One would like to think we have far more important things to hate on one another about.
Wars.
Which side of Chicago has the best beef sandwiches.
But, no, nothing throws a match on a mountain of combustibility quite like raising the topic of WNBA rookie sensations Caitlin Clark and Angel Reese. Or, sorry, should that be Angel Reese and Caitlin Clark?
It doesn’t matter — either order you put their names in, it’s already too late to stop the flames of righteous anger and bounding brainlessness from spreading.
A problem we have in our society is that we don’t know how to disagree about anything, not even a trifling matter such as Reese vs. Clark, Clark vs. Reese. People get so excited to insert themselves into the argument du jour, they start lobbing rhetorical grenades at the other side without having even begun to read, listen or consider. Thus, the nastiness of the rhetoric — even about a pair of 22-year-old basketball players playing their tails off — erupts almost instantly and irrevocably.
And everyone involved gets a little bit stupider, every time.
The latest on the WNBA front is a crackling fire — it’ll inevitably become a conflagration — about which of the two superstar newcomers deserves to be at the front of the race for rookie of the year. Indeed, it is a two-player race, with the Sky’s Reese on a league-record streak of 13 straight double-doubles, the Fever’s Clark packing the stats sheet despite every perimeter defender with a pulse lining up for a chance to take her rock and, just telling it like it is, no other rookie even worthy of being in the conversation.
It’s also the latest reminder that every time one is foolish enough to wade into a public debate about these two players, the experience is as educational and illuminating as a lobotomy.
Last weekend, after Reese had rung up her 12th straight double-double in a win against the Storm in Seattle, the Sun-Times’ Sky reporter and chief WNBA expert, Annie Costabile, wrote about the rookie of the year race and opined that Reese had earned the edge at midseason.
“It’s hard to argue against,” Costabile wrote.
“[Reese] is rookie of the year,” Sky teammate Chennedy Carter said in the story. “There’s no other way to put it.”
If only those sentiments were true, society might be a tad more bearable. Alas, arguments — any arguments — are irresistible and far too many people are quick to find “other ways” to put things that invoke insults, slurs and other forms of outright ignorance right off the top.
Despite knowing better, I looked at the comments under the Sun-Times’ Facebook posting of this story. Like a dope who slathers himself in tree sap before breaking open a hornets' nest, I got what I deserved — and that’s referring to merely reading the comments, not even contributing to them.
The first person to comment on the story could not have been less provocative or inflammatory, pointing out Clark’s and Reese’s individual strengths and saying both will be fun to watch in the All-Star Game in Phoenix later this month. Yet that comment was all it took to unleash unpleasantness and hate.
The first to reply called Clark a “better teammate” and “better for the league.” In a blink, Reese was being called “unsportsmanlike,” “trashy,” without humility and worse. More than one fool said or insinuated that Reese will win the award because she’s Black and that suits the league’s social agenda.
But even some who commented in support of Clark without tearing down Reese were labeled as “haters.” Clark was mocked as a “savior.” Someone even likened her to former NBA player Sam Bowie, who infamously was drafted by the Trail Blazers in 1984 before a rather talented kid from North Carolina slipped to the Bulls. The implication being Reese is Michael Jordan? OK, sure.
I stopped reading the comments before long. Suffice it to say, they were too much like the discourse whenever Clark and Reese come up in the context of each other.
You know what would be a breath of fresh air? If we could talk about these two — about basketball — without keeping one eye peeled for an incoming grenade. Is it really too much to ask for?
I’m going to admit a few things here.
One, Clark is the huge favorite on betting sites to win rookie of the year. I’m not sure there’s even a debate about who will win the award. Debate about “should” if you want to, but it’s kind of beside the point.
Two, the excitement and hype from WNBA circles over Reese’s double-doubles is a tad puzzling. No one has had 13 in a row before, so it’s clearly a terrific accomplishment. On the other hand, hearing such a hubbub over double-doubles is unusual, isn’t it? Reese is averaging 14.1 points and 11.9 rebounds in 31.5 minutes, very strong production — but nobody threw the Kings’ Domantas Sabonis a parade for his NBA-leading 77 double-doubles this past season. The Bulls’ Nikola Vucevic has averaged a double-double each season in Chicago as well as over his nine-year career — 17.1 points and 10.5 boards in 31.4 minutes — yet fans here can hardly stand watching him under-deliver.
Three, Clark is averaging 16.1 points and misfiring on more than two-thirds of her three-point shots. She has been really good but also really human, while Reese is the one who’s over-delivering. If Clark were scoring even a bucket a game more, there might not be any debate at all, but the Caitlin Show hasn’t exactly been a non-stop thrill ride.
Wow, admitting all that sure felt good.
Now please excuse me while I go hide.
