The Hypocrisy Of The WNBA Snubbing Caitlin Clark Off Olympic Roster (Complete Story)

.

.

.

Full video:

Was leaving Caitlin Clark off the Olympic roster a mistake? WNBA experts debate

The Athletic has launched a new series of sports’ debates in which two writers break down a specific topic. In this WNBA and Olympic edition, Sabreena Merchant and Ben Pickman discuss Caitlin Clark’s absence from the Olympics and dive into other Team USA roster decisions.

Sabreena Merchant: Another week, another Caitlin Clark firestorm, this time regarding Clark’s exclusion from the U.S. Olympic team. Ben, is this surprising at all to you?

Ben Pickman: Is the outcry surprising? No. Is the fact that Clark didn’t make the team also surprising? I don’t think it’s a total shocker either. As I wrote over the weekend, leaving Clark off the team was totally reasonable. The committee favored continuity and experience over anything related to maximizing marketability and television ratings. Their evaluation was based on several factors — attitude, adaptability to international game, likelihood of contributing to team success. As Team USA looks to win an eighth consecutive gold, popularity wasn’t one of the factors.

Merchant: I found it really interesting that the chair of the selection committee, Jen Rizzotti, specifically told you, “Marketability, popularity, TV viewership, jersey sales was not something that we were supposed to be measuring.”

Even if putting together a team that will excel from a basketball perspective is the primary objective, why outright dismiss every other off-the-court consideration? It has to be at least a part of the discussion. We’ve legitimately never experienced anything like this Caitlin Clark Effect.

Pickman: I think what made this decision so difficult is that it seemed especially hard for the committee to weigh that (the marketability of Clark) over the potential basketball impact, when there were a number of players whose basketball resumés would suggest they should have spots on the team.

Merchant: To be clear, I’m not trying to make the argument that Clark deserved to be on the team from purely a basketball perspective. But it doesn’t appear that the rest of the roster decisions were made with only winning a gold medal in mind either.

Pickman: Are you referring specifically to a 42-year-old guard who has played in five prior Olympics? One Diana Taurasi?

Merchant: Sure, let’s start there.

Pickman: Listening …

Merchant: If we’re purely talking about the best guards in the WNBA, over the past couple of seasons, Taurasi hasn’t been as good as Arike Ogunbowale, Kayla McBride or Betnijah Laney-Hamilton (depending on how you want to qualify her positionally). All of them have been to USA camps within the last two years – including a World Cup appearance for Laney-Hamilton – so it’s not as if they weren’t in the pool.

If you want to make the argument that Taurasi rises to another level when USA is on her chest, may I direct you back to the 2024 Olympic qualifiers when the Americans were getting walloped with her on the court against Belgium and Cheryl Reeve had to bench her in the second half?

Pickman: May I direct you to five Olympic gold medals, three world championship golds and six EuroLeague titles? So much of Taurasi’s case seems to have to do with leadership (which we can’t exactly quantify), but also two decades of playing (and winning) in the best international competitions in the world. Are you trying to make the case Taurasi shouldn’t be on the team, because I thought we were debating Clark?

Merchant: Let’s be clear, Taurasi was always going to make the team, short of retiring before the start of the Olympics. But it’s pretty obvious that her ability to contribute on the court wasn’t the decisive factor in her inclusion if we’re also talking about her leadership and the vibes on the team. There’s just a lack of consistency in the overall decision-making process, which makes Clark’s absence harder to justify.

Pickman: I would just cite Rizzotti’s comments that the roster, in general, is not the best 12 players but the best 12-player team, in the committee’s mind. Since we’ve brought up Clark and Taurasi, so far, what do you make of this notion around age and the youngest players (Jackie Young and Sabrina Ionescu) on the roster both being 26?

Merchant: It is out of character for Team USA to not have a de facto youngster. Going back to the 1996 team with Rebecca Lobo (who was 23), there has always been a player who is one or two years out of college, including Chamique Holdsclaw, Diana Taurasi, Candace Parker, Maya Moore, Breanna Stewart and Napheesa Collier. Even if players ride the bench during their first Olympics, they routinely cite how important it is to learn about the culture of Team USA and build up some experience for when they eventually take on more important roles.

Pickman: But do you think that speaks more so to the increased talent level across the WNBA (and in the American pool), more than anything else? A lot of the debate goes back to the question of who, among the 12 they selected, are you taking off? And what makes it so difficult (and I haven’t really seen a convincing case for anyone to be pulled) is that there were so, so many qualified players, even some we haven’t yet named — Brionna Jones, Rhyne Howard, Aliyah Boston, Ariel Atkins.

Merchant: There are always qualified people who don’t make the cut, and Clark is hardly the biggest snub of the last decade. Parker was left off in 2016 and all she did was win the WNBA title and Finals MVP that year, proving that she was still among the best of the best.

Pickman: Are you predicting Clark will now do that?

Merchant: There’s a chance that Laney-Hamilton could be the 2024 finals MVP!

But back to the point, Nneka Ogwumike didn’t make the team in 2021 despite taking part in Team USA’s offseason tour before the Olympics and leading the team in scoring at the qualifying tournament. Both she and Parker were left off for younger players despite years of equity with the national team, which is what I expected to happen this time around.

Pickman: I’m not sure, though, how much I ever subscribed to the theory of needing to build for future Olympics. The American talent pool is so deep that I think it can view team-building largely in three-year cycles, which seems to be what we saw from this committee.

Merchant: It is worth noting that this is the first Olympics selection committee since 1992 that hasn’t been led by Carol Callan, so the priorities may have shifted.

Pickman: Right. And the U.S. Olympic pool in 2028 will again feature plenty of young players, many of whom surely will get some experience playing with Team USA after this summer’s games in the World Cup.

Merchant: I don’t know that we should assume any of the players in this cycle will phase out. Taurasi is obviously an outlier, but everyone who expects Clark (or other young players like Boston, Paige Bueckers or even JuJu Watkins) to be a shoo-in for 2028, has to consider that the current players are hitting their primes later and might not be stepping aside in four years.