Welcome back, by the time you read this it might be 2024. Wishing you all the very best for the new year, one of professional excellence, friendship, and the best sleep you’ve ever had.
When I saw the headline for the article (“Best Shooter in College”) I immediately expected to learn about an athlete in the current NCAA, dropping 3s as regularly as Steph, and for whatever reason I expected this stand out athlete to be like me, that is someone who identifies as male.
It delighted me beyond belief to see that the athlete was Caitlin Clark, not a man, and tunneled me back to a conversation I had with someone not that long ago at the dog park.
Content ⛔️ Warning
I’m not trying to cancel anyone here but basically this person did not think that women’s basketball was “at the level” of men’s basketball, and though it took me by surprise that he, or anyone, honestly, would feel this way, I engaged in the conversation because I’m a terrible human being; and because I wanted to make sure I could clearly defend the women’s game, and not just on the basis of equality, but on the merits of the talent in the game itself.
But first the argument against. The so-called financial argument, which I’ve come across several times in NBA spaces, which let’s face it, can be pretty dude heavy and, like all male heavy things, a bit toxic. Some tough sports guy will say something along the lines of — the female game has less merit because women are not as athletic as men, and therefore not as interesting to watch.
Snooze,
If they were, this person will say, then the money would follow, and all you have to do is look at “the numbers” to see that there is no comparison between the men’s and women’s games on a money level. Then they’ll add this, women can’t even slam dunk.
Who gives a shit, bro.
Though it’s true WNBA athletes don’t slam dunk anywhere near as often as their male basketball playing counterparts, a basketball court was not invented for players to be Leron-level supernova athletes to excel on.
Slam-dunking as a core skill is a sort of dubious one anyway. It feels kinda ok-boomery to celebrate it, aggro on some level, especially when it’s held up like some kind of trophy. I can hear Shaq’s voice in my head yelling at some “big man” to pound it in, big fella — like it’s the ultimate validation of masculinity. That said, it’s still a cool part of the game, which I myself got a taste of when I slam-dunked a nerf ball through a hoop at (shameless plug) Sky Zone, with the help of a trampoline.
For real, it’s never going to get old watching Aaron Gordon jump over a stuffed animal while acrobatically pouncing a ball into a basketball hoop. The energy of a well timed dunk is still enough to make an entire stadium of dudes rise to their feet and jizz.
But, aesthetically speaking, it’s not the only skill that matters, and far from the most important one when it comes to what is necessary on the court to win basketball games.
Skills like Passing. Like Dribbling. Like Jump-Shooting. Those help win games.
Wouldn’t it be a shame if the best three point shooter on the planet was a woman, and she did not have a platform to show off her talents on the highest of levels because some portion of the population didn’t think it was valuable enough to platform a game comprised of a gender that didn’t reliably slam dunk a basketball?
It would be very 🥲.
Enter Steph Curry. The feminist.
Imagine if this man did not come around and revolutionize the game of basketball?
Imagine if Steph Curry cared about dunking?
It would be harder for someone like Caitlin Clark to “matter” because her skill set, shooting, would be less important.
What Steph Curry did for basketball is more than just a stylistic revolution, it’s a political one. By blowing open the game, and extending the very nature of what we deemed important on a court, Steph paved a path for women to one day take over the game.
I’m not necessarily advocating for a destruction of the men’s game, as there are virtues that make both games compelling, but it’s exciting to imagine a women’s game that could be just as popular down the line as the guy’s. All it takes is one female athlete to change our idea of what is possible…
Could that be Caitlin Clark?
What if in three years there was a female player who could sink 3 point baskets from the half court line? Then what would someone like the fellow from my dog park encounter have to say?
Who wouldn’t tune into that kind of performance? That kind of athlete might be so impossible to stop from scoring, so beautiful to watch, that overnight she could make the WNBA a box office sensation on par with the NBA, and perhaps even surpass it.
I have a feeling that most of us love the idea of the WNBA, and though I venture to assume that many of us watch the men’s game more, we certainly would watch the WNBA if the game captured our imagination, if something happened that made it impossible to look away. All of this is possible and I am so stoked that the NBA has decided to invest into the WNBA. Because the moment will come where the next great basketball athlete is not a man, but a mom, and we’ll have a platform where we can watch her.
I’ll leave you with a clip from Ben Pickman’s article in the Athletic where I first heard about Caitlin Clark.
In a nearly empty arena in late November 2020, Caitlin Clark shot her first college 3-pointer. Time was ticking down in the first quarter of the Hawkeyes’ matchup against Northern Iowa. Clark forced a steal at midcourt and weaved her way to the right wing. With two defenders around her, she rose up. Her attempt was blocked.
That didn’t discourage her.
Now a senior, Clark is perhaps the biggest star across both men’s and women’s college basketball. She’s made more than 400 3-pointers throughout her college career and re-written the record book — at Iowa and nationally. “We see it every single day in practice, she hits one (shot) that amazes you,” Iowa assistant Abby Stamp says.
Everything is possible. Happy 2-0-2-4.