Should Caitlin Clark have been included on the Olympic team?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CC could definitely become a great player in the WNBA but it will take time. She’s not going to make first team all WNBA for at least 3 and more likely 5 years, and that’s ok. People thinking a rookie is the best player in the pro game just don’t know what they are talking about

5 years she may be retired. Things do not work that way even in the NBA. Larry Bird was the best player the year he joined. MJ was his second year. Magic took a year but that is all. It is her WNBA.

Clark might not even win rookie of the year, though I doubt you are ready to hear that.

That may be true. But whoever else does win, people will ask who the person is, if they ask about the WNBA at all.

First of all I doubt it. Second of all the mentality that says awards should go to the person with the biggest social media popularity is just nuts

You like popularity contests a lot if you agree with the Olympic team roster. That was its own popularity contest and Caitlin Clark can't sit with them.

[Anonymous]

Caitlin Clark proved her doubters wrong with a 7 point effort on 3-11 shooting and 1-6 from 3 tonight!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was waiting to buy tickets for the womens games. DD wanted to see CC. Now I can spend that money elsewhere.

I realize that as one person no one cares that I won't be buying 2 tickets. And yes, the games will probably sell out even without CC. But I'm probably not the only one who feels this way.

You were going to Paris? I’m sure if your DD really wants to see Caitlin play you can catch one of her games in the US.

People do actually attend the Olympics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Caitlin Clark proved her doubters wrong with a 7 point effort on 3-11 shooting and 1-6 from 3 tonight!

They just unleashed a Monster, coach!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you prefer for her to go and ride the bench? Team chemistry is important…I don’t see her fitting with this group. Matters not to be if she made the team or not; I’ll watch the games just like I’ve done for previous Olympics.

If you said this about a young black player, it would be racist.

A white woman being good at basketball is not exactly novel. There are four white women on the team. Four of the top 10 players in WNBA history - Breanna Stewart, Sue Bird, Diana T, and Lauren Jackson - are white. CC would have fit in fine. The reason she was left off the team was not racism but because she is shooting 37% from the field, 33% from 3, leads the league in turnovers, and is a below average defender. Those are the facts.

Yet better than Tuarasi across the board. But keep trying. Fact is they want her to pay her dues it's not about objectivity and talent.

Clark and Tuarasi have very similar stat lines this season.

But one is better.

Is it the one with 5 gold medals, 3 WNBA titles, 3 NCAA championships? Or the one that never won an NCAA championship?

I thought the Olympics are about the best of the best and what have you done for me lately? Are you saying we're just awarding people based on nostalgia now? Pick a lane.

Dont have to. DT still has the better stat line.

Wrong again.

Shooting splits are near identical between Taurasi and Caitlin Clark at similar volume. CC is 37/33/89 and Taurasi is 37/34/85. Points are similiar. 16.6 vs. 16.3. Caitlin Clark has more assists, but leads the league in turnovers by a wide margin. Neither is a plus defender. Honestly, neither should be on the team, but hard to see any metric by which Caitlin Clark is clearly better.

Nearly identical is not identical. You tried it though. Just admit you don't like her and will keep inventing reasons to keep her off the team.

DP. I like her. She's just not there yet. It's nothing personal.

Of course it is. We were told she was better. Then the stats came out and they were "near identical". If in doubt why wouldn't you take the person in the upswing of their career, not the downswing? There are obvious subjective factors at play here.

10/10 times I would take the veteran who has been there before and won multiple times over someone who has never been to an international competition and hasn’t even played a full season of professional basketball.

That’s basically the reason Alex Morgan is likely going to the Olympics over players who have a much better claim to go than CC.

I would not take the vet. Don't need to. Gold medal is a given.

Not sure gold medal is a given. Didn’t USA almost lost to Belgium last year? Stewart bucket on the buzzer saved them. The rest of the world is coming for Team USA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was waiting to buy tickets for the womens games. DD wanted to see CC. Now I can spend that money elsewhere.

I realize that as one person no one cares that I won't be buying 2 tickets. And yes, the games will probably sell out even without CC. But I'm probably not the only one who feels this way.

You were going to Paris? I’m sure if your DD really wants to see Caitlin play you can catch one of her games in the US.

People do actually attend the Olympics.

Myself and friends have been. I don’t think PP is one of those people who would.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Caitlin Clark proved her doubters wrong with a 7 point effort on 3-11 shooting and 1-6 from 3 tonight!

And a shit ton of assists, you moron.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you prefer for her to go and ride the bench? Team chemistry is important…I don’t see her fitting with this group. Matters not to be if she made the team or not; I’ll watch the games just like I’ve done for previous Olympics.

If you said this about a young black player, it would be racist.

A white woman being good at basketball is not exactly novel. There are four white women on the team. Four of the top 10 players in WNBA history - Breanna Stewart, Sue Bird, Diana T, and Lauren Jackson - are white. CC would have fit in fine. The reason she was left off the team was not racism but because she is shooting 37% from the field, 33% from 3, leads the league in turnovers, and is a below average defender. Those are the facts.

Yet better than Tuarasi across the board. But keep trying. Fact is they want her to pay her dues it's not about objectivity and talent.

Clark and Tuarasi have very similar stat lines this season.

But one is better.

Is it the one with 5 gold medals, 3 WNBA titles, 3 NCAA championships? Or the one that never won an NCAA championship?

I thought the Olympics are about the best of the best and what have you done for me lately? Are you saying we're just awarding people based on nostalgia now? Pick a lane.

Dont have to. DT still has the better stat line.

Wrong again.

Shooting splits are near identical between Taurasi and Caitlin Clark at similar volume. CC is 37/33/89 and Taurasi is 37/34/85. Points are similiar. 16.6 vs. 16.3. Caitlin Clark has more assists, but leads the league in turnovers by a wide margin. Neither is a plus defender. Honestly, neither should be on the team, but hard to see any metric by which Caitlin Clark is clearly better.

Nearly identical is not identical. You tried it though. Just admit you don't like her and will keep inventing reasons to keep her off the team.

DP. I like her. She's just not there yet. It's nothing personal.

Of course it is. We were told she was better. Then the stats came out and they were "near identical". If in doubt why wouldn't you take the person in the upswing of their career, not the downswing? There are obvious subjective factors at play here.

10/10 times I would take the veteran who has been there before and won multiple times over someone who has never been to an international competition and hasn’t even played a full season of professional basketball.

That’s basically the reason Alex Morgan is likely going to the Olympics over players who have a much better claim to go than CC.

I would not take the vet. Don't need to. Gold medal is a given.

Not sure gold medal is a given. Didn’t USA almost lost to Belgium last year? Stewart bucket on the buzzer saved them. The rest of the world is coming for Team USA.

Every betting site in the US and Europe considers the gold medal a given

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Caitlin Clark proved her doubters wrong with a 7 point effort on 3-11 shooting and 1-6 from 3 tonight!

And a shit ton of assists, you moron.

Not sure 6 assists with 7 turnovers is what you want to highlight?

[Anonymous]

She has class.
Despite being hated by the mean girls, she does take the high road.
Love her.

[Anonymous]

God, just for once I need her to take the low road and mention how Angel Reese sucks in comparison to her, and is only f-ing with her in order to stay in the news 🙏

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No. She didn’t even attend the tryout. She’s a rookie wnba player. The Olympics is about the best players, not putting together the team people want to watch.

Why is everyone who is b_ching about this ignoring this???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:God, just for once I need her to take the low road and mention how Angel Reese sucks in comparison to her, and is only f-ing with her in order to stay in the news 🙏

She had a lot better game than Reese today and then she was classy during the press conference about the flagrant foul by Reese, while meanwhile Angel was whining about the whistles. That’s three games in a row where Clark has bested Reese.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. She didn’t even attend the tryout. She’s a rookie wnba player. The Olympics is about the best players, not putting together the team people want to watch.

Why is everyone who is b_ching about this ignoring this???

The tryouts were scheduled during the NCAA tournament. She/Iowa had games to play during that time.

[Anonymous]

She needs her Charles Oakley or Draymond. The Fever management, coaching, and roster are all terrible. Other stars take their licks as rookies, but most have teammates who will rush in and that keeps things from getting out of hand. Clark's teammates don't stand up for her at all, the GM needs to send a message and cut a couple