Caitlin Clark left off USA Roster

[Domejandro]

Is it annoying to listen to people who know nothing about the Olympics? Or would that be condescending?

The fact that there aren’t other younger players on the team is not a plus, and is something both the men and women’s team have actively tried to avoid. Were you up in arms when Christian Laetner made the Dream Team. In the two previous Olympics, the women’s team had three 24 year olds, and the one before that, they selected a 21 year old. These teams want promising young players in the system, feeling like part of the team so they sign up for the next Olympics, and getting experience for future games. This should be especially true this year, when Team USA is so heavily favored, with or without Clark.

Name the player who should be left off this year for Caitlin Clark, especially with the context that she missed the Team USA practices taking the Iowa Hawkeyes to the Final Four.

In case you weren’t aware, Clark has played for Team USA for years in younger age group competitions. She only missed try outs because she was carrying a mediocre Iowa team to the Final Four, and that success should be rewarded, not be punished. Finally, Team USA already said that missing the try outs was fine, and they would use her first month of WNBA play as the try out.

Name the player who should be left off. Would love one additional name beyond Diana Taurasi, but if that's the only one, I think that kind of solidifies the point.

[Joshyjess]

Personally, I'm kind of glad. Now, when we watch the games it will be US Vs. the opposing team rather than Caitlan Clark Vs. the opposing team. If the NCAA tournament was any indication of what the Olympics would be like, than I'm glad for this decision. I want to be able to enjoy watching the US Women's team instead of the Caitlan Clark show.

[uncleduck13]

She could use the rest tbh. She’s played entirely too much basketball over the past year

Last night she dropped 30 after having a good 4 days off.

[jkvonny]

Don't they usually cater towards more veteran players?

She's a rookie. No hurry.

[Fencer reregistered]

This is a pretty dumb take IMO, so they are dominate but still can't break even after nearly 20 years.... mayyyyyybbbe it's time for the league to worry about entertainment aspect as well, if the NBA didn't give subsidy to this league it would have folded years ago.

Investing in womens basketball is valuable to the long-term ecosystem of the NBA, the idea that the subsidy is a dead-end investment is not accurate. The WNBA is less than thirty years old, it takes time to develop profitability; the indirect value of getting young women across the country invested in playing basketball is massive.

How many businesses in life are able to run for 30 years off negative profits? Lol

I believe the airline industry has made negative aggregate profits since its inception.

That would be a little over 100 years.

[Black Jack]

Just send her straight to the hall of fame. Why waste time actually playing games?

[dockingsched]

Name the player who should be left off this year for Caitlin Clark, especially with the context that she missed the Team USA practices taking the Iowa Hawkeyes to the Final Four.

In case you weren’t aware, Clark has played for Team USA for years in younger age group competitions. She only missed try outs because she was carrying a mediocre Iowa team to the Final Four, and that success should be rewarded, not be punished. Finally, Team USA already said that missing the try outs was fine, and they would use her first month of WNBA play as the try out.

Name the player who should be left off.

Taurasi, easily, like it’s not even debatable tbh. The entire roster is made up of veteran experienced champs, Taurasi doesn’t bring anything to the table that is of value over Clark.

The other is Gray who doesn’t even have a time table for the return. Tbh I don’t even think she’ll be back and was named to the roster just to be replaced by Clark later on.

[HMFFL]

Jealousy and racism but let's not mention that.
The league can say tough love as they profit greatly off her. She had a great game lastnight making her opponent look silly.

[shrink]

Name the player who should be left off this year for Caitlin Clark, especially with the context that she missed the Team USA practices taking the Iowa Hawkeyes to the Final Four.

In case you weren’t aware, Clark has played for Team USA for years in younger age group competitions. She only missed try outs because she was carrying a mediocre Iowa team to the Final Four, and that success should be rewarded, not be punished. Finally, Team USA already said that missing the try outs was fine, and they would use her first month of WNBA play as the try out.

Name the player who should be left off. Would love one additional name beyond Diana Taurasi, but if that's the only one, I think that kind of solidifies the point.

I will apologize for not directly naming a specific replacement, but I will give you a general statement that should help you decide. The reason I visit RealGM, and not the countless shallow fan sites, is that many posters here are more reflective on the “real” part of the game. The real game is more than stats. GM moves matter. Money matters. Media matters. In a fan site forum, they would say “here are the 12 best players in the wnba right now, so that should be the roster.” That is not reality. Money, media, public perception, personalities .. all of that should go into a realistic decision. Clark is easily not the best player on the roster, but I would argue she could be more important than any player because of her impact on the entire sport, now and in the future.

[shrink]

Don't they usually cater towards more veteran players?

She's a rookie. No hurry.

No, both the men and women’s team traditionally carry a few younger players to maintain continuity, and keep them attached to the program.

[puny]

I saw CC in person.

This decision is puzzling. She’s basically the Steph Curry of Michael Jordan’s

Michael Jordan's what?

[HanzGruber]

I didn't mind her before, I never had interest in women's basketball before, just followed it from afar.

But now I sense there's some jealousy and racism towards her, so I'm rooting for her.

I don't know why she was left out of the USA roster specifically, though.

Such a cringe take. Yea totally racism when there’s better more veteran white players in the team already lol

[Tor_Raps]

Investing in womens basketball is valuable to the long-term ecosystem of the NBA, the idea that the subsidy is a dead-end investment is not accurate. The WNBA is less than thirty years old, it takes time to develop profitability; the indirect value of getting young women across the country invested in playing basketball is massive.

How many businesses in life are able to run for 30 years off negative profits? Lol

I believe the airline industry has made negative aggregate profits since its inception.

That would be a little over 100 years.

Is this fact true?

And let's not compare the necessity of air travel required by many around the world to something most people don't even know anything about during most of their existence.

[Capn'O]

I don't know what went into that process...

[Tor_Raps]

Personally, I'm kind of glad. Now, when we watch the games it will be US Vs. the opposing team rather than Caitlan Clark Vs. the opposing team. If the NCAA tournament was any indication of what the Olympics would be like, than I'm glad for this decision. I want to be able to enjoy watching the US Women's team instead of the Caitlan Clark show.

Sadly you'll be in the minority as very few watched women's basketball before she came onto the scene. There was a reason why women basketball players were crying about equal pay to the men while rest of the world was laughing at them lol.

[jkvonny]

Don't they usually cater towards more veteran players?

She's a rookie. No hurry.

No, both the men and women’s team traditionally carry a few younger players to maintain continuity, and keep them attached to the program.

Fair enuff and true.

But, how often are rookies are on the roster? I could be wrong, but there hasn't been many rookies on such. Roster spots are pretty limited.

[thebigbird]

I’m not really a women’s basketball fan, but all the hate and jealousy she’s getting is making me a CC fan

[uncleduck13]

She's been struggling hard as a WNBA rookie and there's a massive hoopla wherever she goes which would be very distracting for Team USA. Honestly it would have felt kinda gimmicky to have her on the team. In 4 years she'll be at the Olympics but I get the decision to leave her off this time around.

She’s had a lot of turnovers with the ball in her hands immediately, but she was Rookie of the Month, the second player ever to average 15-5-5 in her first month, and tied the rookie three point record (7) last night in her 30 point game. They could have easily justified a spot.

But her impact goes far beyond her stats. Just like in the WNBA, the other players should be profiting from her popularity as she grows the league, not complaining about it. This was a massive blown opportunity to help the WNBA, and they have only emphasized their own pettiness.

Eh, she looks talented and skilled in wnba games and I'm not really worried about her future, but she's also not that great in games now. Needs some time for the game to slow down and have her put her tools to work at the right time. Looks like she'll be able to be a Steve Nash/Trae Young type player down the line who can drive and pass off picks and drill any shot you give her, but for now she looks sort of lost and makes bad passing and shooting decisions a lot. Also can't seem to decide what she wants to do on most plays.

Her team also sucks pretty bad and doens't have a real offense, but either way she definitely doens't look ready for the biggest stages yet.

Think the obvious evolution of her game is adding a middy and a floater. These two things would make her the best player ever probably

[Fencer reregistered]

How many businesses in life are able to run for 30 years off negative profits? Lol

I believe the airline industry has made negative aggregate profits since its inception.

That would be a little over 100 years.

Is this fact true?

And let's not compare the necessity of air travel required by many around the world to something most people don't even know anything about during most of their existence.

I forget how old the stat is, but it seemed authorative after one of the post-deregulation rounds of bankrupticies. I think it referred either to US airlines only or to non-government airlines, but at one time that was a distinction almost without a difference.

I'm sure the pandemic was a period of massive aggregate loss.

Mjor US airlines have generally gone bankrupt several times each.

[azcatz11]

This thread is illustrating exactly why she should be on the team:

- die hard women’s fans who are trying to correct people (they are watching anyways)

- casuals who are saying they are watching bc of CC


Diana Taurasi is a freakin dinosaur. It’s laughable to include her over CC when they are winning the gold regardless