I have been paying some passing attention to the WNBA recently due to the emergence of their new superstar Caitlin Clark. The former University of Iowa star busted every collegiate scoring record not only for women but men as well. Over 138 games Clark put up 3,951 points which averages out to 28.4 points per game (it is important to note, “Pistol” Pete Maravich holds the men’s NCAA scoring record for most points. While he did score almost 300 fewer points than Clark did in college he did so in 55 fewer games. His per game average of 44.2 will likely never be surpassed).
After lighting up the competition in college, Clark has emerged on the scene in the WNBA as a true star. She is top-15 in scoring, averaging 16.8 PPG and is fourth in assists with 6.3 per game. The Indiana Fever guard is near the top of every category among rookies and leads in both scoring and assists.
The hype around the arrival of Caitlin Clark was measurable by the fact the WNBA Draft drew 2.446 million viewers on ESPN making it the most-watched draft in the history of the league. The attention continued as Clark’s debut in the WNBA drew over 2 million viewers making it the largest audience to watch a WNBA game in 23 years and the largest cable broadcast of a WNBA game ever!
Clark’s arrival has led to greater television and live audiences which has meant more revenue for a league that has consistently been in the red since it was founded in 1996. A league which many of us sports fans had dubbed the “friends and family” league because that was essentially the audience, has suddenly become relevant, largely due to Clark.
So what has been the reaction to this possible savior – a player who has put the WNBA in the discussion on sports shows, has created social media buzz and has helped the league recognize a once seemingly impossible goal of being financially self-sufficient? In a word, that reaction can politely be described as… puzzling.
Here are some of the inexplicable events surrounding the Caitlin Clark debate and my take on each.
The Caitlin Clark rules
Nobody is saying that any star player in any league should be treated with so-called kid gloves. However, if you are speaking of a possible generational talent who could lead a financially stagnant league out of the wilderness, maybe the league should be sending a message to players who believe that taking liberties with Clark is all part of the game.
You see, one could make the case that in the NBA or NFL or NHL that giving a rookie star player a rough ride is OK because those leagues are “established” and their teams are profitable. However, when the WNBA has been thrown a life-line in the form of a sharp-shooting guard, maybe, just maybe, you take some reasonable measures to protect that lifeline.
The league and even the on-court officials seem to be unaware of the importance that Clark and her health play into the success of the WNBA. This isn’t the 1989 Chicago Bulls’ Michael Jordan in a thriving NBA. The GOAT was literally assaulted on the court in an effort to slow him down. That said, Jordan wasn’t the savior, he was a continuation of the foundation laid over the years, most recently in the 1980s by Magic Johnson and Larry Bird.
Most of this star (mis)treatment of his Airness, which came to be known as the “Jordan Rules”, occurred during play. This was not the case in a game involving Caitlin Clark on June 1 when she was fouled when the ball was not even in play. A hard off-the-ball foul by Chicago Sky guard Chennedy Carter on an inbounds pass inexplicably did not even initially warrant anything more than a common foul (it was upgraded after the game to a flagrant one foul).
There are many takeaways from the incident. The most important of those is that the league believes it is totally OK for opponents of Clark to operate outside the rules when they wish to “send a message” to the rookie phenom.
There are some other puzzling takeaways. First, there are the comments of Adam Silver, Commissioner of the NBA. You would think that the head of the league that has been financially propping up the WNBA for years would want to protect the NBA’s indirect investment. When Silver said in the aftermath of the incident that the foul was a “welcome to the league” moment for Clark and was “nothing new in basketball” I wonder if all the franchise owners in the NBA concurred. While on their face, Silver’s comments may have been correct the commissioner again is not speaking of a league, the WNBA, which has been financially stable. It was poor form by Silver to effectively endorse illegal play which could have led to the injury of the league’s golden ticket.
Another issue I have with what happened to Clark was the response of her teammates. The non-reaction of Clark’s teammates was, in my opinion, stunning. I have played various team sports and there has always been a pack mentality among teammates. When someone goes after your star player there must be a swift and appropriate response by that player’s teammates. The response does two things, it creates a stronger team bond and it draws a proverbial line in the sand. For those who have not played team sports at a competitive level you will not understand this schoolyard justice. When a bully punches you in the nose, you punch them back or they will continue to play the bully. Clark’s teammates clearly missed the memo on this point.
The Mean Girls of the WNBA
“Kudos to all of this women they have really made WNBA interesting… beside three point shooting what does (Clark) bring to the table man.” Chennedy Carter doubling down on her disdain for Caitlin Clark
The above quote is by no means the only one we have seen from WNBA players in relation to Caitlin Clark. The question is why? What can be the explanation for such vitriol directed toward a player who quite literally is breathing life into what was a stale league? I am searching my memory to remember this type of treatment for another “next one” player in any league and anyone can correct me if I a wrong but I just cannot recall this level of hate for a player.
Most times when a player like current young guns Connor Bedard (NHL); Victor Wembanyama (NBA); Trevor Lawrence (NFL) are being spoken about by veterans n their league it is in a positive manner. The respect is almost tangible. This is not to say that these young stars get a free pass on the playing surface but outside of the game they get the flowers they deserve from opponents.
This is not the case with Clark. Not only is she being abused on the court she is getting abused off it as well. There are multiple theories as to why but I think the possible reasons can be attributed to old fashioned jealousy and at least to some degree, race. Charles Barkley, a veteran of the NBA wars and a current NBA television analyst offered a candid take on the “cattiness” (his word – not mine but for the record I agree with his choice of words) of some WNBA players as it relates to Caitlin Clark.
Barkley focused mostly on the jealousy factor but there are those who have raised the specter of race as what may be behind some of the negative treatment of Clark. You see, Caitlin Clark is a white woman not only competing but exceling in a league dominated by black players. Almost two-thirds of all WNBA players are black. By comparison, just over one out of every ten players are white. Could it be that all the discussion of race over the years has gotten in the heads of some of the black players in the WNBA? I do not know definitively but in support of by belief is Angel Reese and how she has been treated. Reese is another WNBA player drafted this season and one who is putting up impressive numbers but is not receiving the same type of flames on or off the court from other players. By the way Angel Reese is black.
By contrast, the NBA has a number of white stars which the league and their fans embrace – most notably, Luka Doncic and three-time league MVP Nikola Jokic. While there are some NBA analysts such as Kendrick Perkins who have ridiculously brought up race to explain why, for example, Jokic has won multiple MVPs, most players just marvel at the play of Jokic and Doncic. Race doesn’t matter in the NBA. The league lived through the greatness of Larry Bird. The league and their fans understand when they see a “baller”, regardless of that player’s skin colour.
The biggest stage requires its biggest attraction – the Olympic slight
This last point is probably the one which can be filed under “what the hell were they thinking?”. In this case, the “they” is USA Basketball and the “what” is leaving Caitlin Clark off this summer’s Olympic team.
When the USA women’s basketball roster was announced this week it was an opportunity for USA Basketball to cash in on the celebrity of Caitlin Clark. Let’s be clear, it is not as if including Clark would have been controversial from a talent perspective. What it would have been from a purely marketing point-of-view is… smart.
I will never claim to know a great deal about basketball but it does not take a marketing genius to understand that including Clark on the roster for the Paris Games would have been a financial boon for women’s basketball. All of the millions of Caitlin Clark fans would have been hanging on every interview by the star and most importantly watching every minute of every game in which Team USA played (not to mention, buying all those Clark jerseys). People point out that Clark would have likely seen limited minutes, but so what? Her sitting on the bench would have drawn more viewers and sold more merchandise than a team without her as part of the roster.
I see a bit of a parallel with another young superstar in another sport. Back in 1991 hockey fans were salivating at the chance to watch an 18-year-old Eric Lindros compete on the international stage. Hockey Canada seized on that wave of interest and named Lindros to their 1991 Canada Cup roster. Recognize that Lindros who was a runaway number one draft pick at the NHL Draft in June of the same year had not played a single NHL game and you can see the comparisons. The difference is that Hockey Canada put aside all the cliches of saying Lindros had to “pay his dues” or leaning on tired assertions that he would “be a distraction to the team” and simply gave the fans what they wanted – the best young star since Mario Lemieux was drafted in 1984 playing on the stage with the best players in the world.
The decision by USA Basketball to leave Caitlin Clark off their Olympic roster guarantees one person for sure (and I am certain many others)- the author of this piece, will not be tuning in to watch even a single minute of women’s basketball at the Olympics.
One Dad With a Blog

