With WNBA All-Star weekend right around the corner, we take a look at some of the biggest storylines in the league before we hit the halfway mark of the regular season...
"I don’t doubt there’s a bit of embellishment in how Brennan is writing about Carrington specifically. I also don’t doubt that Brennan has a clear blind spot for how she, as a white woman, is coming across in her questioning towards black players."
When I read the except yesterday, this was my impression as well. I think Brennan embellished parts of the story to make her point/make herself look better. But in general, the encounters she described seemed believable in general given the personalities involved.
Notably absent from the excerpt was Brennan's own lack of understanding regarding three to the dome. Still the thing that annoys me to this day.
I agree that the issue with what Carolyn Peck said is that she said the Fever are MORE dangerous without Caitlin. If she had said they are equally dangerous, or have different weapons, I don’t think most rational people would’ve taken issue. As someone who’s watched every Fever game this season, I can say that Aari and Sydney do offer things that Caitlin doesn’t - they are tenacious defenders, which is extremely valuable. But there’s also a clear ceiling to being a purely defensive team. I can guarantee if you ask a coach whether they’d prefer to scout against a team with Caitlin Clark and a team without Caitlin Clark, they’d choose the second option. (I also had a friend say that she even makes them better from the sidelines because she’s terrifying, which I thought was hilarious and also maybe not totally wrong?)
But what I think the main issue here is that Carolyn is honestly not a good analyst. This is far from her first completely boneheaded take that’s made me wonder if she even watches the sport she’s talking about. But like so many things, you have folks jumping to call her a CC hater, and others jumping to say she’s the greatest basketball mind ever and knows what she’s talking about, and the context and nuance is gone!
"I don’t doubt there’s a bit of embellishment in how Brennan is writing about Carrington specifically. I also don’t doubt that Brennan has a clear blind spot for how she, as a white woman, is coming across in her questioning towards black players."
When I read the except yesterday, this was my impression as well. I think Brennan embellished parts of the story to make her point/make herself look better. But in general, the encounters she described seemed believable in general given the personalities involved.
Notably absent from the excerpt was Brennan's own lack of understanding regarding three to the dome. Still the thing that annoys me to this day.
Yes JJVP!!!
I agree that the issue with what Carolyn Peck said is that she said the Fever are MORE dangerous without Caitlin. If she had said they are equally dangerous, or have different weapons, I don’t think most rational people would’ve taken issue. As someone who’s watched every Fever game this season, I can say that Aari and Sydney do offer things that Caitlin doesn’t - they are tenacious defenders, which is extremely valuable. But there’s also a clear ceiling to being a purely defensive team. I can guarantee if you ask a coach whether they’d prefer to scout against a team with Caitlin Clark and a team without Caitlin Clark, they’d choose the second option. (I also had a friend say that she even makes them better from the sidelines because she’s terrifying, which I thought was hilarious and also maybe not totally wrong?)
But what I think the main issue here is that Carolyn is honestly not a good analyst. This is far from her first completely boneheaded take that’s made me wonder if she even watches the sport she’s talking about. But like so many things, you have folks jumping to call her a CC hater, and others jumping to say she’s the greatest basketball mind ever and knows what she’s talking about, and the context and nuance is gone!