Perspektiv Posted June 13 Author Report Share Posted June 13 1 hour ago, Black Dog said: Context is your friend. Common sense is yours. 1 hour ago, Black Dog said: Golf and basketball weren't lower echelon sports before those guys. Michael Jordan brought millions of non fans to the sport. So did Tiger Woods. They moved needles. Both sports were strong already and entrenched within their fanbase, so it takes an athlete like that to bring non fans your way. Basketball is a top 5 sport, but Jordan made it a global phenomenon. Most know what you're talking about when they say to put their air Jordan's on. Globally. I can go to China, and they will know what I am talking about. Africa. Doesn't matter. Thats precisely what Clark is doing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted June 13 Report Share Posted June 13 3 minutes ago, Perspektiv said: Common sense is yours. Michael Jordan brought millions of non fans to the sport. So did Tiger Woods. They moved needles. Both sports were strong already and entrenched within their fanbase, so it takes an athlete like that to bring non fans your way. Basketball is a top 5 sport, but Jordan made it a global phenomenon. Most know what you're talking about when they say to put their air Jordan's on. Globally. I can go to China, and they will know what I am talking about. Africa. Doesn't matter. Thats precisely what Clark is doing. LOL let's slow that roll, she's played 13 games for a terrible team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perspektiv Posted June 13 Author Report Share Posted June 13 10 minutes ago, Black Dog said: she's played 13 games for a terrible team. And has dominated. What are you slow? This points to her being really good. O_o Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted June 13 Report Share Posted June 13 45 minutes ago, Perspektiv said: And has dominated. What are you slow? This points to her being really good. O_o https://www.espn.com/wnba/stats/player Is she 15th in points in the league? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perspektiv Posted June 14 Author Report Share Posted June 14 13 hours ago, Michael Hardner said: Is she 15th in points in the league? That's looking at things in a one dimensional manner. She's a complete ball player. She's a one of a kind elite play maker, an above average threat from the 3 point line and well beyond. Her range is off the charts. Her accuracy shooting from "downtown" is just not something you see in the WNBA. Her pin point accurate circus passes under pressure, to wide open players, for uncontested shots. You can't get mad at her if many of those shots are bricks. Shot blocking, shes the real deal. Keeping in mind, she is having to adapt to teams physically punishing her on a day to day basis more than the acceptable norms, many of which are hard uncalled for fouls. Reminds one of the "hack a Shaq" from back in the days. Shaq is over 7' tall and over 300lbs. He could handle it. Also, he sucked at the free throw line, whereas she is accurate. Clark is skinny, and 6' tall, and has many league leaders towering over her. She's had to adapt her game to this. Her range has helped her, along with how she distributes the ball at an elite level. She makes routine circus passes, you only tend to see in the NBA, often to only have teammates often miss their shots. Despite all this, she is putting up rock solid defensive and offensive numbers on a garbage team. She makes her teammates better, simply by being on the court, which is indicative of strong leadership and elite skills. Again, as a rookie. Don't show me someone great from the onset. Show me someone who is obsessed with getting better (wants to be the best), and is quick to adapt to setbacks, keeping cool and a positive attitude, throughout. Thats greatness in the making. Game on the line, ice in the veins, and sinks shots most would miss, at will. She is born for pressure. People relate to her because she's an underdog. Same thing that endeared Michael Jordan to others, in how he was let go of his college team for sucking at basketball. Did he quit? Sulk? This only amplified his drive. The rest is history. She has won championships at seemingly all levels. Dominated at all levels. Adapted at all levels. Had a crowd chating "overrated", and dropped 42 points, and shrugged at the accomplishment, which has become her signature move. Again. A rookie: She isn't a millionaire by stroke of luck, or for being white like her detractors would like to believe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted June 14 Report Share Posted June 14 (edited) 18 minutes ago, Perspektiv said: That's looking at things in a one dimensional manner. She's a complete ball player. It's a meaningful statement to say someone dominates vs a 'complete player' .... Bob Gainey was a complete hockey player. Gretzky dominated. But far be it for me to expect you to modify an excessive statement... Edited June 14 by Michael Hardner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perspektiv Posted June 14 Author Report Share Posted June 14 28 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: It's a meaningful statement to say someone dominates vs a 'complete player' .. You clearly don't watch basketball. Points aren't the only measuring stick of dominance. John Stockton was a dominant player, but was a playmaker. On paper by your standards, he sucked because he wasn't tops in points. He was tops in assists. Sidney Crosby wasn't tops in the NHL, can control a game almost single handedly. He's a dominant force. He's also evolved into being a complete player, so doesn't need to produce as much. Clark is a league leader or near it, in multiple departments. Meaning she has an overall game, that is dominant. This overall game, is what wins you championships. Her resume sides with that observation. She's already a dominant force, and happens to be a complete player. Championships. Gold medals. She's a winner. Her team with her in the court and not, is night and day. Thats dominance. A presence. You don't get hacked, by being complete. You get hacked, by being dominant. She still puts up elite numbers, with this in mind. You really like having everything spelled out for you o_O Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted June 14 Report Share Posted June 14 42 minutes ago, Perspektiv said: You really like having everything spelled out for you o_O I'm just asking questions. I am reading your rationale to understand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perspektiv Posted June 14 Author Report Share Posted June 14 1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said: I'm just asking questions. No, you want things spelled out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
impartialobserver Posted June 14 Report Share Posted June 14 https://www.espn.com/wnba/stats Caitlin Clark only ranks in the top 5 in one of the major stat categories.. assists and she is 4th. This is her first year.. lets hold off on comparing her to all time greats in various sports. Steph Curry was not dominant in his first year..GS went 26-56 and he averaged 17.5 points per game which is not even top 20 for that season. Now, give him a few years and he changes the league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted June 14 Report Share Posted June 14 7 hours ago, Perspektiv said: No, you want things spelled out. Yeah because you say she's dominant and I have heard otherwise. I want to hear your reasons. First Day on the forum? Did I say you were wrong? I just asked for your reasons and absorbed them. Don't be such a fraidy cat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perspektiv Posted June 15 Author Report Share Posted June 15 47 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: Yeah because you say she's dominant Because she is. She is putting up numbers like this while being hacked at. As a rookie no less. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yakuda Posted June 18 Report Share Posted June 18 On 6/10/2024 at 3:11 PM, Perspektiv said: For those of you not familiar with the name, Caitlin Clark is a young rookie phenom in women's basketball. Her skillset is just not something you see often, regardless of gender. IE lethal shot, pin point accurate passing, elite handles on the ball, and three throw shots she can drop at will. One issue. She's elite, but white. Not even a full season in, and she has gotten ratings that rival NBA games, when she plays. This is for a sport that averaged 200k to 500k views per game (dismal numbers for pro sports like basketball). Skyrocket that to 1.5 to 2 million views, seemingly overnight, to sellout crowds to watch her play. This translates to millions of dollars of extra sponsorship bucks. Millions of more eyes on your sport. Better salaries for players, etc. Whats not to like? There lies the problem. The backlash for her skill, has been swift. Veterans to current players publicly throwing shade her way, to dirty plays being made on her, by players not even attempting to hide how much they hate her. Then there's the Olympic team snub. Some say its because she doesn't match the woke agenda they are pushing. IE being a racial minority, and part of the LGBTQ movement. Shes polite, courteous (even when having to answer to venomous comments about her by league peers) and shows love to her fans. But is also a proud catholic. Is it possible to be too white for basketball? Is Caitlin Clark not gay or black enough for the WNBA? Straight white woman in a black lesbian dominated league. What could go wrong. The reason for animals like reese to dislike her wide and varied. The only reason anyone knows Reese's name is because of Caitlin. I understand why the lezbos are mad but they need to wake up and see what side of their toast is buttered. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
User Posted June 18 Report Share Posted June 18 On 6/14/2024 at 6:54 PM, Michael Hardner said: Yeah because you say she's dominant and I have heard otherwise. I want to hear your reasons. Interesting. You have heard otherwise? Where did you hear that from? Do you believe that and why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted June 18 Report Share Posted June 18 15 minutes ago, User said: Interesting. You have heard otherwise? Where did you hear that from? Do you believe that and why? You can scroll up and read my posts. Perspektiv seems to know a lot more about women's basketball and me so he explained the answers to my questions. Nervously, but he did explain it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yakuda Posted June 18 Report Share Posted June 18 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: You can scroll up and read my posts. Perspektiv seems to know a lot more about women's basketball and me so he explained the answers to my questions. Nervously, but he did explain it. The thing is this has nothing to do with skill. This is mostly a race issue and jealousy on the side. It's rather straight forward. It's a Lifetime movie like my wife watches all the time. Edited June 18 by Yakuda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
User Posted June 18 Report Share Posted June 18 2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: You can scroll up and read my posts. Perspektiv seems to know a lot more about women's basketball and me so he explained the answers to my questions. Nervously, but he did explain it. I am asking you to explain your statement. You claimed that you heard otherwise. From who? Are you now saying you agree that she is she's dominant or do you agree with who you heard otherwise from? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yakuda Posted June 18 Report Share Posted June 18 1 minute ago, User said: I am asking you to explain your statement. You claimed that you heard otherwise. From who? Are you now saying you agree that she is she's dominant or do you agree with who you heard otherwise from? Skill is not the real problem here IMO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted June 18 Report Share Posted June 18 12 minutes ago, User said: I am asking you to explain your statement. You claimed that you heard otherwise. From who? Are you now saying you agree that she is she's dominant or do you agree with who you heard otherwise from? I just said... Perspektiv. I listened to my favourite sports guys and also looked at the points standings. I don't have a strong opinion on it, I appreciated the explanation from our board mate. I agree with Nick Wright that too much political hay is being made of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
User Posted June 18 Report Share Posted June 18 2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: I just said... Perspektiv. I listened to my favourite sports guys and also looked at the points standings. I don't have a strong opinion on it, I appreciated the explanation from our board mate. I agree with Nick Wright that too much political hay is being made of it. It ws not Perspektiv who said otherwise. It was Perspektiv you told you heard otherwise too... I am asking you, who did you hear otherwise from that she was not dominant? Who is your favorite sports guy who said that? "Yeah because you say she's dominant and I have heard otherwise." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yakuda Posted June 18 Report Share Posted June 18 1 minute ago, User said: It ws not Perspektiv who said otherwise. It was Perspektiv you told you heard otherwise too... I am asking you, who did you hear otherwise from that she was not dominant? Who is your favorite sports guy who said that? "Yeah because you say she's dominant and I have heard otherwise." He mentioned Nick Wright. It may have been him. We all know Wright is a sports imbecile. The only reason they have him on television is so people can tune in to see what it is he will get wrong next. It's ironic his name is "wright" because he rarely is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted June 18 Report Share Posted June 18 15 minutes ago, User said: I am asking you, who did you hear otherwise from that she was not dominant? Who is your favorite sports guy who said that? It was the video clip I posted. First things first. They didn't say she wasn't dominant in those words but they said there was a case for her not being on the Olympic team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yakuda Posted June 18 Report Share Posted June 18 8 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: It was the video clip I posted. First things first. They didn't say she wasn't dominant in those words but they said there was a case for her not being on the Olympic team. A case. Not a good case, just a case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perspektiv Posted June 18 Author Report Share Posted June 18 1 hour ago, Yakuda said: What could go wrong. Not only is she white and hetero, but also catholic. She is about as non woke as it gets, simply by existing. You can tell basically on the fact she doesn't sulk, or think the world owes her anything. She has earned every accolade. This literally s**ts on the notion that you're victimized in being part if the have nots. She's smaller, yet has made vets who towered over her look like rookies at times. She's an underdog in every sense of the word. She was deliberately clubbed in the head on a flagrant fowl the other day. She didn't get angry, or decry the refs. She dusted herself off, and played an amazing ball game. Didnt whine about it post game. Simply put it on her shoulders to take her team, and put it firmly on her shoulders, and checked her ego to the side. She's a role model, while Griner gets caught in Russia with dope. Shes got the Eminem aura. Shes better than many, but happens to have the wrong hue. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted June 18 Report Share Posted June 18 18 minutes ago, Yakuda said: A case. Not a good case, just a case. Sure, and a case for her not being on. The main takeaway for this is that it doesn't have to be political thing. Pretty clearly we're looking for content to put into political shows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.