:

"I saw Caitlin at Iowa, and she was very impressive. If she couldn't make Team USA, those other players must be REALLY good. I need to watch them."
Expand ...
More probable reaction by the casual fan.

"I saw Caitlin at Iowa, and she was very impressive. If she couldn't make Team USA, " there must be a conspiracy against her. Look no further than Dawn Staley who is on the committee. She hates Caitlin for busting up her two year unbeaten streak and outshining Aliyah Boston who is a WNBA flop.
 
Last edited:
visitingcock said:
More probable reaction by the casual fan.

"I saw Caitlin at Iowa, and she was very impressive. If she couldn't make Team USA, " there must be a conspiracy against her. Look no further than Dawn Staley who is on the committee. She hates Caitlin for busting up her two year unbeaten streak and outshining Aliyah Boston who is a WNBA flop.
Expand ...
Oh you are brave! I was gonna go there, but decided to message someone instead ... :D
 
.-.
visitingcock said:
More probable reaction by the casual fan.

"I saw Caitlin at Iowa, and she was very impressive. If she couldn't make Team USA, " there must be a conspiracy against her. Look no further than Dawn Staley who is on the committee. She hates Caitlin for busting up her two year unbeaten streak and outshining Aliyah Boston who is a WNBA flop.
Expand ...

Finally it's not Geno's fault
 
What really annoys me about this is that Diana has been dragged into this. When they started making the roster, you know who was the first name on the list ? DIANA TAURASI. Why ? Because she's going for a record sixth Gold Medal. Anyone who's opinion actually matters on this issue would know that. All the social media ragers have no idea about this whatsoever. And NBC will make that a huge story of the Olympics and I'd wager they mention Caitlin Clark on day one and not again after.
 
Aluminny69 said:
So, I believe Diana Taurasi played on Olympic Team the year she graduated, 2004. There must be others.

My question is, who gets the 12th roster spot, a 40 year old Taurasi, or a 22 year old Clark?
Expand ...
The one going for her 6th gold medal. Want Clark on the team ? Take someone else off, Diana was the first name on the list, not the last.

E8PXqOPVoAgMwxN.jpg
 
DRBackup said:
What really annoys me about this is that Diana has been dragged into this. When they started making the roster, you know who was the first name on the list ? DIANA TAURASI. Why ? Because she's going for a record sixth Gold Medal. Anyone who's opinion actually matters on this issue would know that. All the social media ragers have no idea about this whatsoever. And NBC will make that a huge story of the Olympics and I'd wager they mention Caitlin Clark on day one and not again after.
Expand ...

When the discussion first came about on who should make the team, I said if Diana wants to be on it, she will be. There were so many comments telling me I was wrong. They are giving her the same kind of love they gave Catchings.
 
visitingcock said:
More probable reaction by the casual fan.

"I saw Caitlin at Iowa, and she was very impressive. If she couldn't make Team USA, " there must be a conspiracy against her. Look no further than Dawn Staley who is on the committee. She hates Caitlin for busting up her two year unbeaten streak and outshining Aliyah Boston who is a WNBA flop.
Expand ...
1000009465.jpg

It's happening....
 
.-.
visitingcock said:
More probable reaction by the casual fan.

"I saw Caitlin at Iowa, and she was very impressive. If she couldn't make Team USA, " there must be a conspiracy against her. Look no further than Dawn Staley who is on the committee. She hates Caitlin for busting up her two year unbeaten streak and outshining Aliyah Boston who is a WNBA flop.
Expand ...

Well, if one is prone to looking for and believing conspiracy theories.
 
Of course she should be on the team, she's the reason women's basketball and the WNBA are having this moment. It almost seems like people involved with the sport are intentionally not trying to grow the game...

This is a golden opportunity to sell the sport globally while the sport is having by far it's most success ever and they're leaving out the player who has brought them all this success. David Stern understood the importance of this back in '92 it's bonkers to me the people in charge are taking things for granted now.
 
Last edited:
OMG I'm so tired of hearing her name and we're not even halfway through the season. Every player on that team went to training camp and earned their place. They deserve to be there. She will have plenty of time to go and win numerous gold medals in her career. Statistically she's not even the best rookie. The relentless narrative pushed by the media and some of her toxic fanbase are just exhausting now. Instead of congratulating the team, they have to listen non-stop about CC's imaginary "snub." It shouldn't be a popularity contest to win a gold medal. The only ones in the media who've gotten it right are Geno (on the Dan Patrick show), Monica McNutt and Andraya Carter. The rest are so disrespectful of the vets that earned their place.
 
.-.
I would've been fine with Caitlin going in Taurasi's place, but oh well.

That said, I don't think she's a snub. Arike is. Given how she's played on both sides of the ball, she should be going in place of Kelsey Plum.
 
WBBTakeover said:
I would've been fine with Caitlin going in Taurasi's place, but oh well.

That said, I don't think she's a snub. Arike is. Given how she's played on both sides of the ball, she should be going in place of Kelsey Plum.
Expand ...
I’d be willing to bet that one of the marks against Arike was how she’d perform in a system where she wasn’t the focal point.
 
GoUconn7961 said:
Statistically she's not even the best rookie.
Expand ...
Which rookies are better statistically than Clark, GoUConn7961?

About her shooting percentages and TOs, I can agree, but the combination of her scoring, assists and rebounds are pretty impressive for a rookie, agreed?
 
The deacon said:
Which rookies are better statistically than Clark, GoUConn7961?

About her shooting percentages and TOs, I can agree, but the combination of her scoring, assists and rebounds are pretty impressive for a rookie, agreed?
Expand ...
pretty impressive standing on their own but low shooting percentages can negate scoring and TOs can negate assists. It all has to be looked at together plus defense: steals , blocks etc
 
visitingcock said:
pretty impressive standing on their own but low shooting percentages can negate scoring and TOs can negate assists. It all has to be looked at together plus defense: steals , blocks etc
Expand ...
People always talk about the assist numbers without balancing them against turnovers and it’s maddening. 6 assists when you average 5.5 turnovers is not impressive. That is not a good assist to turnover ratio for a PG.

Especially when those turnovers are typically live ball turnovers that result easy points for the other team.

Angle Reese is top 5 in steals per game and rebounds per game and might still be leading the league in offensive rebounds per game and is close to averaging a double double. I know Caitlin will run away with ROY because the only stars anyone cares about is scoring and no rookie will come close to her in that this year.
 
The deacon said:
Which rookies are better statistically than Clark, GoUConn7961?

About her shooting percentages and TOs, I can agree, but the combination of her scoring, assists and rebounds are pretty impressive for a rookie, agreed?
Expand ...
No she's not even close to what players like Stewie, and A'ja did in their first year in the WNBA. You can also add Parker, and Maya Moore who had much better first years.
 
.-.
visitingcock said:
pretty impressive standing on their own but low shooting percentages can negate scoring and TOs can negate assists. It all has to be looked at together plus defense: steals , blocks etc
Expand ...
Inarguable, visitingcock, and I totally agree Caitlin has improvement needed, understandably since she's early in her rookie season and faces defensive pressure unlike any before...

Yet I ask again, as I did of GoUConn761, which rookie(s) have better stats?
 
The deacon said:
Inarguable, visitingcock, and I totally agree Caitlin has improvement needed, understandably since she's early in her rookie season and faces defensive pressure unlike any before...

Yet I ask again, as I did of GoUConn761, which rookie(s) have better stats?
Expand ...
So why are we looking only at her? Waaaaaaahhhhhhh! Boston should be on the team. She had great rookie stats - for a full, rather than part of, a year. She was an allstar selection and Rookie of the Year. Waaaaaaahhhhhhhhh! But that wasn't enough to beat out the chosen ones. Boston hasn't earned a spot despite an excellent first year,

I would not have had a problem if they had chosen Clark for financial reasons. "Grow the Game" is valid in my mind,

I also have no problem with her being excluded because she hasn't earned it. I just wish the new-to-the-game whiners would grow up. Clark will have the opportunity to EARN A SPOT in the future. You can't always get what you want - NOW.
 
The deacon said:
Inarguable, visitingcock, and I totally agree Caitlin has improvement needed, understandably since she's early in her rookie season and faces defensive pressure unlike any before...

Yet I ask again, as I did of GoUConn761, which rookie(s) have better stats?
Expand ...
Well, I'm no expert like you seem to be but according to ESPN:

"
The metrics don’t love Caitlin Clark.

Clark, the No. 1 pick in the 2024 WNBA Draft, is stunningly No. 6 in ESPN’s ranking of rookies based on a variety of advanced statistics.

The former Iowa star falls behind, in order: Cameron Brink (No. 2 pick), Angel Reese (No. 7), former Iowa teammate Kate Martin (No. 18), Rickea Jackson (No. 4) and Julie Vanloo (international signing).

Clark leads WNBA rookies with 15.6 points per game entering Friday, more than four points ahead of the second-highest scorer in Reese, but ESPN’s models are dinging her for her mediocre shooting numbers and poor defense."
 
visitingcock said:
So why are we looking only at her? Waaaaaaahhhhhhh! Boston should be on the team. She had great rookie stats - for a full, rather than part of, a year. She was an allstar selection and Rookie of the Year. Waaaaaaahhhhhhhhh! But that wasn't enough to beat out the chosen ones. Boston hasn't earned a spot despite an excellent first year,

I would not have had a problem if they had chosen Clark for financial reasons. "Grow the Game" is valid in my mind,

I also have no problem with her being excluded because she hasn't earned it. I just wish the new-to-the-game whiners would grow up. Clark will have the opportunity to EARN A SPOT in the future. You can't always get what you want - NOW.
Expand ...
I love this response. And honestly, the person who should be all over the media is A'ja Wilson. I'm just tired of these women who have worked so hard to bring light on the W, and working to make successive Olympic teams being overshadowed by the media's obsession with CC. I haven't even seen one show say congratulations to the women who made the team! It's all about who was snubbed. WAAAAAAHHH is exactly right!!
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,221
Messages
4,557,813
Members
10,442
Latest member
StatsMan


Top Bottom