Caitlin Clark

lawmanfan said:
I watch a lot of the W. The style of play is tremendous, the desire and effort of the players is tremendous, and there are absolutely tremendous players all over the league. It is a fabulous league to watch if you love the game.

My primary criticism of the league for a long time has been that it is far too physical. There is no question in my mind that this is intentional and that the league allows the physicality because they are trying to offset the idea that women's basketball is "soft."

Like you I have no trouble with physical play but the W has been over the line in that regard even before Clark and it has not gotten any better. Instead it has predictably gotten worse because whatever you let players get away with, they are going to take another step. And at this point that extra step is a plethora of "not a basketball play" events that will eventually wind up with someone getting seriously injured.

Long story short this is not a Clark issue, it is a W issue that preexisted her and is just (like many things in the W) getting more attention because of her. And it's an issue the league needs to fix - to the extent they ever needed to allow that degree of physicality to "legitimize" the league, it has outgrown its usefulness and needs to be reined in.
Click to expand...
Well done.
 
lawmanfan said:
It actually may be my favorite league to watch from a basketball standpoint. Love the way they play the game, just need to clean up some of the BS.
Click to expand...
I like it because it involves smart play, passing and team work along with defense over acrobatic dunking and alley ops and sheer brute athleticism.

Not meant to imply there is a lack of athleticism or lateral quickness (reference intentional, LOL), there is plenty of that in the WNBA just at a different level than the NBA and MCBB.

What I see in the League as opposed to WCBB is that once you get past the top 25 teams in WCBB, the fall off in skills is great, WNBA skill level is superb.
 
BrookJersey Redmen said:
I like it because it involves smart play, passing and team work along with defense over acrobatic dunking and alley ops and sheer brute athleticism.

Not meant to imply there is a lack of athleticism or lateral quickness (reference intentional, LOL), there is plenty of that in the WNBA just at a different level than the NBA and MCBB.

What I see in the League as opposed to WCBB is that once you get past the top 25 teams in WCBB, the fall off in skills is great, WNBA skill level is superb.
Click to expand...
Exactly - the talent level of the players in the NBA and men's D1 has distorted the game at times unrecognizably from its original form as a team endeavor in which the objective was to move the ball and/or players in order to create good shot opportunities (in a somewhat egalitarian manner).
In the W and the high level college women's game you can still see the game more or less the way it was meant to be played.

The dichotomy between players old-school fans like and the ones new-school fans like is rooted in that - the new-era fans will (often correctly) tell you that a one-on-one play is a good one. The old school fans are always looking at whether a better opportunity could be created by sharing the ball.
 
lawmanfan said:
I watch a lot of the W. The style of play is tremendous, the desire and effort of the players is tremendous, and there are absolutely tremendous players all over the league. It is a fabulous league to watch if you love the game.

My primary criticism of the league for a long time has been that it is far too physical. There is no question in my mind that this is intentional and that the league allows the physicality because they are trying to offset the idea that women's basketball is "soft."

Like you I have no trouble with physical play but the W has been over the line in that regard even before Clark and it has not gotten any better. Instead it has predictably gotten worse because whatever you let players get away with, they are going to take another step. And at this point that extra step is a plethora of "not a basketball play" events that will eventually wind up with someone getting seriously injured.

Long story short this is not a Clark issue, it is a W issue that preexisted her and is just (like many things in the W) getting more attention because of her. And it's an issue the league needs to fix - to the extent they ever needed to allow that degree of physicality to "legitimize" the league, it has outgrown its usefulness and needs to be reined in.
Click to expand...
aka Mrs Lawmanfan watches wnba so now Lawman loves it :)
 
lawmanfan said:
I watch a lot of the W. The style of play is tremendous, the desire and effort of the players is tremendous, and there are absolutely tremendous players all over the league. It is a fabulous league to watch if you love the game.

My primary criticism of the league for a long time has been that it is far too physical. There is no question in my mind that this is intentional and that the league allows the physicality because they are trying to offset the idea that women's basketball is "soft."

Like you I have no trouble with physical play but the W has been over the line in that regard even before Clark and it has not gotten any better. Instead it has predictably gotten worse because whatever you let players get away with, they are going to take another step. And at this point that extra step is a plethora of "not a basketball play" events that will eventually wind up with someone getting seriously injured.

Long story short this is not a Clark issue, it is a W issue that preexisted her and is just (like many things in the W) getting more attention because of her. And it's an issue the league needs to fix - to the extent they ever needed to allow that degree of physicality to "legitimize" the league, it has outgrown its usefulness and needs to be reined in.
Click to expand...
Saying the style of play in the WNBA is tremendous may be the most inaccurate and funny statement I’ve ever seen in my 37 years on this earth. The style of play is horrific. Sure there are some 1-2 extremely talented players on some teams but most of them stink on ice!
 
sirvoo said:
Saying the style of play in the WNBA is tremendous may be the most inaccurate and funny statement I’ve ever seen in my 37 years on this earth. The style of play is horrific. Sure there are some 1-2 extremely talented players on some teams but most of them stink on ice!
Click to expand...

Thank you for proving my point.
 
lawmanfan said:
I watch a lot of the W. The style of play is tremendous, the desire and effort of the players is tremendous, and there are absolutely tremendous players all over the league. It is a fabulous league to watch if you love the game.

My primary criticism of the league for a long time has been that it is far too physical. There is no question in my mind that this is intentional and that the league allows the physicality because they are trying to offset the idea that women's basketball is "soft."

Like you I have no trouble with physical play but the W has been over the line in that regard even before Clark and it has not gotten any better. Instead it has predictably gotten worse because whatever you let players get away with, they are going to take another step. And at this point that extra step is a plethora of "not a basketball play" events that will eventually wind up with someone getting seriously injured.

Long story short this is not a Clark issue, it is a W issue that preexisted her and is just (like many things in the W) getting more attention because of her. And it's an issue the league needs to fix - to the extent they ever needed to allow that degree of physicality to "legitimize" the league, it has outgrown its usefulness and needs to be reined in.
Click to expand...
It would be nice if that was all there is to it.

I've been a fan of woman's basketball since my daughters could play a little and competed at the high school level and in top AAU programs in the metro area. In AAU we played from New Hampshire to Virginia, to western PA.

I agree that women basically are fundamentally sound within their physical limitations. At the high school level, you teach kids a play, they run that play, even to the point of ignoring a wide open teammate.

When we played inner city kids, the game was much different. For the most part the girls were bigger, faster, stronger. Many, if not most or all, grew up playing in schoolyards against boys, and to be allowed to play had to play a tougher game.

So, yes, the WNBA is a tough, physical league. I agree with all your points EXCEPT that Clark IS by all means a target. Cheap shots, fists, high elbows above the neck, shoves.

Many players have reacted to Clark the way one or two posters here have, namely WTF is she to get all the press, all the attention, all that sponsor money? And there have been celebrations, smirks, and laughter when she is targeted.

For her part, Clark is no shrinking violet. She talks trash, takes the hits, and hasn't cried about it. If the WNBA is smart, they will see to it that she is moved to a major market which can only help the entire league.

Like a lot of legal defenses, you are omitting damning evidence. In court you need only to create reasonable doubt. However, to say she isn't being singled out just doesn't pass the eye test.
 
Beasts of the East said:
It would be nice if that was all there is to it.

I've been a fan of woman's basketball since my daughters could play a little and competed at the high school level and in top AAU programs in the metro area. In AAU we played from New Hampshire to Virginia, to western PA.

I agree that women basically are fundamentally sound within their physical limitations. At the high school level, you teach kids a play, they run that play, even to the point of ignoring a wide open teammate.

When we played inner city kids, the game was much different. For the most part the girls were bigger, faster, stronger. Many, if not most or all, grew up playing in schoolyards against boys, and to be allowed to play had to play a tougher game.

So, yes, the WNBA is a tough, physical league. I agree with all your points EXCEPT that Clark IS by all means a target. Cheap shots, fists, high elbows above the neck, shoves.

Many players have reacted to Clark the way one or two posters here have, namely WTF is she to get all the press, all the attention, all that sponsor money? And there have been celebrations, smirks, and laughter when she is targeted.

For her part, Clark is no shrinking violet. She talks trash, takes the hits, and hasn't cried about it. If the WNBA is smart, they will see to it that she is moved to a major market which can only help the entire league.

Like a lot of legal defenses, you are omitting damning evidence. In court you need only to create reasonable doubt. However, to say she isn't being singled out just doesn't pass the eye test.
Click to expand...
Clark is the real deal, as a player/competitor/athlete. I also think most of the targeting stuff is within the realm of competition and nothing more, although I do agree with lawfan that the league has gone too physical in general and is missing that finesseness that made it a more enjoyable watch ten years ago — not that I can say I watch a ton of games; but there is a discernible difference imo.

I do think it’s a shame that the Clark dialogue has been focused on other stuff and not her as a transcendent talent. It’s a massive whiff for the league, and made her presence in the league a lot less enjoyable than it should’ve been.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top