Today, we’re diving into the usual discussions, focusing specifically on the controversial situation surrounding Caitlin Clark and her omission from the Olympic team. This is reminiscent of debates seen on the Stephen A. Smith Show, particularly First Take.

Recently, Andraya Carter made several questionable statements regarding this matter. In hindsight, it’s clear that not including Caitlin Clark in the Olympic team was a poor decision—something even the most ardent Caitlin Clark detractors recognize. By the end of June, following her remarkable performances, it was evident that any basketball-based argument against her inclusion was weak.

Let’s look back at some of Caitlin Clark’s statistics leading up to the Olympic selections:

June 30: Caitlin had a near triple-double against the Mercury, showcasing her exceptional ability.
July 5: She recorded a triple-double early in July against the Liberty, further solidifying her status.
Overall Performance in July: By the time of the Olympics and the All-Star break, Caitlin had the best July performance among players, with numerous standout games, including:

Chicago Game: 23 points on 71.1% shooting, 12 rebounds, and 6 assists.
Other Notable Games:

16 points (6 of 12 shooting), 4 rebounds, and 7 assists.
17 points and a franchise record of 30 assists in a single game.
Multiple games with double-digit assists, tying franchise records.

By the announcement of the team on June 6, the arguments against her inclusion began to shift from basketball performance to marketing reasons. While some believed that selecting her solely for promotional purposes was diminishing her talent, it became hard to argue against her basketball capabilities as her performances continued to speak for themselves.

Andraya Carter, along with other commentators, made the point about promoting the league versus purely basketball reasons. However, by early July, Caitlin’s performances made it very clear that she was among the top guards in the league. If anyone argued that she didn’t deserve a spot on the Olympic team based on performance, they were ignoring the facts.

The landscape of the league changed rapidly:

Averaged 16 points per game during her time leading up to the Olympic selections.
Notably, she had one game where she recorded 24 points, 19 assists, and 8 rebounds, setting a record for the most points responsible for a single game in WNBA history.

By the time the Olympics arrived, it was widely accepted that Caitlin was one of the best guards in the WNBA, and her absence from the team was viewed as a significant oversight.

In terms of comparisons, players like Chelsea Gray were recognized for their skill, yet Caitlin’s performances showed that she could compete at the highest level, regardless of the concerns about her physicality against international competition.

It’s important to recognize that while some analysts might have felt justified in their initial takes, they were largely proven wrong. Hindsight is 20/20, but the reality is that Caitlin Clark’s talent was evident even before the Olympics.

Now, while Andraya Carter made some strong points about the marketing aspects of selecting players, she also implied that Caitlin’s inclusion would have been disrespectful to the game. This contradicts the evidence of Caitlin’s performance and growth throughout the season.

In summary, Caitlin Clark was not only a top player but arguably the best point guard at the time. Those who questioned her place on the Olympic team, including Andraya Carter, have since been exposed for not recognizing her value appropriately.

As we wrap up this discussion, it’s essential to acknowledge that all analysts make mistakes, and it’s crucial to own up to those misjudgments. While hot takes can sometimes be entertaining, they should be rooted in facts—something that seemed to falter in this case.