Why Is Caitlyn Clark Hyped With Men?

I Don't Get It

For what it is worth, I don’t watch much basketball anymore. I used to. I find today’s game kind of boring. I miss the way it used to be played during the 80s/90s. That being said, today’s players are pretty amazing. Seeing a 7 footer run the point and be able to do everything Bob Cousy did and more is incredible.

Caitlyn Clark is getting a lot of hype these days. She deserves it. But, you have to keep in mind that there are huge chasms in the way women play and the way men play.

Caitlyn Clark is a one-of-a-kind talent. She can sling it. She’s also a female. The female basketball game is not anything like the male basketball game. First, they play with a smaller ball. Hence, more room for the ball to go into the hoop.

Women don’t jump very well and they aren’t nearly as quick. The game is significantly slower than any men’s game. There are plenty of Boys high school teams who would crush the WNBA All-Stars. That doesn’t mean they aren’t talented, but it is just not fair to compare men to women.

I see a lot of comparisons of Clark to Pete Maravich. I don’t think they are fair to Ms. Clark, nor are they fair to Maravich. Maravich was one of a kind. You had to see it to believe it and there is plenty of video on the internet.

If you want to compare her to a current player, I might suggest Steph Curry. He plays the same position in the same era and is a shooting machine. Curry has unbelievable stats against NBA competition. He is singular, one of a kind. Over a long career, he has shot 47.4%/42.6%/91%. Like Clark, he takes a lot of shots. Plenty of people have high shooting percentages and only take a few shots inside the lane. Curry is crazy good. His father was a great shooter, so you see where Steph learned it. Curry is one of the best 50 to ever play the game. I don’t know that I would put Maravich in that category, and I love Pistol Pete.

Other long-range shooters that you might look to compare are Reggie Miller or Ray Allen. They were truly fantastic and separate from the rest.

Besides being of different sexes, Clark and Maravich played in totally different eras. Maravich couldn’t even play varsity ball in college as a freshman. There was no shot clock in his era and no three-point line. Basketball was a 100% different kind of game.

Even if you go back and re-total Maravich’s scoring implying a three-point line, it’s not the same. The three-point line changes the way you run your entire offense. It also changes the way you defend.

If Maravich came up in today’s game, he’d be bulkier. No one lifted weights in his day. Maravich played against fewer Blacks in the SEC back in the 1960s. Players today are more athletic, but Maravich would have been more athletic too. I think he still would have gotten his points, but he would have played a lot differently. He would be shooting less from the midrange, and more from three-point range. He shot at worst, 42.7% from the field. In the NBA, he shot over 44% from the field for his entire career. There are better shooters than Maravich for sure. But, he is among one of the best to ever play.

Here is a crazy stat. There are nine NBA players that shot 50-40-90; 50% from 2pt land, 40% from 3pt land, and 90% from the line. Maravich was not one of them. Those are incredible statistics. Clark shoots a very respectable 84% from the charity stripe. But, it’s a long way from that to over 90%. Again, it is important to remember, she is playing with a smaller ball. More room to go through the hoop.

When I was a kid I shot all the time. I put a rim on my rim that made the basket smaller. Instead of being able to fit two balls through, only a ball and a half fit. I shot all the time on it. It also gives you the benefit of getting the proper arc on your shot.

I think we ought to respect what each of them did, and Clark is in the process of doing, without comparing them. It’s like trying to compare an apple to an orange. She is an amazing shooter. She shoots just under 40% from 3pt land and shoots roughly 46.5% from 2pt land. That’s really great.

In addition to Maravich’s scoring prowess, he was a wizard with the basketball. He was an incredible ballhandler and an incredible passer. There are few like him when it comes to those kinds of skills.

From what I have seen of Clark, she is an incredible spot-up shooter. But, she is not close to as complete a player as Maravich was. Again, the game is far different and she’s a she, not a he. Comparison isn’t fair.

If you have to compare, one way to think about it is who you would put money on to win a game of HORSE. I’ll give you the first pick. Who are you picking to win it? Even if you don’t pick Clark first, I am not picking her second.

Just appreciate Caitlyn Clark for who she is. The greatest scorer we have ever seen in the college women’s game. I think it is ironic that she plays for Iowa since the state of Iowa has a very long high school tradition of women’s basketball. Isn’t that enough? Maybe she will be the catalyst that makes the WNBA profitable.