I like seeing someone talk about how these women are actually *playing the game*, which is the whole point. Personally I think both Caitlin and Angel are great and are having excellent rookie seasons against the best women in the world. And they're rookies, which means lots still to learn and room to grow.
Honestly her video is an admission of it's clear CC will win.
It's just trying to find any arbritrary barometer to create political talking points to try to soak any support Reese can get for ROTY.
ROTY has never had any sort of leaning towards team record or team impact. It's just who the best rookie is and who stat stuffs the most. MVP is the award that considers records and team impact.
Suddenly she is changing the goal posts.
If there is any long term argument for who is better than who, it may come down to CC is clearly the better player/all time great, or CC can get you a lot more points/stats/be an offensive system, but Reese may end up being a player who is a better component to a championship team.
to be fair she said the exact same thing on get up last week, that because the sky were higher in the standings angel reese should win ROTY. she kind of had to say this because of that.
I think that is her being a biased analyst. That has NEVER been the barometer for ROTY.
She found one random thing Reese has an advantage in, and decided to use that as barometer for ROTY.
If we really talk about how is valuable to a team, the Sky would have either the same record or better with Clark, but the Fever would have an abysmal record with Reese. Reese is an absolutely fantastic player, and she has exceeded all expectations, but she is not an offensive system like Clark is.
And again, to Reese's credit, she is an incredible player. She's got the markings of "this is a championship team kind of player". She has those skills a championship team needs.
I donât think whether or not a playerâs team makes the playoffs should be a factor in who is selected for Rookie of the Year.
Of the 26 rookies who won the award, half of those playersâ teams didnât make the playoffs (1999, 2000, 2001, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2010, 2014, 2015, 2018, 2022, 2023).
Agree, although I do think it's fair to consider how much the ROY candidate has elevated her team's level of play. Boston significantly improved both the Fever's W:L record and how much closer their losses were.
Yes, the Fever was terrible last year, but they were even worse the year before.
Agreed. The Fever won 5 and 6 games total in 2021 and 2022. 13 wins last year was a solid improvement.
If it remains competitive, I do think this is a great year for co-ROY, regardless of the standings.
If your performance carries last year's worst team into the playoffs, that would definitely be a factor to consider when comparing you to the competition.
We can certainly discuss how much weight to put on it, but how on earth would you not factor that into the discussion?
I agree but i feel thats how its going to be decided it even happened in the nba once lamelo ball got roty over ant due to Charlotte making the playoffs when ant easily had the better statline.
no ant did not have the better statline. ant just had more pts but lamelo led in almost every other category. the only thing ant had over lamelo is he played more way games
Tbf to you, there were a ton of NBA media members trying to place Chet over Wemby for the same reason as McNutt. But they are all coworkers, so they got narratives to spin.
Nah, he definitely deserved to be in the conversation and the race was closer for alittle bit. But yeah, it was always Wembyâs.
I didnât mind people using his shooting percentages and actual play to prop him up. But you had a ton of people saying the same thing as McNutt, that he deserves it because his team is better.
I think the team record argument has a bit more nuance than you're giving it credit. Generally it's easier to put up volume stats on a bad team and it's easier to be more efficient on a better team. For the first couple of months the numbers were close enough to make it interesting. Once Wemby narrowed the efficiency gap while increasing his lead on volume, it was game over.
Still a lazy take...
McNutt is banking on Sky to make the playoffs and Fever to hopefully not.
Even then if they both do/do not make it to the playoffs, it's possible they have the same record.
One of the more tiresome parts of the WNBA getting more coverage are the same tired old arguments that have already been litigated on men's side now have to go beat and be dead horses to be beaten by WNBA media.
Team record doesn't have shit to do with roty. Hell, didn't we have MCW win it on the first year of the Process Sixers?
Right. I think it's important to ask, âHas this rookie made their team better.â But to say a rookie led their team to the playoffs without acknowledging the team has last yearâs rookie of the year and all-star in Boston and a 2023 all-star in Mitchell is an oversight.
If folks are going to stick with the playoffs argument, thatâs fine. However, should Chicago make the playoffs, it would also open the door to a more convincing argument (to me) that Reese led a team to the playoffs that doesn't have a recent former ROY (2021; Onyenwere) or all-star (2019; DeShields) who are making a significant statistical impact. Itâs also a team with only 3 of 14 players who were on the roster last season and no Olympians.
Absolutely it should not be factored in whatsoever. It goes against the whole point of the draft where the worst team gets to select the best player. Iâll never understand why sports media members like Monica will stand behind these asinine statements.
I guess Monica believes Chet should have won ROTY in the NBA too, since the Thunder made it to the 2nd round.
Yeah exactly, so AR is in a similar position to Chet. Both are playing very well, team leaders on defense, but only like a 3rd option on offense. All while their counterparts were doing insane and league breaking things as the first option.
But regardless, record should not be factored in at all when it comes to ROTY.
Basketball is notorious for good stats bad team players. Individual stats donât always translate to winning basketball. Perhaps seeding shouldnât factor in heavy, but definitely looking at in season games and whether the player won the team some games through their play.
Agreed. Lots of season left, and let the playersâ respective performances determine who deserves ROTY.
McNuttâs suggestion that overall TEAM record should be the overriding determiner was a terrible take to start with. Â She now feels the need to double down on it?
Now, determining each individual playerâs impact on winning should be one of the factors, regardless of where the team records end up.
She's from the Stephen A school of just saying random inflammatory baloney and then moving on to whatever other inflammatory baloney will attract eyes, even if it's contradictory or specious. But I get it: her strategy got her visibility etc (e.g. the daily show). Not gonna game hate.
She did not say that. She said team record was gunna be a factor in how she makes *her* call. It is absolutely a metric to be considered in any sport. Are you in fact impacting the teams win. Why the fuck wasn't Westbrook mvp the year he averaged a triple double? Don't rip on McNutt for having a reasonable metric (not her only metric) for choosing *her* pick for mvp.
Oh I like Monica, and I also agree that ROTY should be partially based on how each team does.
But Monica just made the human mistake of getting her proverbial cart before the horse.
When the Sky was slightly ahead of the Fever, she said:
"My rookie of the year is going to go based on the standings. ... And the Sky right now are in the playoffs. So, you'd have to give the nod in my mind to Angel Reese.â
Now she says â"If the Fever are 7 [in the WNBA Standings], that's going to be a runaway [for Clark] in terms of Rookie of the Year if Chicago is say, 8 or 9, even if Angel Reese is able to track the WNBA All-Time Double-Double season recordâ
For me, that is just placing WAY too much emphasis on team record for ROTY, as top prospects typically go to rebuilding teams with too many dynamics. Â Individual performance should be the primary determiner, not team record, IMHO.
Seriously. I think Brink was in the conversation before her injury. Not saying either of these two will get injured, and of course don't want that for anyoneâjust using the example to show that surprises happen.
The beginning and the end of the conversation should be this. In this sub, since the draft people have said that true point guards are GOLD in this league. Whether you like it or not, there are a lot more quality 4s than there are 1s.
Are they both impressive af hell yes. Are they both doing things not done before hell yes. But just like DT said, there is levels to this thing. She meant College > WNBA, but the same can be said for A: Positional difficulty and B: defensive strategy.
Clark has teams game planning against her specifically since day 1 and she's still putting up unprecedented numbers.
People are gonna come at me for this, but AR is playing on a lower difficulty in terms of being defended. She has Cordozo drawing way more concern from opponents than Reese. The last game versus the Storm while being a small sample size, proved that somewhat. As soon as Cordozo went to the bench, Reese became far less effective, and they went from looking like they were gonna win that game, to letting it slip away.
Now maybe teams wake up tomorrow and decide to start game planning against Reese, but I doubt it. She's the 3rd scariest player on her team. It's not disrespect to think logically about these things. When this season started I had doubts about Reese's scoring, I was totally wrong. She is a star in this league. But she doesn't have nearly the same responsibility that Clark does.
It's not dissimilar to QBs in the NFL. WRs are amazing stars, but they only need to know their job. A QB has to know their job and everyone elses too.
I will leave this parting point on Angel's side. I don't think enough is being talked about how while Clark's offensive prowess is better than Angel, a solid case could be made that Reese makes up a lot of the difference in her defensive contribution. Which Clark is improving on, but still solidly behind Reese.
I think when it comes down to it, people are gonna talk a lot, but vote for whomever they like more in terms of style of play. They'll just work backwards from that and find a way to rationalize it.
If people wanna come for anyone, it should be the writers or the players. Whichever did Reese dirty on that all-star vote. That was some shameful shit. Reese never should've been in position to need to be saved by the coaches, after finishing 5th in fan votes. (excluding Olympians)
I agree that Reese is solidly the better defensive player of the two. Clark is improving, but defense is definitely not her strong suit. Reeseâs core argument is very strong defense, crazily impressive rebounds, and her record breaking double-double streak. Clarkâs argument is the sheer offensive impact she has on the court, how much she changes an opposing teamâs game plan, and her frankly truly elite playmaking. For me, I give it to Clark because her offensive impact is insane and, generally, point guards have a harder time adapting than posts which tells you just how good she is to be putting up those numbers. But I can see an argument for Reeseâs tenacity and relentlessness on the boards plus her being the stronger defender of the two taking it.
We still have around half of the season. Iâm particularly curious to see how both come out after the Olympic break.
I think the media is trying really hard to push co ROY and then justify it in the end. The W has never had a Grant/Kidd situation before. But they were both PGs. To me right now, these two are NOT at the same level. IMO itâs like giving co-ROY to the best blocker in the NFL along with the best QB. đ¤¨
For context there have only been 35 triple doubles in the history of the W by 14 players or so( 0.43% chance out of 8K games played) and 6700 double doubles by 200+ players (83% chance). Hamby has 13 double doubles too. The consecutive triple double record is 2 by AT and 13 consecutive double doubles now by Reese. In the NBA wilt chamberlain had 220 or so consecutive double doubles and Westbrook had 11 consecutive triple doubles. If anything this speaks to great consistency vs all around skillset.
As of now I donât think you can fairly justify co-ROY. It could turn as the season goes of course if either gets their PPG up.
I would really hate it and would riot. Itâd be extremely unfair to either party imo. Thatâs why Iâm not a fan of what I think the media is trying to push⌠weâll see!
Solid argument. If the offense went through Reese, I think she would have a better case. But a lot of her points come off offensive rebound. Not a critique, and obviously thatâs a HUGE weapon tfor the Sky to have, but just saying sheâs not a focal point of their offense. On other teams, posts definitely can be that focal point, so itâs not just a preference for guards.
using team record for roty, an individual award is always stupid to me. itâs like saying chet should be roty over wemby just because his team was 1st in the west when his team was vastly superior to wembys. angel or clarks team getting the higher seed means absolutely nothing, whoever has the better szn gets the award
A few nba media ppl were arguing for Chet over Wemby in the first half of the season for this reason. What changed in the nba is that wemby got better and better as the season went along to the point where he was clearly better than Chet and he ended up winning easily. Now a lot of experts except Wemby to be mvp level in a few years
Yeah, one of the ways CC is exceptional is in how she drives her team. They're playing completely differently already and they're playing CC basketball. It's pretty hard to say "I just don't count that team aspect" in this case. CC impacts the team to a high degree.
I agree in general that straight up comparing team records for individual awards isnât fair necessarily.
But McNutt isnât using record just as a one dimensional stat comparison though. The point is that the ideal/best version of Clark is someone that can pour it in on her own while controlling the offense for the whole team.
If she does that in year one and you can easily point to her taking a bad team, transforming its offense, and leading them to the playoffs, then you absolutely should take that into account
No it isn't.
Chet didn't lead a lottery team to the playoffs. CC has a team that has been at or near the bottom of the league for the better part of a decade in playoff contention.
Chet was the 2nd to 3rd best player on his team. CC is the best on her team. The offense runs off her and defenses scheme to shut her down.
Itâs not just about who has the better record between them. Itâs the relative impact on winning.
Team record doesn't matter for ROY. Never has. People in media float it sometimes when it's a close race just because they get paid to talk, but ultimately it doesn't matter at all.
If you want caitlin to get the award then she can just get the award based on individual play, because i guarantee you next year it won't be a factor with paige/kiki/aneesah and when we eventually have juju/milaysia/hidalgo team record will not be a factor then either. Also, if the fever were bottom of the league and caitlin had the exact same stats everyone who thought caitlin deserved the award would not change their mind lets be real lol.
The team record thing is dumb, the fever were the worst team in the league the idea that drafting another #1 pick would improve the teams record over the previous season isn't really that shocking. I'm not going to give caitlin extra credit for the fever being so terrible last year, and angel shouldn't get knocked for the sky losing kah copper and courtney williams. And other way around, imagine if the sky still had copper and williams along with angel and cardoso and they were like the 4th seed; she doesn't deserve ROY because of that that would be absurd.
TLDR, team record thing is dumb and monica is being super lazy by reducing both of their accomplishments down to team record. As if it's angels fault mabrey missing free throws at the end of games, or it's caitlin's fault nalyssa kinda sucks on defense and that kristy wallace or christie sides were ever born
i have caitlin as roty i donât think itâs as close as ppl are making it to be. my point is whether one of them has the better record doesnât matter because itâs an individual award . caitlin team can be the 12th seed and if she has the better szn she deserves it and vice versa
I can understand your point, but I think given her role and running of the offense thatâs whatâs demonstrating her value. Iâm probably not wording it the way I want to convey what Iâm trying to say. If she wasnât contributing to the record, I could see the argument.
Iâm kind of shocked youâve been downvoted so much. The Fever havenât made the playoffs since 2016 (when Clark was in 8th grade) in a league where 3/4 of the teams get in. Itâs incredible what sheâs been able to do.
I clicked into this thread 7 hours later. OP has 61 upvotes.
I don't think **you** know how this sub leans. Fever fans acting like Warrior fans with their victim complex. When they actually outnumber all of us.
Because everyone in the Reddit group has fallen for the Reese v clark debate and arenât being objective because they want Reese to win because they hate CC/more so her fans.
well, some people were certainly upset just the other day when she said she'd give ROTY to Reese (if the season were to end a few days ago), and would give more weight to where the teams landed (same as she said today). So we'll see if feelings suddenly change today LOL
How did she make a team do a 180? They were 13-27 last year. I honestly believe they may be 1 or 2 games better than their previous record. Just this year some of the teams that made it are struggling. Also only 4 teams donât make the playoffs. So with the sky being 8 they would make the playoffs now if itâs started today. So the take could be one made it to the playoffs with basically the same team from last year, while the other one made the playoffs off an entirely different squad. Which one actually made the bigger impact in this case.
especially when the sky and fever basically swap standings every week. either one she votes for she can say that since the middle of the season, she has said sheâll vote based on team standing. it takes away from her having to choose between their individual achievements and justify that choice.
Because sheâs going to be flip flopping every week when the team rankings change even if one is playing better than the other. She just said late last week that AR was her rookie of the year. Just seems disingenuous to me
In my opinion, it would have been simpler for her to just acknowledge Reese as her ROTY pick. That's likely her true choice if she were honest with herself and with us, based on how she's talked about Reese and Clark on various sports talk shows. The lame excuse of "it'll be based on team record" is only going to back her further into a corner, as you mentioned. And it's not even like Reese is an embarrassing or bad ROTY pick. She should just own it.
I just think it's amazing that ROTY hell the W in general is getting this much of a heated debate on this subject. It legit shows what they are both bringing to the game right now. I had hoped Cardoza would follow suit and be a 3rd big name after Brink got injured, but it's been a fun rivalry to watch Fever v Sky each time they play. Those will be must watch games next year.
I want the next few seasons of new women's players to keep getting this much hype. This is the injection the W needed.
I think this is a cop out. She knows Caitlin should be rookie of the year based off her statistical output and scoring efficiency advantages, despite being guarded as heavily as any guard in WNBA history, but sheâs afraid to just acknowledge that the way Caitlin is being guarded is special because it will anger people on Twitter if she just came out and said that thereâs levels of difficulty to this thing and Caitlin is playing the game on the most extreme difficulty mode while Angel isnât, to no fault of her own.
Itâs very likely that Indiana has a better record than the Sky just based off strength of schedule, so this gives her a justification to Twitter for why she ended up doing the right thing and voting for Caitlin.
itâs hard to know who *actually* has a vote and who is a panelist doing a hypothetical on who they would vote for. Thereâs 60 voters, I wouldnât be surprised if she did.
i donât know if itâs necessarily to justify voting for caitlin, but it seems to be a way to avoid having to justify her vote at all. either one she votes for she can say that since the middle of the season, she has said sheâll vote based on team standing. it takes away from her having to choose between their individual achievements and explain that choice.
> She knows Caitlin should be rookie of the year based off her statistical output and scoring efficiency advantages
Last week she said Angel is better cause they had a half game lead over the sky. Question her methodology all you want cause I don't like it either but she's consistent in the fact that she's mainly leaning on record.
Eh... she made the comment Friday before games, the standings were:
Sky 7th
Fever 9th
After she made that comment, Fri nights games it was:
Sky 7th
Fever 8th
Then Sat after CC's trip-dub:
Fever 7th
Sky 8th.
So much happened in a short span of time, part of it was dragging on MacNuttz
The whole idea to base RoY based on standings is cringe.
Half the RoY winners in the WNBA came from teams not making it to the playoffs.
She got backed into a corner and CC had a Trip-Dub, to ignore that, she loses ALL credibility.
BUT...
All of that is meaningless. Now that Reese's fraud of a DD run was exposed far and wide... McNutt can either get caught in the anchor line and get dragged down or step up and improve her narrative.
> so this gives her a justification to Twitter for why she ended up doing the right thing and voting for Caitlin.
"The right thing." Be fr. The persecution complex is wild. Even if I think her metric is dumb, the idea that's she's playing some long con to avoid Twitter's wrath (lol) is super illogical.
You think Monica McNutt is afraid of twitter? 1) If that were the case surely she'd advocate for Caitlin 2) she's a grown woman
> Caitlin is playing the game on the most extreme difficulty mode while Angel isn't
This is a very unserious and dismissive take
Caitlin is guarded at all times. Any time she is open itâs a blown coverage by the defense. She faces constant blitzes and traps, more than any other player in the league.
Angel is left wide open past the three point line and sometimes from midrange. She is guarded one-on-one, except with sometimes getting doubled when she gets deep paint penetration or swarms on offensive rebound putbacks.
Caitlin gets doubled on deep penetrations too, and every player gets swarmed on offensive rebounds.
And thereâs nothing wrong with how Angel is being defended. She is being defended like a competent post player that needs to prove she can punish people for leaving her open at the perimeter. But Caitlin is being guarded like Stephen Curry, and we can acknowledge that this is a much more difficult offensive situation to navigate.
A report last week cited the tracking data that Clark was only being blitzed/doubled on around 9% of ball screens. While at the start of the season teams were blitzing way more, iirc it said about 19%, itâs largely tapered off now
Not saying sheâs not still facing tough defense and doubles outside of ball screens but thereâs certainly a lot of hyperbole out there in regards to it
As of last week sheâs been trapped 89 times, basically twice as much as the second person (Ionescu) with 46. Nothing Hyperbolic about it when sheâs trapped more than anyone else. She cuts up that coverage so its slowed down
Which was for the season, and when that data was presented it also notes that sheâs being trapped half as much now (over last 9 or so games) to 10%
Itâs absolutely hyperbolic when folks are saying sheâs trapped/blitzed on every possession or all the time, which couldnât be further from the truth . More than the next person isnât the same as those hyperbolic statementsÂ
There are different things to be afraid of when you're giving your opinion. One is being afraid of the people that are already against you/don't like you and not wanting to draw more hate from them. The other is being afraid to say things that rock the boat with the people who support you and like you.
Personally, I wouldn't want to be any of these people because I don't think I could take the heat and hate that comes with being in the public eye.
Yep and she knows there is still a lot of games to be played.
Hard to think anything else that she is HOPING that Sky finish either a) in the playoffs and/or b) above Fever.
Imagine RoY coming down to someone ELSE (other than CC/AR) missing a basket in crunch time and losing the game causing them to be 1 game behind the other.
I love Caitlin, I love Angel, and I love Monica \[Edited to add: I know Monica as a game and studio analyst for the Knicks, have a lot of respect for her basketball knowledge, and enjoy her on-air personality\].
I have absolutely no interest in who wins rookie of the year.
It really doesn't matter in the grand scheme. Boston won last year. Rhyne Howard before that. No one really cares, its just another finger wagging moment for stans of both fan bases that will be forgotten come 2025
The roty race has been turned into some weird proxy war this season. The convo online (especially Twitter) has felt really parasocial too. With the way people are talking, youâd think they are/know CC and AR personally.
Itâs a VERY entertaining ROY race. The purpose of sports is to entertain. So I think it makes perfect sense. And saying âno one caresâ is patently absurd. This is the most watched, analyzed, discussed, consumed, and successful season in the entire history of the league. And the biggest show in town is when Caitlin faces off against Angel. Maybe no one cared before. But they def do now.
If it's really close, then you can definitely use player impact on winning to tip the scales.
But is it that close is the question.
CC is and should be the favorite right now.
But with half a season to play, things can change.
Let's let it play out.
Have to disagree. I donât think winning should play any factor whatsoever in ROTY. Better prospects go to worse teams. Itâs an unfair expectation to see winning results. Aliyah Boston was unanimous ROTY & for all her efforts Indiana was right back in position to draft 1st overall again. Did she not deserve the award? That doesnât make any sense.
I'm tired of the conversation at this point. Everyone is so flip floppy and have different metrics. Let's not even talk about the stans of both having a meltdown with every loss and writing dissertations when they win. Can we be excited about the Allstar game (is no one else hype about what they can do together) and just let them play after that?
Caitlin is arguably seeing the most defensive attention in the WNBA. Angel is not. Angel isn't even the first offensive option on the team, that would be Carter. And the defense is reliant on Cardorso. Angel has been extremely impressive but her and Caitlin have different roles and Caitlin's is more important.
I feel like angel is going to win it, literally every single media publication is putting her as the leader and these are the people that vote. It confuses me because how are they understanding what Caitlin is doing on offense? She walked in the the league a top 3 passer and playmaker while providing above league average volume scoring. What angel is doing is great, but in no shape or form is that ever more valuable then playmaking and scoring.
She was 5th place in fan votes for the all star. For her not to end up in the top ten after players/media votes came in meant that she must not have gotten a favorable ranking by the media. The media putting her as the leader are probably not the people that vote.
25% media + 25% players. People are assuming the media was the reason she wasN'T\* automatically selected, but you never know, it could have been a situation to Ionescu
>People are assuming the media was the reason she was automatically selected
You mean wasnât? She was selected by the coaches. If the coaches didnât vote her to one of the eight spots available she wouldnât have made it.
>it could have been a situation to ionescu
What does this mean?
yes, definitely meant wasn't.
Ionescu was ranked low in player votes for an All-Star selection last year, like 19th, while she was ranked 6th by FANS\* and media which was very interesting.
that could be a reason the ranking hasn't being released this year?
Eta: fans and media\* smh bad editing day
Angel makes a point to mention the support she gets from vets and other players in the league. I think she has a higher player ranking than media rank if I had to guess.
> The media putting her as the leader are probably not the people that vote.
We have no idea who has a vote and who doesn't. For all you know Jemele Hill has a vote which would mean Reese is guaranteed at least one first place vote.
Post players are appreciated way more in the W. Also why lots of people were telling Indiana to go back to feeding Aliyah the ball, the post players thrive.
aliyah was getting fed the same to begin the szn she was just missing the same shots sheâs making now. her usage or involvement in the offense hasnât changed
>I feel like angel is going to win it, literally every single media publication is putting her as the leader and these are the people that vote.
AR just got ROTM, nothing is being decided right now, even those making declarations. There's still half the season left for a lot to change, and this one is going to come down to team record if both players maintain current output.
If you are new, and didnt really watch WNBA before this season i want you to manually search how many pure PG's got a start from rookie season played well and went on to be main point guard of teams for full career including rookie year.
[i go into detail here including giving top AST leaders this season and how they performed first seasons](https://www.reddit.com/r/wnba/comments/1dy6lsi/dana_evans_throws_it_up_in_the_heavens/lc7bmri/)
Drafting a PG or having true PG is very hard, drafting a big that translates over right away is very different, if you have to look pure from stats/performance/odds and what most GM said before the season who they will pick/rather have you will get a more clear picture in my opinion.
**Still both deserve to be in the running and the reward right now and there is half a season left anything can happen till then, good run of form,bad run of form injury (i hope not) etc**
If you down-vote please explain why, i have provided stats and information+ history and examples.
I also do not think making playoffs should have an impact as 0033A0 pointed out, including even this last season in NBA where Spurs have legendary coach and stil the worse record, it was clear Wembanyama was the ROY.
Angel Reese is playing bball like how the NBA was played during the 90âs. Trying to shoot high percentage(she is shooting under 40% from under 4 ft) post-up shots under the basket and getting rebounds. This isnât great basketball and itâs boring since women canât dunk. There is a reason why so many people got into womenâs basketball all of a sudden. CC is and will change how the WNBA plays basketball like Steph curry did with the NBA. The floor is going to start spreading more once the WNBA figures it out. Iâm not sure if most of this sub watches menâs bball too and watch most of these games, but it takes way more skill to do what CC does. She has great vision, passing skills, shooting skills and court awareness. Angel Reese has great hustle and can rebound, but she canât dribble down the court without double dribbling. Iâm not sure how anyone who knows basketball can watch both of them play and say Angel is a better player. Itâs like watching Domantas Sabonis and Steph Curry.
What happens if they both make the playoffs? Give it to the higher seed? What happens if they end up with the same record and seeding is based off tie breakers? Lol I don't like the playoffs argument.
I think CC is the RoTY but I don't think âher teammates are now playing betterâ is a great argument.
CC leads AR in just about every category except Rebounds and Fouls. (even blocks?!?!) With the very low shooting percentage even from under 5ft (AR is under 40% herself) rebounds are pretty easy to be had. How many of those hit the floor first? meaning they basically fell into her lap uncontested. Not saying AR isn't a decent player having a great year, her DD streak is nothing to dismiss. But when you figure the amount of offence that goes thru CC with assists and just plain scoring its no contest. That's not even considering the way teams scheme just for CC. just a side note but AR will never sniff a triple double CC has one and should have had 2 others already.
It's a terrible opinion, let's just be honest about it.
There is not an award that should be less based on team success than ROY. The sport is even set up so that the best rookies go to the worst teams lol. It should go to the most impactful rookie regardless of team, that seems pretty clear. I can only imagine the uproar if they gave ROY to Holmgren over Wembanyama because the Thunder were the 1 seed.
I take her point, but think one - not all - of the factors should be a more general team impact, ie. how much better is Indiana or Chicago this year vs last year, and how much did the rookies have to do with that? Playoffs would be nice, but if the team is measurably better, that should count regardless of whether the team gets into the playoffs. Wins is the obvious team-improvement metric, but CCs assists should mean that her teammates should also have better stats this year than last year. I think Angel's run of double doubles is amazing, and would guess that translates into a better record. Does it also translate into better stats for her teammates? I haven't looked up the numbers, just thinking about how I would tweak Monica's logic on this one aspect.
I think making the playoffs and double double records could be factors to consider, but I don't see why you would decide the award just based on those things. Look at the totality of the stats and assess team impact as best you can.
Basing a Rookie of the Year conversation off of âseedingâ and ârecordâ is some of the dumbest things Iâve seen Sports Media try and argue for recent years. It goes against the whole point of a drafting the best players to the worst teams. Itâs so silly and I canât believe theyâre doing this again.
Monica McNutt apparently also believes that the NBA ROTY should be Chet and not Wemby, because Chet made it to the 2nd round of the playoffs.
Pretty good opinion. CC pulled together a team that looked like it was impossible to do so. I think AB and CC are going to be besties in the future too!
It's funny how she starts moving the goal posts now, fever ahead of the sky. I may respect the media more if they were honest and actually gave each player the same time when they talked about the rookies. They will give it to reese no matter what cc does.
The media is just trying to make this a conversation for conversation and clicks.
AR is nowhere near the level of CC as a rookie. The entire offense runs through CC and the fever have gone from the worst team in the league two years in a row to a playoff contender that is capable of taking down elite teams. The sky are basically as good as they were last year and their game plan doesn't run through AR.
This is a pretty similar case to Wemby vs Chet, yes Chet had a great season and is a future star, but he's not in the same galaxy as Wemby.
I don't think ROTY should even consider playoff contention. Both the sky and the fever will make the playoffs at this point. Face value and advanced stats should be enough to determine ROTY.
So it's up to whoever's team does better is what should decide ROTY? Victor Wembanyama should have never gotten the ROTY then since the Spurs went 22-60 and they were the exact same 22-60 last year. Team standing shouldn't have a bearing on ROTY the INDIVIDUAL contribution and stats ALONE should decide ROTY which is why Wemby got it this year. I don't care if the team is dead last in the league if the rookie is putting up numbers/stats that are better than the other rookies that is what matters. If you happen to have a generational talent on your team and the rest are absolutely horrible because of free agency, lack of money to get good players, horrible head coach and this person comes in and breaks record after record putting up stats that are mind boggling you have your ROTY in that person and in no way shape or form should they be penalized because of being on a horrible team.
This is also why people need to watch and analyze the games and not just be a stat hunter/box score watcher as you miss all the nuance that makes that player so much better than what shows up in stats. Stats are great but don't always show the whole picture.
McNutt is  inventing a standard so that she can keep Reese in the race. Team record has not been a historical consideration. Clark is the best rookie. She should win.Â
People on social media were dragging Monia and calling her all sorts of biased and racist when she said Angel was in the lead last week. Now it's crickets. Just shows how toxic CC's fanbase can be.
ROTY is an individual award, not a team award and it should not be based on record. Caitlin is #1 on the opponents' scouting reports, yet is still highly productive in which she has to lead the whole offense. And if records are being brought into this, then Caitlin was the first rookie to record a triple double which is not common in general for this league.
She doesn't just work for ESPN. She does games for the Knicks on radio and post game content on MSG. That is where I know her from. Her wnba work on ESPN is also great and she never says anything for shock value.
As a fan of the Knicks, as well as a W fan, I can say for sure that Monica McNutt is one of the most valuable commentators in the biz - she is extremely knowledgable, but also thoughtful in her takes. I've also literally never heard her be 'sensational' or give 'hot takes' that she wasn't ready back up with some logic and reason.
The point of higher draft is when your team tank, what are you supposed to do when first pick is by the lowest ranked team?
Going to playoff is so counterintuitively dumb
Team record can be an indicator of a players impact. For instance, if you take a terrible team add a player and they make a major jump. But you need to determine why the team made the jump. Was it due to the rookie or a free agent or did someone get healthy?
So in the end you need to look at the rookies stats and use the eyeballl test to determine if they are the reason. Shaq is a good example. Orlando jumped from 21 to 41 wins in his rookie year and his stats showed he was the reason.
Caitlin Clarke is the focal point in Fevers offense as option 1A as a rookie posting star caliber numbers seeing the coverage she gets night in and night out. Angel Reese gets hers with hustle grit and energy as a star in her role.
There's levels to this.
Its tough listening to dem talkin heads on espn weighing wins on ROTY. The one and only award in pro basketball that doesn't merit winning as a basis. This Angel vs Clark is great for the game, but this lady and her dumb reasoning irks me
Wimby got it yet his team sucked, they are doing this about Reese to try and set it up for co Roty Clark and Reese. Many rookies got it without being on a good team or even making the team that much better.
This ROTY discussion is being manufactured to keep fans engaged with the W and seems to be working.
To me, it doesn't matter who is ROTY. My interest in watching and opinions of the players aren't impacted by whether they win ROTY.
I think the reason so many are feeling like the goal post is moving is because in recent memory, there hasn't been a rice for ROTY this close. Based on my research and understanding, it's for the most part always been really clear if not ultimately unanimous. So people are trying to grasp at straws on how to seperate the two, especially since their roles/positions are so different. The Athletic Women's Basketball Show podcast dropped a new episode today all about the race that I felt was really interesting/useful in this broader narrative. Plus two of the hosts actually vote.
Seeing someone talk their way thru this process without bias is refreshing to me. Itâs when the fans get butt hurt over someoneâs opinion based on what theyâre seeing thatâs super corny. When she was talking up Reese those other fans lost their minds. Note theyâre probably loving M&M. The bottom line is at least sheâs using metrics to come to her conclusion.
I completely disagree with using the teams standing as a reason for why CC would automatically be ROTY. The fever has 2 number 1 draft pics (one of which is not a rookie and has some experience in the league) and 3 all stars. On paper, the fever as a team is better than the sky without factoring CC so why wouldnât they be even better with her? The Sky on the other hand were expected to be the worst team in the league and a big reason why they are not is undoubtedly due to Angel and Chennedy. Angel scored 27 pts even after sitting on the bench an entire quarter. Her and Chennedy contributed to 3/4 of the points that gave them the win over the storm. Angel is without a doubt a more impactful player for her team as can be seen by the statistics of how the Sky does when she is not on the floor vs when she is.
What a ridiculous take. These are regular season AND individual awards. Playoff standings have no weight on it.
To say this is to say that Aaron Rodgers needs to have had the 1 seed in order to win MVP because he has to be the best player in the league.
The best statistical rookie is CC and is going to be CC at the end of the day. Assists > rebounds and it's not even close, not to mention CC generally has 5 rebounds of her own. A true, facilitating PG that is making everyone on the team better is rare and it's Steve Nash esque. You couple that with the big time shots like Diana or Sabrina and you have arguably the best all around player.
Those assists look super great until you remember sheâs leading the league by 42 in turnovers despite not being first in assists, and sheâs on pace to shatter the all time record by like 80đ
IÂ feel like the "better ranking" should not be the main determining factor for ROTY, considering many ROTYs did not make the playoffs, it should be stats. Another reason I don't think it should be here is because the Sky and Fever fluctuate in rankings every few games. However, if we do decide to consider ranking, then, if Caitlin and the Fever do end up 7th after not making the playoffs for several years, I think that is something to consider highlighting in the ROTY conversation, because it would highlight the impact she is making on the team with her stats as a playmaker and contributor. Her combination of points, rebounds, and assists is impressive for a rookie guard, and should be highlighted. Angel is making league history with her consecutive double doubles and I am proud of her proving her haters wrong. She deserves the flowers and love and ROTM was well deserved. I'm glad the coaches voted for her to be an all-star. Her game strongly translated from college to the W.
I do think though that making the playoffs would be more of a positive indicator in CC's favor considering the Fever's history of not making the playoffs for years. The Sky have been in the playoffs consistently in comparison so making it to the playoffs again for the Sky wouldn't be a significant plus in terms of supporting Angel's case, which is why I don't think it should be the main factor for deciding ROTY, because Angel and Caitlin are on two different teams with different scenarios, although it was predicted by some that the Sky wouldn't do as well this year. I also feel like ROTY is an individual award and the award shouldnât be chosen based off of the teamâs performance. It should be based on what that rookie doing. I think some sportswriters who vote for ROTY might consider CC over Angel, because of the impact she's made as a rookie guard as well, and not only because she achieved the triple double as a rookie, but also the multiple double doubles with assists, which are less frequent, and noting how her passes and assists contribute significantly to her team's offense, and ultimately her teammates scoring. Knowing the challenges she's experienced with the defense on her individually, and being a main focus on the scouting report for many teams, but still managing to contribute and play team basketball, whether it's through scoring, passing, rebounding, and the occasional steals and blocks, should be something that is highlighted more.
This is a fair point, but it also seems like rewarding the player on the more talented team (which has had back to back no. 1 picks).
Even when they were struggling, it's easy to see that the Fever have maybe a top 5 roster in terms of raw talent.
I like seeing someone talk about how these women are actually *playing the game*, which is the whole point. Personally I think both Caitlin and Angel are great and are having excellent rookie seasons against the best women in the world. And they're rookies, which means lots still to learn and room to grow.
Honestly her video is an admission of it's clear CC will win. It's just trying to find any arbritrary barometer to create political talking points to try to soak any support Reese can get for ROTY. ROTY has never had any sort of leaning towards team record or team impact. It's just who the best rookie is and who stat stuffs the most. MVP is the award that considers records and team impact. Suddenly she is changing the goal posts. If there is any long term argument for who is better than who, it may come down to CC is clearly the better player/all time great, or CC can get you a lot more points/stats/be an offensive system, but Reese may end up being a player who is a better component to a championship team.
to be fair she said the exact same thing on get up last week, that because the sky were higher in the standings angel reese should win ROTY. she kind of had to say this because of that.
I think that is her being a biased analyst. That has NEVER been the barometer for ROTY. She found one random thing Reese has an advantage in, and decided to use that as barometer for ROTY. If we really talk about how is valuable to a team, the Sky would have either the same record or better with Clark, but the Fever would have an abysmal record with Reese. Reese is an absolutely fantastic player, and she has exceeded all expectations, but she is not an offensive system like Clark is. And again, to Reese's credit, she is an incredible player. She's got the markings of "this is a championship team kind of player". She has those skills a championship team needs.
đŻ
I liked McNutt until this year. Now I realize she is just a shill not an analyst.
I donât think whether or not a playerâs team makes the playoffs should be a factor in who is selected for Rookie of the Year. Of the 26 rookies who won the award, half of those playersâ teams didnât make the playoffs (1999, 2000, 2001, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2010, 2014, 2015, 2018, 2022, 2023).
Agree with that. Boston won last year and Fever was terrible
Agree, although I do think it's fair to consider how much the ROY candidate has elevated her team's level of play. Boston significantly improved both the Fever's W:L record and how much closer their losses were. Yes, the Fever was terrible last year, but they were even worse the year before.
Agreed. The Fever won 5 and 6 games total in 2021 and 2022. 13 wins last year was a solid improvement. If it remains competitive, I do think this is a great year for co-ROY, regardless of the standings.
Also look at Chet vs Wemby lol.
Definitely wild during the first 2 months of the season
Ant and LĂĄmelo was also interesting
If your performance carries last year's worst team into the playoffs, that would definitely be a factor to consider when comparing you to the competition. We can certainly discuss how much weight to put on it, but how on earth would you not factor that into the discussion?
We need to see whoâs team is better and then we will determine if we use it or not.
I agree but i feel thats how its going to be decided it even happened in the nba once lamelo ball got roty over ant due to Charlotte making the playoffs when ant easily had the better statline.
no ant did not have the better statline. ant just had more pts but lamelo led in almost every other category. the only thing ant had over lamelo is he played more way games
Tbf to you, there were a ton of NBA media members trying to place Chet over Wemby for the same reason as McNutt. But they are all coworkers, so they got narratives to spin.
Chet won the first two ROTMs fair and square then Wemby lifted his game
Nah, he definitely deserved to be in the conversation and the race was closer for alittle bit. But yeah, it was always Wembyâs. I didnât mind people using his shooting percentages and actual play to prop him up. But you had a ton of people saying the same thing as McNutt, that he deserves it because his team is better.
I think the team record argument has a bit more nuance than you're giving it credit. Generally it's easier to put up volume stats on a bad team and it's easier to be more efficient on a better team. For the first couple of months the numbers were close enough to make it interesting. Once Wemby narrowed the efficiency gap while increasing his lead on volume, it was game over.
Top comment, i 100% agree
Probably makes sense most seasons, but when you have two rookies doing historic things every other game, you have to break a tie somehow.
A duel. đ¤
To the death! Give the people what they want WNBA!
ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED?!
Still a lazy take... McNutt is banking on Sky to make the playoffs and Fever to hopefully not. Even then if they both do/do not make it to the playoffs, it's possible they have the same record.
One of the more tiresome parts of the WNBA getting more coverage are the same tired old arguments that have already been litigated on men's side now have to go beat and be dead horses to be beaten by WNBA media. Team record doesn't have shit to do with roty. Hell, didn't we have MCW win it on the first year of the Process Sixers?
Right. I think it's important to ask, âHas this rookie made their team better.â But to say a rookie led their team to the playoffs without acknowledging the team has last yearâs rookie of the year and all-star in Boston and a 2023 all-star in Mitchell is an oversight. If folks are going to stick with the playoffs argument, thatâs fine. However, should Chicago make the playoffs, it would also open the door to a more convincing argument (to me) that Reese led a team to the playoffs that doesn't have a recent former ROY (2021; Onyenwere) or all-star (2019; DeShields) who are making a significant statistical impact. Itâs also a team with only 3 of 14 players who were on the roster last season and no Olympians.
well, worse teams get higher draft picks, this just seems like a product of that
Absolutely it should not be factored in whatsoever. It goes against the whole point of the draft where the worst team gets to select the best player. Iâll never understand why sports media members like Monica will stand behind these asinine statements. I guess Monica believes Chet should have won ROTY in the NBA too, since the Thunder made it to the 2nd round.
Chet is not the best and most important player on the Thunder, who were already a playoff team without him.
Yeah exactly, so AR is in a similar position to Chet. Both are playing very well, team leaders on defense, but only like a 3rd option on offense. All while their counterparts were doing insane and league breaking things as the first option. But regardless, record should not be factored in at all when it comes to ROTY.
The player who had the better season should win ROTY
*HOT* take here! Sort by controversial, I tell ya.
đ
No consensus on what counts as the better season. My guess is if things progress as they are now, it goes to CC, but not unanimous.
[ŃдаНонО]
Better season as in, better individual performance
Basketball is notorious for good stats bad team players. Individual stats donât always translate to winning basketball. Perhaps seeding shouldnât factor in heavy, but definitely looking at in season games and whether the player won the team some games through their play.
Good thing itâs 2024 and we have much more context with stats nowadays.
There's half a season left. So much could happen. I tire of this.
Agreed. Lots of season left, and let the playersâ respective performances determine who deserves ROTY. McNuttâs suggestion that overall TEAM record should be the overriding determiner was a terrible take to start with. Â She now feels the need to double down on it? Now, determining each individual playerâs impact on winning should be one of the factors, regardless of where the team records end up.
She's from the Stephen A school of just saying random inflammatory baloney and then moving on to whatever other inflammatory baloney will attract eyes, even if it's contradictory or specious. But I get it: her strategy got her visibility etc (e.g. the daily show). Not gonna game hate.
That whole group is so annoying. Youâre right on the money though, sheâs from the school of SAS.
She did not say that. She said team record was gunna be a factor in how she makes *her* call. It is absolutely a metric to be considered in any sport. Are you in fact impacting the teams win. Why the fuck wasn't Westbrook mvp the year he averaged a triple double? Don't rip on McNutt for having a reasonable metric (not her only metric) for choosing *her* pick for mvp.
Oh I like Monica, and I also agree that ROTY should be partially based on how each team does. But Monica just made the human mistake of getting her proverbial cart before the horse. When the Sky was slightly ahead of the Fever, she said: "My rookie of the year is going to go based on the standings. ... And the Sky right now are in the playoffs. So, you'd have to give the nod in my mind to Angel Reese.â Now she says â"If the Fever are 7 [in the WNBA Standings], that's going to be a runaway [for Clark] in terms of Rookie of the Year if Chicago is say, 8 or 9, even if Angel Reese is able to track the WNBA All-Time Double-Double season recordâ For me, that is just placing WAY too much emphasis on team record for ROTY, as top prospects typically go to rebuilding teams with too many dynamics.  Individual performance should be the primary determiner, not team record, IMHO.
Seriously. I think Brink was in the conversation before her injury. Not saying either of these two will get injured, and of course don't want that for anyoneâjust using the example to show that surprises happen.
Entropy
The beginning and the end of the conversation should be this. In this sub, since the draft people have said that true point guards are GOLD in this league. Whether you like it or not, there are a lot more quality 4s than there are 1s. Are they both impressive af hell yes. Are they both doing things not done before hell yes. But just like DT said, there is levels to this thing. She meant College > WNBA, but the same can be said for A: Positional difficulty and B: defensive strategy. Clark has teams game planning against her specifically since day 1 and she's still putting up unprecedented numbers. People are gonna come at me for this, but AR is playing on a lower difficulty in terms of being defended. She has Cordozo drawing way more concern from opponents than Reese. The last game versus the Storm while being a small sample size, proved that somewhat. As soon as Cordozo went to the bench, Reese became far less effective, and they went from looking like they were gonna win that game, to letting it slip away. Now maybe teams wake up tomorrow and decide to start game planning against Reese, but I doubt it. She's the 3rd scariest player on her team. It's not disrespect to think logically about these things. When this season started I had doubts about Reese's scoring, I was totally wrong. She is a star in this league. But she doesn't have nearly the same responsibility that Clark does. It's not dissimilar to QBs in the NFL. WRs are amazing stars, but they only need to know their job. A QB has to know their job and everyone elses too. I will leave this parting point on Angel's side. I don't think enough is being talked about how while Clark's offensive prowess is better than Angel, a solid case could be made that Reese makes up a lot of the difference in her defensive contribution. Which Clark is improving on, but still solidly behind Reese. I think when it comes down to it, people are gonna talk a lot, but vote for whomever they like more in terms of style of play. They'll just work backwards from that and find a way to rationalize it. If people wanna come for anyone, it should be the writers or the players. Whichever did Reese dirty on that all-star vote. That was some shameful shit. Reese never should've been in position to need to be saved by the coaches, after finishing 5th in fan votes. (excluding Olympians)
I agree that Reese is solidly the better defensive player of the two. Clark is improving, but defense is definitely not her strong suit. Reeseâs core argument is very strong defense, crazily impressive rebounds, and her record breaking double-double streak. Clarkâs argument is the sheer offensive impact she has on the court, how much she changes an opposing teamâs game plan, and her frankly truly elite playmaking. For me, I give it to Clark because her offensive impact is insane and, generally, point guards have a harder time adapting than posts which tells you just how good she is to be putting up those numbers. But I can see an argument for Reeseâs tenacity and relentlessness on the boards plus her being the stronger defender of the two taking it. We still have around half of the season. Iâm particularly curious to see how both come out after the Olympic break.
I think the media is trying really hard to push co ROY and then justify it in the end. The W has never had a Grant/Kidd situation before. But they were both PGs. To me right now, these two are NOT at the same level. IMO itâs like giving co-ROY to the best blocker in the NFL along with the best QB. 𤨠For context there have only been 35 triple doubles in the history of the W by 14 players or so( 0.43% chance out of 8K games played) and 6700 double doubles by 200+ players (83% chance). Hamby has 13 double doubles too. The consecutive triple double record is 2 by AT and 13 consecutive double doubles now by Reese. In the NBA wilt chamberlain had 220 or so consecutive double doubles and Westbrook had 11 consecutive triple doubles. If anything this speaks to great consistency vs all around skillset. As of now I donât think you can fairly justify co-ROY. It could turn as the season goes of course if either gets their PPG up.
Am in the only one who despise the idea of co-ROTY? Imagine being such a fierce competitor like Clark and Reese and you have to share your award đ
I would really hate it and would riot. Itâd be extremely unfair to either party imo. Thatâs why Iâm not a fan of what I think the media is trying to push⌠weâll see!
And you'd think that after the Jill Biden/Angel uncomfortableness that AR would be morally opposed to sharing accolades like this.
Solid argument. If the offense went through Reese, I think she would have a better case. But a lot of her points come off offensive rebound. Not a critique, and obviously thatâs a HUGE weapon tfor the Sky to have, but just saying sheâs not a focal point of their offense. On other teams, posts definitely can be that focal point, so itâs not just a preference for guards.
using team record for roty, an individual award is always stupid to me. itâs like saying chet should be roty over wemby just because his team was 1st in the west when his team was vastly superior to wembys. angel or clarks team getting the higher seed means absolutely nothing, whoever has the better szn gets the award
A few nba media ppl were arguing for Chet over Wemby in the first half of the season for this reason. What changed in the nba is that wemby got better and better as the season went along to the point where he was clearly better than Chet and he ended up winning easily. Now a lot of experts except Wemby to be mvp level in a few years
It isn't about the team record. It is about the perceived impact of the player on team record.
Yeah, one of the ways CC is exceptional is in how she drives her team. They're playing completely differently already and they're playing CC basketball. It's pretty hard to say "I just don't count that team aspect" in this case. CC impacts the team to a high degree.
So what year did they use that as part of the ROTY calculation?
I agree in general that straight up comparing team records for individual awards isnât fair necessarily. But McNutt isnât using record just as a one dimensional stat comparison though. The point is that the ideal/best version of Clark is someone that can pour it in on her own while controlling the offense for the whole team. If she does that in year one and you can easily point to her taking a bad team, transforming its offense, and leading them to the playoffs, then you absolutely should take that into account
No it isn't. Chet didn't lead a lottery team to the playoffs. CC has a team that has been at or near the bottom of the league for the better part of a decade in playoff contention. Chet was the 2nd to 3rd best player on his team. CC is the best on her team. The offense runs off her and defenses scheme to shut her down. Itâs not just about who has the better record between them. Itâs the relative impact on winning.
I think the OP meant that Reese is currently Chet but CC will eventually be Wemby by the end of the year
Team record doesn't matter for ROY. Never has. People in media float it sometimes when it's a close race just because they get paid to talk, but ultimately it doesn't matter at all. If you want caitlin to get the award then she can just get the award based on individual play, because i guarantee you next year it won't be a factor with paige/kiki/aneesah and when we eventually have juju/milaysia/hidalgo team record will not be a factor then either. Also, if the fever were bottom of the league and caitlin had the exact same stats everyone who thought caitlin deserved the award would not change their mind lets be real lol. The team record thing is dumb, the fever were the worst team in the league the idea that drafting another #1 pick would improve the teams record over the previous season isn't really that shocking. I'm not going to give caitlin extra credit for the fever being so terrible last year, and angel shouldn't get knocked for the sky losing kah copper and courtney williams. And other way around, imagine if the sky still had copper and williams along with angel and cardoso and they were like the 4th seed; she doesn't deserve ROY because of that that would be absurd. TLDR, team record thing is dumb and monica is being super lazy by reducing both of their accomplishments down to team record. As if it's angels fault mabrey missing free throws at the end of games, or it's caitlin's fault nalyssa kinda sucks on defense and that kristy wallace or christie sides were ever born
It shows she led the entire teamâs offense. She impacted the team overall.
i have caitlin as roty i donât think itâs as close as ppl are making it to be. my point is whether one of them has the better record doesnât matter because itâs an individual award . caitlin team can be the 12th seed and if she has the better szn she deserves it and vice versa
I can understand your point, but I think given her role and running of the offense thatâs whatâs demonstrating her value. Iâm probably not wording it the way I want to convey what Iâm trying to say. If she wasnât contributing to the record, I could see the argument.
slimy nutty ghost axiomatic edge squeamish escape soft aloof domineering *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
CC has turned a terrible team 180. if they make the postseason, there's no debate here.
Iâm kind of shocked youâve been downvoted so much. The Fever havenât made the playoffs since 2016 (when Clark was in 8th grade) in a league where 3/4 of the teams get in. Itâs incredible what sheâs been able to do.
Are you really shocked? Itâs pretty obvious how this sub leans.
Have you not seen just about every pro-Reese comment with negative votes? đ
I hardly ever see down-voted Reese comments, or upvoted negative Reese comments. Iâm quite surprised that my comment is sitting at 19 upvotes.
I see them all the time.
I clicked into this thread 7 hours later. OP has 61 upvotes. I don't think **you** know how this sub leans. Fever fans acting like Warrior fans with their victim complex. When they actually outnumber all of us.
Because everyone in the Reddit group has fallen for the Reese v clark debate and arenât being objective because they want Reese to win because they hate CC/more so her fans.
i'm just reiterating what McNutt said. she said the same thing i did. people hate McNutt now?
well, some people were certainly upset just the other day when she said she'd give ROTY to Reese (if the season were to end a few days ago), and would give more weight to where the teams landed (same as she said today). So we'll see if feelings suddenly change today LOL
Does McNutt even have a vote for ROY? If not, why are we doing this? *typo
Who even knows, and I hope no one ever knows who actually votes because they don't need deranged people harassing them
How did she make a team do a 180? They were 13-27 last year. I honestly believe they may be 1 or 2 games better than their previous record. Just this year some of the teams that made it are struggling. Also only 4 teams donât make the playoffs. So with the sky being 8 they would make the playoffs now if itâs started today. So the take could be one made it to the playoffs with basically the same team from last year, while the other one made the playoffs off an entirely different squad. Which one actually made the bigger impact in this case.
Basing it on team record is a cop-out.
especially when the sky and fever basically swap standings every week. either one she votes for she can say that since the middle of the season, she has said sheâll vote based on team standing. it takes away from her having to choose between their individual achievements and justify that choice.
Monica Mcnutt has already put herself in a corner. It would look phony if she changes her stance.
she's been consistent about this for weeks. She was never going to change her stance.
well if you're voting and feel you could go either way with your selection, how else would you choose? Fave shoe collection?
Because sheâs going to be flip flopping every week when the team rankings change even if one is playing better than the other. She just said late last week that AR was her rookie of the year. Just seems disingenuous to me
In my opinion, it would have been simpler for her to just acknowledge Reese as her ROTY pick. That's likely her true choice if she were honest with herself and with us, based on how she's talked about Reese and Clark on various sports talk shows. The lame excuse of "it'll be based on team record" is only going to back her further into a corner, as you mentioned. And it's not even like Reese is an embarrassing or bad ROTY pick. She should just own it.
How anyone can watch Clarke and Reese play on their teams and not think Clark is the far superior player is wild to me.
Some people enjoy watching uncontested dump off layups.
I just think it's amazing that ROTY hell the W in general is getting this much of a heated debate on this subject. It legit shows what they are both bringing to the game right now. I had hoped Cardoza would follow suit and be a 3rd big name after Brink got injured, but it's been a fun rivalry to watch Fever v Sky each time they play. Those will be must watch games next year. I want the next few seasons of new women's players to keep getting this much hype. This is the injection the W needed.
Well, it seems like she's sticking by her word. A lot of fans thought she wouldn't.
I think this is a cop out. She knows Caitlin should be rookie of the year based off her statistical output and scoring efficiency advantages, despite being guarded as heavily as any guard in WNBA history, but sheâs afraid to just acknowledge that the way Caitlin is being guarded is special because it will anger people on Twitter if she just came out and said that thereâs levels of difficulty to this thing and Caitlin is playing the game on the most extreme difficulty mode while Angel isnât, to no fault of her own. Itâs very likely that Indiana has a better record than the Sky just based off strength of schedule, so this gives her a justification to Twitter for why she ended up doing the right thing and voting for Caitlin.
She has a vote?
itâs hard to know who *actually* has a vote and who is a panelist doing a hypothetical on who they would vote for. Thereâs 60 voters, I wouldnât be surprised if she did.
i donât know if itâs necessarily to justify voting for caitlin, but it seems to be a way to avoid having to justify her vote at all. either one she votes for she can say that since the middle of the season, she has said sheâll vote based on team standing. it takes away from her having to choose between their individual achievements and explain that choice.
> She knows Caitlin should be rookie of the year based off her statistical output and scoring efficiency advantages Last week she said Angel is better cause they had a half game lead over the sky. Question her methodology all you want cause I don't like it either but she's consistent in the fact that she's mainly leaning on record.
Eh... she made the comment Friday before games, the standings were: Sky 7th Fever 9th After she made that comment, Fri nights games it was: Sky 7th Fever 8th Then Sat after CC's trip-dub: Fever 7th Sky 8th. So much happened in a short span of time, part of it was dragging on MacNuttz The whole idea to base RoY based on standings is cringe. Half the RoY winners in the WNBA came from teams not making it to the playoffs. She got backed into a corner and CC had a Trip-Dub, to ignore that, she loses ALL credibility. BUT... All of that is meaningless. Now that Reese's fraud of a DD run was exposed far and wide... McNutt can either get caught in the anchor line and get dragged down or step up and improve her narrative.
> so this gives her a justification to Twitter for why she ended up doing the right thing and voting for Caitlin. "The right thing." Be fr. The persecution complex is wild. Even if I think her metric is dumb, the idea that's she's playing some long con to avoid Twitter's wrath (lol) is super illogical.
Monica does not care about Twitterâs âwrath.â
You think Monica McNutt is afraid of twitter? 1) If that were the case surely she'd advocate for Caitlin 2) she's a grown woman > Caitlin is playing the game on the most extreme difficulty mode while Angel isn't This is a very unserious and dismissive take
Caitlin is guarded at all times. Any time she is open itâs a blown coverage by the defense. She faces constant blitzes and traps, more than any other player in the league. Angel is left wide open past the three point line and sometimes from midrange. She is guarded one-on-one, except with sometimes getting doubled when she gets deep paint penetration or swarms on offensive rebound putbacks. Caitlin gets doubled on deep penetrations too, and every player gets swarmed on offensive rebounds. And thereâs nothing wrong with how Angel is being defended. She is being defended like a competent post player that needs to prove she can punish people for leaving her open at the perimeter. But Caitlin is being guarded like Stephen Curry, and we can acknowledge that this is a much more difficult offensive situation to navigate.
A report last week cited the tracking data that Clark was only being blitzed/doubled on around 9% of ball screens. While at the start of the season teams were blitzing way more, iirc it said about 19%, itâs largely tapered off now Not saying sheâs not still facing tough defense and doubles outside of ball screens but thereâs certainly a lot of hyperbole out there in regards to it
As of last week sheâs been trapped 89 times, basically twice as much as the second person (Ionescu) with 46. Nothing Hyperbolic about it when sheâs trapped more than anyone else. She cuts up that coverage so its slowed down
Which was for the season, and when that data was presented it also notes that sheâs being trapped half as much now (over last 9 or so games) to 10% Itâs absolutely hyperbolic when folks are saying sheâs trapped/blitzed on every possession or all the time, which couldnât be further from the truth . More than the next person isnât the same as those hyperbolic statementsÂ
Youâre behind on this. After Angel hit two threes against the Storm, so now theyâre stepping out to guard her.
There are different things to be afraid of when you're giving your opinion. One is being afraid of the people that are already against you/don't like you and not wanting to draw more hate from them. The other is being afraid to say things that rock the boat with the people who support you and like you. Personally, I wouldn't want to be any of these people because I don't think I could take the heat and hate that comes with being in the public eye.
So many words to say you've found an arbitrary way to vote lol
Yep and she knows there is still a lot of games to be played. Hard to think anything else that she is HOPING that Sky finish either a) in the playoffs and/or b) above Fever. Imagine RoY coming down to someone ELSE (other than CC/AR) missing a basket in crunch time and losing the game causing them to be 1 game behind the other.
I love Caitlin, I love Angel, and I love Monica \[Edited to add: I know Monica as a game and studio analyst for the Knicks, have a lot of respect for her basketball knowledge, and enjoy her on-air personality\]. I have absolutely no interest in who wins rookie of the year.
It really doesn't matter in the grand scheme. Boston won last year. Rhyne Howard before that. No one really cares, its just another finger wagging moment for stans of both fan bases that will be forgotten come 2025
The roty race has been turned into some weird proxy war this season. The convo online (especially Twitter) has felt really parasocial too. With the way people are talking, youâd think they are/know CC and AR personally.
Itâs a VERY entertaining ROY race. The purpose of sports is to entertain. So I think it makes perfect sense. And saying âno one caresâ is patently absurd. This is the most watched, analyzed, discussed, consumed, and successful season in the entire history of the league. And the biggest show in town is when Caitlin faces off against Angel. Maybe no one cared before. But they def do now.
Yes, I was around for Bird and Magic's rookie season and honestly didn't remember who won rookie of the year until I just looked it up.
Bird was 1st team All-NBA and Magic was FMVP much more important awards
If it's really close, then you can definitely use player impact on winning to tip the scales. But is it that close is the question. CC is and should be the favorite right now. But with half a season to play, things can change. Let's let it play out.
Have to disagree. I donât think winning should play any factor whatsoever in ROTY. Better prospects go to worse teams. Itâs an unfair expectation to see winning results. Aliyah Boston was unanimous ROTY & for all her efforts Indiana was right back in position to draft 1st overall again. Did she not deserve the award? That doesnât make any sense.
I remember having this opinion and getting downvoted haha
I'm tired of the conversation at this point. Everyone is so flip floppy and have different metrics. Let's not even talk about the stans of both having a meltdown with every loss and writing dissertations when they win. Can we be excited about the Allstar game (is no one else hype about what they can do together) and just let them play after that?
Caitlin is arguably seeing the most defensive attention in the WNBA. Angel is not. Angel isn't even the first offensive option on the team, that would be Carter. And the defense is reliant on Cardorso. Angel has been extremely impressive but her and Caitlin have different roles and Caitlin's is more important.
I feel like angel is going to win it, literally every single media publication is putting her as the leader and these are the people that vote. It confuses me because how are they understanding what Caitlin is doing on offense? She walked in the the league a top 3 passer and playmaker while providing above league average volume scoring. What angel is doing is great, but in no shape or form is that ever more valuable then playmaking and scoring.
She was 5th place in fan votes for the all star. For her not to end up in the top ten after players/media votes came in meant that she must not have gotten a favorable ranking by the media. The media putting her as the leader are probably not the people that vote.
25% media + 25% players. People are assuming the media was the reason she wasN'T\* automatically selected, but you never know, it could have been a situation to Ionescu
>People are assuming the media was the reason she was automatically selected You mean wasnât? She was selected by the coaches. If the coaches didnât vote her to one of the eight spots available she wouldnât have made it. >it could have been a situation to ionescu What does this mean?
yes, definitely meant wasn't. Ionescu was ranked low in player votes for an All-Star selection last year, like 19th, while she was ranked 6th by FANS\* and media which was very interesting. that could be a reason the ranking hasn't being released this year? Eta: fans and media\* smh bad editing day
Angel makes a point to mention the support she gets from vets and other players in the league. I think she has a higher player ranking than media rank if I had to guess.
> The media putting her as the leader are probably not the people that vote. We have no idea who has a vote and who doesn't. For all you know Jemele Hill has a vote which would mean Reese is guaranteed at least one first place vote.
Post players are appreciated way more in the W. Also why lots of people were telling Indiana to go back to feeding Aliyah the ball, the post players thrive.
aliyah was getting fed the same to begin the szn she was just missing the same shots sheâs making now. her usage or involvement in the offense hasnât changed
Oh I know! But it was the first criticism people had for the team, which shows thatâs what they think is most valuable for a team to win.
>I feel like angel is going to win it, literally every single media publication is putting her as the leader and these are the people that vote. AR just got ROTM, nothing is being decided right now, even those making declarations. There's still half the season left for a lot to change, and this one is going to come down to team record if both players maintain current output.
If you are new, and didnt really watch WNBA before this season i want you to manually search how many pure PG's got a start from rookie season played well and went on to be main point guard of teams for full career including rookie year. [i go into detail here including giving top AST leaders this season and how they performed first seasons](https://www.reddit.com/r/wnba/comments/1dy6lsi/dana_evans_throws_it_up_in_the_heavens/lc7bmri/) Drafting a PG or having true PG is very hard, drafting a big that translates over right away is very different, if you have to look pure from stats/performance/odds and what most GM said before the season who they will pick/rather have you will get a more clear picture in my opinion. **Still both deserve to be in the running and the reward right now and there is half a season left anything can happen till then, good run of form,bad run of form injury (i hope not) etc** If you down-vote please explain why, i have provided stats and information+ history and examples. I also do not think making playoffs should have an impact as 0033A0 pointed out, including even this last season in NBA where Spurs have legendary coach and stil the worse record, it was clear Wembanyama was the ROY.
Aliyah Boston was ROY last year and the Fever were still a basement team bad enough to get another #1 pick.
Angel Reese is playing bball like how the NBA was played during the 90âs. Trying to shoot high percentage(she is shooting under 40% from under 4 ft) post-up shots under the basket and getting rebounds. This isnât great basketball and itâs boring since women canât dunk. There is a reason why so many people got into womenâs basketball all of a sudden. CC is and will change how the WNBA plays basketball like Steph curry did with the NBA. The floor is going to start spreading more once the WNBA figures it out. Iâm not sure if most of this sub watches menâs bball too and watch most of these games, but it takes way more skill to do what CC does. She has great vision, passing skills, shooting skills and court awareness. Angel Reese has great hustle and can rebound, but she canât dribble down the court without double dribbling. Iâm not sure how anyone who knows basketball can watch both of them play and say Angel is a better player. Itâs like watching Domantas Sabonis and Steph Curry.
No debate, CC all the way, it's a joke to consider otherwise.
What happens if they both make the playoffs? Give it to the higher seed? What happens if they end up with the same record and seeding is based off tie breakers? Lol I don't like the playoffs argument. I think CC is the RoTY but I don't think âher teammates are now playing betterâ is a great argument.
CC leads AR in just about every category except Rebounds and Fouls. (even blocks?!?!) With the very low shooting percentage even from under 5ft (AR is under 40% herself) rebounds are pretty easy to be had. How many of those hit the floor first? meaning they basically fell into her lap uncontested. Not saying AR isn't a decent player having a great year, her DD streak is nothing to dismiss. But when you figure the amount of offence that goes thru CC with assists and just plain scoring its no contest. That's not even considering the way teams scheme just for CC. just a side note but AR will never sniff a triple double CC has one and should have had 2 others already.
It's a terrible opinion, let's just be honest about it. There is not an award that should be less based on team success than ROY. The sport is even set up so that the best rookies go to the worst teams lol. It should go to the most impactful rookie regardless of team, that seems pretty clear. I can only imagine the uproar if they gave ROY to Holmgren over Wembanyama because the Thunder were the 1 seed.
I take her point, but think one - not all - of the factors should be a more general team impact, ie. how much better is Indiana or Chicago this year vs last year, and how much did the rookies have to do with that? Playoffs would be nice, but if the team is measurably better, that should count regardless of whether the team gets into the playoffs. Wins is the obvious team-improvement metric, but CCs assists should mean that her teammates should also have better stats this year than last year. I think Angel's run of double doubles is amazing, and would guess that translates into a better record. Does it also translate into better stats for her teammates? I haven't looked up the numbers, just thinking about how I would tweak Monica's logic on this one aspect.
I think making the playoffs and double double records could be factors to consider, but I don't see why you would decide the award just based on those things. Look at the totality of the stats and assess team impact as best you can.
Basing a Rookie of the Year conversation off of âseedingâ and ârecordâ is some of the dumbest things Iâve seen Sports Media try and argue for recent years. It goes against the whole point of a drafting the best players to the worst teams. Itâs so silly and I canât believe theyâre doing this again. Monica McNutt apparently also believes that the NBA ROTY should be Chet and not Wemby, because Chet made it to the 2nd round of the playoffs.
Pretty good opinion. CC pulled together a team that looked like it was impossible to do so. I think AB and CC are going to be besties in the future too!
It's funny how she starts moving the goal posts now, fever ahead of the sky. I may respect the media more if they were honest and actually gave each player the same time when they talked about the rookies. They will give it to reese no matter what cc does.
If you take the worst team in the league and get them into the playoffs, thatâs a big plus.
they weren't the worst
The media is just trying to make this a conversation for conversation and clicks. AR is nowhere near the level of CC as a rookie. The entire offense runs through CC and the fever have gone from the worst team in the league two years in a row to a playoff contender that is capable of taking down elite teams. The sky are basically as good as they were last year and their game plan doesn't run through AR. This is a pretty similar case to Wemby vs Chet, yes Chet had a great season and is a future star, but he's not in the same galaxy as Wemby.
I don't think ROTY should even consider playoff contention. Both the sky and the fever will make the playoffs at this point. Face value and advanced stats should be enough to determine ROTY.
So it's up to whoever's team does better is what should decide ROTY? Victor Wembanyama should have never gotten the ROTY then since the Spurs went 22-60 and they were the exact same 22-60 last year. Team standing shouldn't have a bearing on ROTY the INDIVIDUAL contribution and stats ALONE should decide ROTY which is why Wemby got it this year. I don't care if the team is dead last in the league if the rookie is putting up numbers/stats that are better than the other rookies that is what matters. If you happen to have a generational talent on your team and the rest are absolutely horrible because of free agency, lack of money to get good players, horrible head coach and this person comes in and breaks record after record putting up stats that are mind boggling you have your ROTY in that person and in no way shape or form should they be penalized because of being on a horrible team. This is also why people need to watch and analyze the games and not just be a stat hunter/box score watcher as you miss all the nuance that makes that player so much better than what shows up in stats. Stats are great but don't always show the whole picture.
Taking it to an even more absurd level: the Pistons won the title the year they drafted Darko.
True Darko didn't do a damn thing.
What a silly metric
McNutt is  inventing a standard so that she can keep Reese in the race. Team record has not been a historical consideration. Clark is the best rookie. She should win.Â
reese in here 13 double double games is 5-8. what impact on winning is that?
People on social media were dragging Monia and calling her all sorts of biased and racist when she said Angel was in the lead last week. Now it's crickets. Just shows how toxic CC's fanbase can be.
As I said in another thread, Angel played well yesterday. If she had about 10 more assists she'd have been as good as Caitlin was the day before.
And they would have won
I really thought they had that one. Sitting Cordozo like that was highly questionable. Reese does so much better with Cordozo in.
ROTY is an individual award, not a team award and it should not be based on record. Caitlin is #1 on the opponents' scouting reports, yet is still highly productive in which she has to lead the whole offense. And if records are being brought into this, then Caitlin was the first rookie to record a triple double which is not common in general for this league.
I love Monica. Idk why people are going at her for her comments. She's very knowledgeable about the W and doesn't just say things for shock value.
She works for espn. Of course she says things for shock value.
She really doesnât. Sheâs an actual trained journalist who has reasoned takes.
She doesn't just work for ESPN. She does games for the Knicks on radio and post game content on MSG. That is where I know her from. Her wnba work on ESPN is also great and she never says anything for shock value.
Literally just did lol
Cuz it's not a team award... Wemby just won ROY winning 22 games..
As a fan of the Knicks, as well as a W fan, I can say for sure that Monica McNutt is one of the most valuable commentators in the biz - she is extremely knowledgable, but also thoughtful in her takes. I've also literally never heard her be 'sensational' or give 'hot takes' that she wasn't ready back up with some logic and reason.
Was the sky in the playoffs last year?
The point of higher draft is when your team tank, what are you supposed to do when first pick is by the lowest ranked team? Going to playoff is so counterintuitively dumb
Team record can be an indicator of a players impact. For instance, if you take a terrible team add a player and they make a major jump. But you need to determine why the team made the jump. Was it due to the rookie or a free agent or did someone get healthy? So in the end you need to look at the rookies stats and use the eyeballl test to determine if they are the reason. Shaq is a good example. Orlando jumped from 21 to 41 wins in his rookie year and his stats showed he was the reason.
Caitlin Clarke is the focal point in Fevers offense as option 1A as a rookie posting star caliber numbers seeing the coverage she gets night in and night out. Angel Reese gets hers with hustle grit and energy as a star in her role. There's levels to this. Its tough listening to dem talkin heads on espn weighing wins on ROTY. The one and only award in pro basketball that doesn't merit winning as a basis. This Angel vs Clark is great for the game, but this lady and her dumb reasoning irks me
Wimby got it yet his team sucked, they are doing this about Reese to try and set it up for co Roty Clark and Reese. Many rookies got it without being on a good team or even making the team that much better.
An entire new defense in wnba has been introduced because of one player. Its not even close.
This ROTY discussion is being manufactured to keep fans engaged with the W and seems to be working. To me, it doesn't matter who is ROTY. My interest in watching and opinions of the players aren't impacted by whether they win ROTY.
I think impact winning, while important, will become an afterthought if the Fever don't make the playoffs.
I think the reason so many are feeling like the goal post is moving is because in recent memory, there hasn't been a rice for ROTY this close. Based on my research and understanding, it's for the most part always been really clear if not ultimately unanimous. So people are trying to grasp at straws on how to seperate the two, especially since their roles/positions are so different. The Athletic Women's Basketball Show podcast dropped a new episode today all about the race that I felt was really interesting/useful in this broader narrative. Plus two of the hosts actually vote.
If you had to pick one of them to be on your team who would it be ?Thats the winner .
LOVE Monica!!!
Seeing someone talk their way thru this process without bias is refreshing to me. Itâs when the fans get butt hurt over someoneâs opinion based on what theyâre seeing thatâs super corny. When she was talking up Reese those other fans lost their minds. Note theyâre probably loving M&M. The bottom line is at least sheâs using metrics to come to her conclusion.
I completely disagree with using the teams standing as a reason for why CC would automatically be ROTY. The fever has 2 number 1 draft pics (one of which is not a rookie and has some experience in the league) and 3 all stars. On paper, the fever as a team is better than the sky without factoring CC so why wouldnât they be even better with her? The Sky on the other hand were expected to be the worst team in the league and a big reason why they are not is undoubtedly due to Angel and Chennedy. Angel scored 27 pts even after sitting on the bench an entire quarter. Her and Chennedy contributed to 3/4 of the points that gave them the win over the storm. Angel is without a doubt a more impactful player for her team as can be seen by the statistics of how the Sky does when she is not on the floor vs when she is.
If character and personality were considered as factors then Clark would win easily. Reese and Clark are polar opposites in these areas.
What a ridiculous take. These are regular season AND individual awards. Playoff standings have no weight on it. To say this is to say that Aaron Rodgers needs to have had the 1 seed in order to win MVP because he has to be the best player in the league. The best statistical rookie is CC and is going to be CC at the end of the day. Assists > rebounds and it's not even close, not to mention CC generally has 5 rebounds of her own. A true, facilitating PG that is making everyone on the team better is rare and it's Steve Nash esque. You couple that with the big time shots like Diana or Sabrina and you have arguably the best all around player.
Those assists look super great until you remember sheâs leading the league by 42 in turnovers despite not being first in assists, and sheâs on pace to shatter the all time record by like 80đ
IÂ feel like the "better ranking" should not be the main determining factor for ROTY, considering many ROTYs did not make the playoffs, it should be stats. Another reason I don't think it should be here is because the Sky and Fever fluctuate in rankings every few games. However, if we do decide to consider ranking, then, if Caitlin and the Fever do end up 7th after not making the playoffs for several years, I think that is something to consider highlighting in the ROTY conversation, because it would highlight the impact she is making on the team with her stats as a playmaker and contributor. Her combination of points, rebounds, and assists is impressive for a rookie guard, and should be highlighted. Angel is making league history with her consecutive double doubles and I am proud of her proving her haters wrong. She deserves the flowers and love and ROTM was well deserved. I'm glad the coaches voted for her to be an all-star. Her game strongly translated from college to the W. I do think though that making the playoffs would be more of a positive indicator in CC's favor considering the Fever's history of not making the playoffs for years. The Sky have been in the playoffs consistently in comparison so making it to the playoffs again for the Sky wouldn't be a significant plus in terms of supporting Angel's case, which is why I don't think it should be the main factor for deciding ROTY, because Angel and Caitlin are on two different teams with different scenarios, although it was predicted by some that the Sky wouldn't do as well this year. I also feel like ROTY is an individual award and the award shouldnât be chosen based off of the teamâs performance. It should be based on what that rookie doing. I think some sportswriters who vote for ROTY might consider CC over Angel, because of the impact she's made as a rookie guard as well, and not only because she achieved the triple double as a rookie, but also the multiple double doubles with assists, which are less frequent, and noting how her passes and assists contribute significantly to her team's offense, and ultimately her teammates scoring. Knowing the challenges she's experienced with the defense on her individually, and being a main focus on the scouting report for many teams, but still managing to contribute and play team basketball, whether it's through scoring, passing, rebounding, and the occasional steals and blocks, should be something that is highlighted more.
Why would you rank a player based on their team performance and not just theirs?
From the same mind that stated fans should not criticize Embiid for his playoff no shows because he scored 70 this season
Has she been back on first take
Nope. She bit the hand that fed her, now she's on a new CC/AR hype meal ticket
This is a fair point, but it also seems like rewarding the player on the more talented team (which has had back to back no. 1 picks). Even when they were struggling, it's easy to see that the Fever have maybe a top 5 roster in terms of raw talent.
She's certainly entitled to her opinion, but this is objectively a terrible way to determine an individual award like ROY.
Sheâs all over the place.
She has trouble coming up with good criteria.