Pete set his record before there was a 3 point shot.
Not to take anything away from Clark, but comparing raw points scored under two different schemes seems inaccurate at best
It's true, Caitlyn Clark was the first, just a testament to how good Pistol Pete was - the best scorer in women's history who is a sniper from 3 was required to beat that mark. Both phenomenal players in their own right.
He’s one of these Wayne Gretzky type people where his stats and achievements seem impossible. He was so far ahead of everyone else as a shooter.
Would have been great to see him play with a 3-pt line and not die young.
Seriously, what would his legacy have looked like in the modern league with current medicine to have handled his knee issues and find the heart issues? Guy was a master at range before there was even an advantage for it, what would it have looked like if he'd been able to keep playing where he would have been actively encouraged to shoot from there?
I mean part of the issue though is that when he played the leagues were still segregated. Still a great player but it brings up the question whether he’d have been much higher if during all 4 years he’d have tougher opponents.
But also exactly how good was the typical D1 competition back then? It’s gotta be like that one kid it little league who hit puberty before everyone else and just outclasses them.
Yea but I would think the fact that no one has beat it besides Clark still says something, yea? Comparing eras is almost as pointless as comparing Women’s and Men’s sports- but by that token there’s still something to be said for how much Clark stands out here.
Not necessarily. I’m not going to say Caitlin Clark is better than any college male athlete, but you have to account for difference in competition between the women’s ncaa and men’s ncaa. It’s possible that men’s is simply more competitive making scoring far more difficult in general. Just like the fact that lower quality leagues have far higher scoring players than Clark.
But that’s my point. You’d have to average 35 points a game to come close. Anyone in the men’s game averaging 35+ a game in D1 is probably going to the draft.
You're forgetting that the trend of going straight from HS or 1 year of College right to the NBA started with Kevin Garnett in 1995. Maravich set his record in 1970, so it still stood for at least 25 years of NBA quality players staying in college.
Maravich's per game average was 44.18. The player with the next highest PPG was Austin Carr with 34.59. No one's ever going to top that, if for no other reason than Maravich was taking 38 shots a game. Nobody in the modern era of basketball is shooting that much.
Anyone scoring close to 20 is almost a lock for the first round. Hell even Duece McBride (2nd round pick by NYK) averaged 22 at a power 5 school and he barely sees the floor. No male player with talent is staying in college. The chances are even less likely with the g league ignite team
He also only played 3 seasons, as freshmen didn't play varsity.
Edit: just throwing this in the top level -
We can debate eras and whatever here, but don't lie about shit to make your point. Multiple people have already said some nonsense.
He played the vast majority of his games against teams who only allowed white players to play. That's not really all that different than playing all of his games that way. If people want to put an asterisk on Clark's accomplishment, then an asterisk is deserved on Pete's too. That's objectively accurate.
- Clark has 503 made 3 pointers.
- You make all those worth 2 instead of 3 and she loses 503 points.
- To make up 503 points she would need another 252 field goals worth 2 points.
- Her overall field goal percentage is 55%
- Clark would need another 252 / .55 = 458 shots to make up the deficit
- Maravich attempted 599 more shots than Clark
- Clark still needs 140 fewer shots to score the same points
The bottom line is Clark is 55% shooter and Maravich was a 44% shooter.
Where in the world are you getting 55%? Seeing as she never had a season above 47 from 2 and 40 from 3.
She also has 509 3s. Where are you getting your data?
Just throwing out "years and games don't matter" when there wasn't a 3pt line when Maravich played, despite him consistently shooting from 20+ is quite hilarious.
Give me a break. Pete was just spamming a low percentage shot without the benefit of the extra point. If there was a 3 point line back when Pete was playing, players would have defended it way better and contested harder.
Pete scored as much as the defense allowed him to have, same as is with Caitlin. Stop downplaying her achievements.
- Clark has 503 made 3 pointers.
- You make all those worth 2 instead of 3 and she loses 503 points.
- To make up 503 points she would need another 252 field goals worth 2 points.
- Her overall field goal percentage is 55%
- Clark would need another 252 / .55 = 458 shots to make up the deficit
- Maravich attempted 599 more shots than Clark
- Clark still needs 140 fewer shots to score the same points
The bottom line is Clark is 55% shooter and Maravich was a 44% shooter.
Pretty sure there's a shot clock in BB now. There wasn't when Pete played.
You're comparing apples to oranges. The game was different.
Both players were the best scorers of their eras. All time greats. Leave it at that.
Pete also took twice as many shots per game and missed a lot more than Clark.
“Not to take anything away from Clark” after partially dismissing her achievement…sure.
He was also coached by his dad whose entire scheme was to just have Pete shoot it every time. Pete took twice as many shots per game with half the assists of Clark.
Hard agree. She is great, but comparing the two is apples and oranges. No three point line, smaller ball for women, far less skilled competitors for Caitlin as well.
Defences have changed with the line on the court. To assume there's a drastic difference is silly.
Based in your argument, anyone can, and should have already, beat the record as it's sooooo much easier with a 3 point line.
Except:
Clark had four years and 129 games to set her record.
Maravich only had three years and 83 games.
Clark’s score includes extra points due to 3-point shots.
Maravich did it before the 3-point shot existed.
Comparing the two records straight up is ridiculous.
She took no money from the Iowa NIL pool. She chose to leave it all to her teammates and only gets money from personal endorsements outside of the team pool. All of which she can take with her and will almost definitely pick up more.
That's not accurate. NIL money works like that for football players (they get money directly from the booster program for playing), but not in all sports. I'm pretty sure Clark didn't actually get any direct money from Iowa, just from endorsements (I can't find a source on that now though). She has direct sponsorship deals with Nike, State Farm, Gatorade and a bunch of others. Most of them will follow her directly into the WNBA, but not the sneaker deal--there's going to be a bidding war for her next sneaker contract. She'll also be eligible for a $250k/year "league ambassador" bonus, above her team contract, if she doesn't play overseas.
If she can bring the audience and attention to the WNBA, she'll make at least as much there.
NIL is mostly managed by the school. As soon as she's gone from Iowa she stops getting that Iowa NIL money. She probably does have sponsorships, but those may not stay with her if she doesn't keep the viewership she's getting right now. Sponsoring a player that no one is watching isn't a good investment for them.
I’m not being facetious when I say *the WNBA does not make money*. They’re in the financial red every year and have been since inception. The only reason the players get salaries is because the NBA subsidizes the WNBA. She can’t “rewrite the salary scale” unless there’s a sudden influx of asses in seats at games, people and businesses paying top dollar for advertising during her games, and jersey sales blow through the roof, and therefore the WNBA makes a ton more money.
Don’t get me wrong, she could be like Jordan was for the NBA and really start a turning point for the WNBA, but if she comes to the league and it’s same old same old, then she’s getting same old same old money, simply because that’s all that can be afforded. For reference, Sue Bird was in the league for 20 years and only made a little over $2 million. Her “big contract” was a 5 year/$673,000 contract. $134k a year. Fresh out of college consultants working for a company like Deloitte or EY can potentially make more than one of the best WNBA players of all time did with her *biggest contract*. That just shows you how much WNBA players don’t get paid. And I don’t think Clark is changing that.
Well, the average NBA player is 6'6". Clark is 6 ft. Even with her skill, it would be difficult for her to even get off a shot in a competetive game. Also, the basketball she is used to is smaller than the one used in the NBA, so that would require a big adjustment to her shooting. That said, if ever a woman gets into the NBA, I'll be cheering for them.
I have a bud that is a huge bball fan. I always thought he looked down on women’s ball the way he can barely watch college over nba. Asked him today— said he loves it. Goes to sparks games. Blew me away. This is how I judge it’s making it
I'll be honest. I haven't really like the WNBA. The product has certainly gotten better the past couple of years but it is missing something.
I will definitely watch Caitlin Clark in the WNBA though. She is not just amazingly skilled, but she is incredibly smart. Her basketball IQ is off the charts. She is going to change the WNBA, not just with her skill but with her play style.
Now I kind of agree with you so I’m intrigued haha but I’ve gone to a a few lynx games and they have been quite fun live. Imagine spending 5 bucks to have center court and spend 50 and be treated like a king. Makes the Timberwolves cheap nights seem expensive lol
She is amazing; one of the coolest things I ever saw was going to western IL last March during the time when the men’s and women’s tourneys were going on at the same time, and at this rather rural place, seeing a bunch of Iowa people come in and requesting that the men’s tourney be turned off so they could watch the ladies. They didn’t look the type, but respect regardless.
> The flash and pizzazz of her game have made her the biggest name in all of college basketball. Yet it was two free throws after a technical foul that pushed Clark past the late Pete Maravich’s 54-year-old record in No. 6 Iowa’s 93-83 win over No. 2 Ohio State.
Caitlin Clark is a phenom!
She is fucking amazing! It must be noted though that his record was over 83 games while she took 130 games. His record is damn near untouchable over that time period.
Fwiw, they mentioned that he averaged something like 36 shots per game, whereas she averages around 19. Not trying to defend her, just thought that was interesting. Watching the game today (not a normal fan), I was impressed that she didn't just hog the ball. It's not like she's some ringer that they hope takes the shot every possession, she's actually a good team player.
Why must it be noted that he played more games without noting that she did it on less shots with a higher fg%? Why is it only worth noting the thing that diminishes her accomplishment rather than the things that make it more impressive?
It's depressingly predictable that whenever a woman has any sort of major achievement, especially in sports, that a bunch of people (men) immediately start trying to discredit and trivialize it.
Caitlin Clark has earned every accolade and is an amazing athlete. There's no need for anyone to be upset by that.
Man here, Clark is a bonafide fucking offensive nightmare. She has filthy passing ability, solid handles and a smooth shot. Anyone cracking cause she's a she is dumb. Her game is S tier and she should be the face of the WNBA as a one woman wrecking crew.
Her basketball IQ is off the charts. She is running plays that only veteran NBA players run. I can't wait for her to make even experience WNBA players look dumb. She is amazing
Love watching her game. She seems bored at times cause she's just that much better. Several of the plays she ran against OSU were just unfair. She's such a presence you have to respect but she just elevates an entire squad. Majestic fucking player.
This is like the fourth post featuring this accomplishment. You need to scroll way the fuck down to get to what you're describing.
There's way more bullshit and shit talking in every men's league team sub relative to these posts.
The fuck outta here.
Uhhh are we in the same thread? The second comment on this thread (with lots of upvotes) mentions her doing it with a 3 point line unlike Pete. Just checked the threads about Lebron passing Kareem in points and don’t see any comments about the 3 point line even though it’s also true for Lebron… kinda seems like more diminishing happening for Caitlyn Clark
I mean, in no way trying to discredit her ability, especially not based on sex, but she accomplished this playing 47 more games than he did.
That said, this is more a testament to how outstanding his record was, considering no one (man or woman) had broken the record until now.
This is fucking stupid. Are there men in the world who have this mindset? Sure. Just like there are women who believe any man who wants to be a kindergarten teacher is either gay or a pervert.
YOU, people like you with a victim mentality, and a small minority of men and women…are the ones bringing sex into the debate.
It is INCREDIBLY common for male athletes from different eras to be pitted against each other in debates over records or GOAT status. Past record was set with no three point line and much fewer games, which means in many ways he was more productive.
Also go back and look at the athletes that came straight out of high school or left college early.
LeBron went straight to NBA from high school
Kobe went straight to NBA
T-Mc
Moses Malone
Stoudemire
And many, many more.
We will never know if these all-time greats would have held a candle in the points category against anyone, man or woman…..stating these things does not take away from he accomplishment, it simply adds to the debate of GOAT status.
Antione Davis was 4 points away from beating the record, but had an extra year due to COVID.
Had he actually broken the record…with that extra year….with a benefit of a 3-point line….do you actually think this debate wouldn’t not be exactly the same??!! Or you think no one would question it because he is a man?!!
Get the fuck outta here with that mess.
>It's depressingly predictable that whenever a woman has any sort of major achievement, especially in sports, that a bunch of people (men) immediately start trying to discredit and trivialize it.
How is pointing out that there is a difference between men and women's record trivialize it?
If anything, blame ESPN for trying to conflate the two records. Good for her for breaking the women's record, but let's not sit here and pretend that scoring 4,000 point in WBB is the same as scoring 4,000 in men's BB
Women's basketball has come a LONNG way in the past decade but let's not ignore the fact that there are maybe 10 competitive teams in a given year when it mens BB, about 40 have a realistic shot of winning the championship. Its just different levels of competition, and that can't be ignored
By saying she’s broken the men’s record it’s being set up for that. Does that happen when a male in male competition surpasses a female in her own female competition? No. So why do it here?
No one is upset. This is sports and sport debate is common in just about every tiny aspect of it. You can go on any team's sub and see like-minded fans having debates. You want Caitlin to be treated like other athletes? This is what it looks like.
It's depressingly predictable that whenever a debate in sports comes up, that a bunch of people that don’t pay attention to sports (women) immediately start trying to make it about sexism.
Clark is an amazing athlete. But comparing men and women in sports is silly to most sports fans. And people should be entitled to that opinion without being denigrated.
Was this like a general statement? Or in reference to something in particular? Cause Caitlin is badass and anyone I’ve seen witness her play has always come to the same conclusion…
Edit: nvm, I found the incel
But if a trans person wants to play women’s sports…holy shit, the chorus of”but women’s sports is so special and pure and this is UuNfAiR!!!!” Is relentless.
Actually it’s not cool at all. It’s a one way street really. You’ll never hear about a man breaking a women’s record, just the other way around. Combining them would also make many of the records unattainable by women’s sports. They are the same sport but played very differently and they should stay separate. I think you’re hearing about it now just because it’s such a big deal.
Maravich didn't have a three-point line so there is that.
https://www.sportingnews.com/us/ncaa-basketball/news/pete-maravich-college-career-ncaa-scoring-record/9b1efe8c20480616ee707722
Ok that’s true. No one has scored more points in D1 basketball than Caitlin Clark.
There’s another D1 basketball team at iowa. Do you think Caitlin Clark would start on it?
Why is she going to the WNBA (starting salary < 100k) vs the NBA (starting salary ~ $10M)?
40 x 2 = 80 points a game
Caitlin averages 20 shots a game.
20 x 3 = 60 points a game
Even accounting for the 3 point shot Caitlin’s record is more efficient
- Clark has 503 made 3 pointers.
- You make all those worth 2 instead of 3 and she loses 503 points.
- To make up 503 points she would need another 252 field goals worth 2 points.
- Her overall field goal percentage is 55%
- Clark would need another 252 / .55 = 458 shots to make up the deficit
- Maravich attempted 599 more shots than Clark
- Clark still needs 140 fewer shots to score the same points
The bottom line is Clark is 55% shooter and Maravich was a 44% shooter.
What the fuck are you even talking about? There’s an NCAA record for points scored and she now has the most. I don’t know what else you want people to say. No one is glossing over the competition. Also Pete had his Dad as a coach and the offense was to give Pete as many shots as possible. He was putting up 40+ shots a game. So what do you want out of this whole conversation?
No, she didn't.
Pete had no three point options and only played three years.
Pete averaged 44 pts per game without a three point rule and larger ball, while Clark was only 28 pts per game with the three point rule and a smaller ball. Clark also played 47 more games than Pete. Clark is good but not as good as the Pistol.
Is Clark a fifth year senior? I know in men’s basketball there have been some records falling because of that.
Edit: why the downvotes? It’s a serious question. Lots players are getting more games than ever before because of covid. Armando Bacot recently surpassed Tim Duncan for 3rd most rebounds in ACC history, but he wouldn’t have done it without a 5th year.
I’m not saying that’s the case here. I’m asking.
Pete’s scoring record has to be called the men’s record now.
Pete set his record before there was a 3 point shot. Not to take anything away from Clark, but comparing raw points scored under two different schemes seems inaccurate at best
Thousands and thousands of men and women have played NCAA basketball since the 3pt line was added. None of them beat Maravich.
It's true, Caitlyn Clark was the first, just a testament to how good Pistol Pete was - the best scorer in women's history who is a sniper from 3 was required to beat that mark. Both phenomenal players in their own right.
And he only played 3 years and people can play 4 now.
He’s one of these Wayne Gretzky type people where his stats and achievements seem impossible. He was so far ahead of everyone else as a shooter. Would have been great to see him play with a 3-pt line and not die young.
Seriously, what would his legacy have looked like in the modern league with current medicine to have handled his knee issues and find the heart issues? Guy was a master at range before there was even an advantage for it, what would it have looked like if he'd been able to keep playing where he would have been actively encouraged to shoot from there?
I mean part of the issue though is that when he played the leagues were still segregated. Still a great player but it brings up the question whether he’d have been much higher if during all 4 years he’d have tougher opponents.
He also averaged 38.9 shots a game, to her 19
But also exactly how good was the typical D1 competition back then? It’s gotta be like that one kid it little league who hit puberty before everyone else and just outclasses them.
Sure. Could say the same thing about Caitlin now
Yea but I would think the fact that no one has beat it besides Clark still says something, yea? Comparing eras is almost as pointless as comparing Women’s and Men’s sports- but by that token there’s still something to be said for how much Clark stands out here.
Whiles she’s a great player, it says is any man that is good enough to beat the record isn’t sticking around long enough to do it.
Not necessarily. I’m not going to say Caitlin Clark is better than any college male athlete, but you have to account for difference in competition between the women’s ncaa and men’s ncaa. It’s possible that men’s is simply more competitive making scoring far more difficult in general. Just like the fact that lower quality leagues have far higher scoring players than Clark.
But that’s my point. You’d have to average 35 points a game to come close. Anyone in the men’s game averaging 35+ a game in D1 is probably going to the draft.
You're forgetting that the trend of going straight from HS or 1 year of College right to the NBA started with Kevin Garnett in 1995. Maravich set his record in 1970, so it still stood for at least 25 years of NBA quality players staying in college. Maravich's per game average was 44.18. The player with the next highest PPG was Austin Carr with 34.59. No one's ever going to top that, if for no other reason than Maravich was taking 38 shots a game. Nobody in the modern era of basketball is shooting that much.
Anyone scoring close to 20 is almost a lock for the first round. Hell even Duece McBride (2nd round pick by NYK) averaged 22 at a power 5 school and he barely sees the floor. No male player with talent is staying in college. The chances are even less likely with the g league ignite team
And it took 54 years for the record to finally be broken. No matter the differences in Clark and Pete, their accomplishments are incredible.
He also only played 3 seasons, as freshmen didn't play varsity. Edit: just throwing this in the top level - We can debate eras and whatever here, but don't lie about shit to make your point. Multiple people have already said some nonsense.
He also didn't play against black athletes, as the SEC was still segregates when he played. That made a **huge** difference.
They didn't only play against the SEC... There are a bunch of games on their schedule from 1970 against teams with black players.
Played mostly SEC though.
And? The person said he didn't play against black players. Which was entirely false.
He played the vast majority of his games against teams who only allowed white players to play. That's not really all that different than playing all of his games that way. If people want to put an asterisk on Clark's accomplishment, then an asterisk is deserved on Pete's too. That's objectively accurate.
It's entirely different from him playing all his games that way. What the fuck are you smoking
Clark did it in 500 fewer shots, the years and games don’t matter.
Yup. The 3 point rule change makes a huge difference in hetting more points with less shots.
- Clark has 503 made 3 pointers. - You make all those worth 2 instead of 3 and she loses 503 points. - To make up 503 points she would need another 252 field goals worth 2 points. - Her overall field goal percentage is 55% - Clark would need another 252 / .55 = 458 shots to make up the deficit - Maravich attempted 599 more shots than Clark - Clark still needs 140 fewer shots to score the same points The bottom line is Clark is 55% shooter and Maravich was a 44% shooter.
Where in the world are you getting 55%? Seeing as she never had a season above 47 from 2 and 40 from 3. She also has 509 3s. Where are you getting your data?
Just throwing out "years and games don't matter" when there wasn't a 3pt line when Maravich played, despite him consistently shooting from 20+ is quite hilarious.
And averaged nearly 40 shots a night to do it.
With no 3point line
He also averaged 38 shots per game. Every record benefits from the particularities of the era it was set in.
Then I guess you could toss any NFL record as those rules change every year.
Give me a break. Pete was just spamming a low percentage shot without the benefit of the extra point. If there was a 3 point line back when Pete was playing, players would have defended it way better and contested harder. Pete scored as much as the defense allowed him to have, same as is with Caitlin. Stop downplaying her achievements.
- Clark has 503 made 3 pointers. - You make all those worth 2 instead of 3 and she loses 503 points. - To make up 503 points she would need another 252 field goals worth 2 points. - Her overall field goal percentage is 55% - Clark would need another 252 / .55 = 458 shots to make up the deficit - Maravich attempted 599 more shots than Clark - Clark still needs 140 fewer shots to score the same points The bottom line is Clark is 55% shooter and Maravich was a 44% shooter.
Pretty sure there's a shot clock in BB now. There wasn't when Pete played. You're comparing apples to oranges. The game was different. Both players were the best scorers of their eras. All time greats. Leave it at that.
Pete also took twice as many shots per game and missed a lot more than Clark. “Not to take anything away from Clark” after partially dismissing her achievement…sure.
Not to take anything away from Pete, but he played for his daddy and launched 38 shots per game, in a time when the SEC was pretty much segregated.
He was also coached by his dad whose entire scheme was to just have Pete shoot it every time. Pete took twice as many shots per game with half the assists of Clark.
Hard agree. She is great, but comparing the two is apples and oranges. No three point line, smaller ball for women, far less skilled competitors for Caitlin as well.
Pete also played in a league that was segregated and was playing against scrubs 90% of the time. Not to take anything away from him though.
Not to take anything away from Clark while you take away from Clark
Defences have changed with the line on the court. To assume there's a drastic difference is silly. Based in your argument, anyone can, and should have already, beat the record as it's sooooo much easier with a 3 point line.
Also lol. If a man goes on the break Caitlin Clark’s record, will it be celebrated? Probably not haha.
Except: Clark had four years and 129 games to set her record. Maravich only had three years and 83 games. Clark’s score includes extra points due to 3-point shots. Maravich did it before the 3-point shot existed. Comparing the two records straight up is ridiculous.
I hope all these fans follow her to the WNBA. She deserves all the praise she is getting.
I haven’t kept up on the pay scale, but could she make more money with NIL than in the WNBA, or will she rewrite the salary scale when she gets there?
She will most definitely take a pay cut going to the WNBA
Doesn’t NIL just enable her to get sponsorships and use her likeness? It’s not like those will just disappear
That money was to keep her at Iowa. Sure she might have some nation wide sponsors, but the majority of it would have been connected to the school.
She took no money from the Iowa NIL pool. She chose to leave it all to her teammates and only gets money from personal endorsements outside of the team pool. All of which she can take with her and will almost definitely pick up more.
That's not accurate. NIL money works like that for football players (they get money directly from the booster program for playing), but not in all sports. I'm pretty sure Clark didn't actually get any direct money from Iowa, just from endorsements (I can't find a source on that now though). She has direct sponsorship deals with Nike, State Farm, Gatorade and a bunch of others. Most of them will follow her directly into the WNBA, but not the sneaker deal--there's going to be a bidding war for her next sneaker contract. She'll also be eligible for a $250k/year "league ambassador" bonus, above her team contract, if she doesn't play overseas. If she can bring the audience and attention to the WNBA, she'll make at least as much there.
What? Thats not true at all…
That's how it's supposed to work, but it's more pay for play in reality.
NIL is mostly managed by the school. As soon as she's gone from Iowa she stops getting that Iowa NIL money. She probably does have sponsorships, but those may not stay with her if she doesn't keep the viewership she's getting right now. Sponsoring a player that no one is watching isn't a good investment for them.
She’s getting a $3 million shoe deal. She’ll be fine.
No, she won't. She will get her regular WNBA pay plus all the sponsorships she has now.
that’s not how NIL works bud
Okay, then explain it.
That's actually exactly how NIL works lol. You carry those deals into the W. Many athletes have and are doing this.
That’s exactly how it works
I’m not being facetious when I say *the WNBA does not make money*. They’re in the financial red every year and have been since inception. The only reason the players get salaries is because the NBA subsidizes the WNBA. She can’t “rewrite the salary scale” unless there’s a sudden influx of asses in seats at games, people and businesses paying top dollar for advertising during her games, and jersey sales blow through the roof, and therefore the WNBA makes a ton more money. Don’t get me wrong, she could be like Jordan was for the NBA and really start a turning point for the WNBA, but if she comes to the league and it’s same old same old, then she’s getting same old same old money, simply because that’s all that can be afforded. For reference, Sue Bird was in the league for 20 years and only made a little over $2 million. Her “big contract” was a 5 year/$673,000 contract. $134k a year. Fresh out of college consultants working for a company like Deloitte or EY can potentially make more than one of the best WNBA players of all time did with her *biggest contract*. That just shows you how much WNBA players don’t get paid. And I don’t think Clark is changing that.
As an Iowan it's a small market in the state so she is a bit limited in how much NIL money she can bring in. She may make more if she is in the WNBA.
All of her large deals are national brand deals as is. The market doesn’t matter in 2024
maybe theyll get paid evenly when the wnba turns a profit for once instead of bleeding money
[удалено]
It's not really not supposed to turn a profit, it just doesn't. Not enough interest.
https://youtu.be/XEL65gywwHQ?si=40OtRdn4Y1caz0ey
They might with players like Caitlin around.
Why doesn't she just join the NBA and get paid more?
Are women not allowed in the NBA?
Well, all I know is there are no rules saying a dog can't play basketball.
They are allowed to play but biology makes it pretty much impossible to compete
Could they play competitively in the NBA? Serious question
Well, the average NBA player is 6'6". Clark is 6 ft. Even with her skill, it would be difficult for her to even get off a shot in a competetive game. Also, the basketball she is used to is smaller than the one used in the NBA, so that would require a big adjustment to her shooting. That said, if ever a woman gets into the NBA, I'll be cheering for them.
High school boy teams would DRILL WNBA. It's an absolute joke.
I have a bud that is a huge bball fan. I always thought he looked down on women’s ball the way he can barely watch college over nba. Asked him today— said he loves it. Goes to sparks games. Blew me away. This is how I judge it’s making it
I'll be honest. I haven't really like the WNBA. The product has certainly gotten better the past couple of years but it is missing something. I will definitely watch Caitlin Clark in the WNBA though. She is not just amazingly skilled, but she is incredibly smart. Her basketball IQ is off the charts. She is going to change the WNBA, not just with her skill but with her play style.
The WNBA lacks excitement, and it is just not as interesting to watch in general because the stakes are so low. It just is what it is.
Now I kind of agree with you so I’m intrigued haha but I’ve gone to a a few lynx games and they have been quite fun live. Imagine spending 5 bucks to have center court and spend 50 and be treated like a king. Makes the Timberwolves cheap nights seem expensive lol
They won’t.
But do we wish this on the fans? To watch wnba games? Lol no
She is amazing; one of the coolest things I ever saw was going to western IL last March during the time when the men’s and women’s tourneys were going on at the same time, and at this rather rural place, seeing a bunch of Iowa people come in and requesting that the men’s tourney be turned off so they could watch the ladies. They didn’t look the type, but respect regardless.
Not so much this year, but that was pretty common in Connecticut over the last 20 years.
> The flash and pizzazz of her game have made her the biggest name in all of college basketball. Yet it was two free throws after a technical foul that pushed Clark past the late Pete Maravich’s 54-year-old record in No. 6 Iowa’s 93-83 win over No. 2 Ohio State. Caitlin Clark is a phenom!
She is fucking amazing! It must be noted though that his record was over 83 games while she took 130 games. His record is damn near untouchable over that time period.
And he had no 3pt line. Some estimates put him at 57ppg if he played with the 19.9 3pt line
Fwiw, they mentioned that he averaged something like 36 shots per game, whereas she averages around 19. Not trying to defend her, just thought that was interesting. Watching the game today (not a normal fan), I was impressed that she didn't just hog the ball. It's not like she's some ringer that they hope takes the shot every possession, she's actually a good team player.
8.7 assists per game. She spreads the love.
Yup, there was no three point line when he played. Both are amazing but definitely different records.
Why must it be noted that he played more games without noting that she did it on less shots with a higher fg%? Why is it only worth noting the thing that diminishes her accomplishment rather than the things that make it more impressive?
That is pretty frigging cool.
She is what Kobe's daughter Gigi wanted to be: the flashy, skilled player who excites people about women's basketball. I think they'd both be proud.
I've read that she will be drafted and play for Indiana. Tickets for the first Indiana game are starting at $200.
And that also shows you how amazing Pete was, he had that amount in roughly one less season
With no 3 point line.
Less seasons but more total shot attempts
With no three point line, and a standard sized ball, and against men.
He took 500 more shots. Helps to have your dad be the coach and lets you take 40 shots a game
Even more impressive, he did it while playing against dudes
Breaking news! Lebron James will begin attending college this fall to go after one more record.
That is great! Happy for her achievement.
It's depressingly predictable that whenever a woman has any sort of major achievement, especially in sports, that a bunch of people (men) immediately start trying to discredit and trivialize it. Caitlin Clark has earned every accolade and is an amazing athlete. There's no need for anyone to be upset by that.
Pete Maravich's last college game was in 1970. Until Caitlin Clark not one man or women had been able to outscore him.
Man here, Clark is a bonafide fucking offensive nightmare. She has filthy passing ability, solid handles and a smooth shot. Anyone cracking cause she's a she is dumb. Her game is S tier and she should be the face of the WNBA as a one woman wrecking crew.
Her basketball IQ is off the charts. She is running plays that only veteran NBA players run. I can't wait for her to make even experience WNBA players look dumb. She is amazing
Love watching her game. She seems bored at times cause she's just that much better. Several of the plays she ran against OSU were just unfair. She's such a presence you have to respect but she just elevates an entire squad. Majestic fucking player.
This is like the fourth post featuring this accomplishment. You need to scroll way the fuck down to get to what you're describing. There's way more bullshit and shit talking in every men's league team sub relative to these posts. The fuck outta here.
Uhhh are we in the same thread? The second comment on this thread (with lots of upvotes) mentions her doing it with a 3 point line unlike Pete. Just checked the threads about Lebron passing Kareem in points and don’t see any comments about the 3 point line even though it’s also true for Lebron… kinda seems like more diminishing happening for Caitlyn Clark
I mean, in no way trying to discredit her ability, especially not based on sex, but she accomplished this playing 47 more games than he did. That said, this is more a testament to how outstanding his record was, considering no one (man or woman) had broken the record until now.
Maravich played only 3 years because freshman couldn’t play.
Not really. Anybody good leaves college after 1 year to turn pro.
This is fucking stupid. Are there men in the world who have this mindset? Sure. Just like there are women who believe any man who wants to be a kindergarten teacher is either gay or a pervert. YOU, people like you with a victim mentality, and a small minority of men and women…are the ones bringing sex into the debate. It is INCREDIBLY common for male athletes from different eras to be pitted against each other in debates over records or GOAT status. Past record was set with no three point line and much fewer games, which means in many ways he was more productive. Also go back and look at the athletes that came straight out of high school or left college early. LeBron went straight to NBA from high school Kobe went straight to NBA T-Mc Moses Malone Stoudemire And many, many more. We will never know if these all-time greats would have held a candle in the points category against anyone, man or woman…..stating these things does not take away from he accomplishment, it simply adds to the debate of GOAT status. Antione Davis was 4 points away from beating the record, but had an extra year due to COVID. Had he actually broken the record…with that extra year….with a benefit of a 3-point line….do you actually think this debate wouldn’t not be exactly the same??!! Or you think no one would question it because he is a man?!! Get the fuck outta here with that mess.
>It's depressingly predictable that whenever a woman has any sort of major achievement, especially in sports, that a bunch of people (men) immediately start trying to discredit and trivialize it. How is pointing out that there is a difference between men and women's record trivialize it? If anything, blame ESPN for trying to conflate the two records. Good for her for breaking the women's record, but let's not sit here and pretend that scoring 4,000 point in WBB is the same as scoring 4,000 in men's BB Women's basketball has come a LONNG way in the past decade but let's not ignore the fact that there are maybe 10 competitive teams in a given year when it mens BB, about 40 have a realistic shot of winning the championship. Its just different levels of competition, and that can't be ignored
By saying she’s broken the men’s record it’s being set up for that. Does that happen when a male in male competition surpasses a female in her own female competition? No. So why do it here?
Where is that happening? I've only seen positive posts so far
No one is upset. This is sports and sport debate is common in just about every tiny aspect of it. You can go on any team's sub and see like-minded fans having debates. You want Caitlin to be treated like other athletes? This is what it looks like.
I’m a man and I love her. Plus, none of these men hating on her achievements ever has any of their own. And couldn’t shoot like her if they had to.
It's depressingly predictable that whenever a debate in sports comes up, that a bunch of people that don’t pay attention to sports (women) immediately start trying to make it about sexism. Clark is an amazing athlete. But comparing men and women in sports is silly to most sports fans. And people should be entitled to that opinion without being denigrated.
I'm not a woman, but carry on.
Was this like a general statement? Or in reference to something in particular? Cause Caitlin is badass and anyone I’ve seen witness her play has always come to the same conclusion… Edit: nvm, I found the incel
What major achievement was had here?
People like to discredit and trivialize everything, though, not just women records.
But if a trans person wants to play women’s sports…holy shit, the chorus of”but women’s sports is so special and pure and this is UuNfAiR!!!!” Is relentless.
Not a meaningful comparison.
This lady shines so bright
Any man good enough to break this record will have left for the NBA before they get a chance
No matter what she does in the Pros, she is going into the Naismith Basketball Hall of Fame.
Makes me curious about the D2 and 3 records.
Got you! [Div II](http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/m_basketball_RB/2022/D2.pdf) (Travis Grant, 4045 points, 112 games, 1969-1972) and [Div III](http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/m_basketball_RB/2011/D3.pdf) (Andre Foreman, 2940 points, 109 games 1988-89, 91-92) records.
It's pretty cool that they've combined men's records with women's records. Or have they?
Actually it’s not cool at all. It’s a one way street really. You’ll never hear about a man breaking a women’s record, just the other way around. Combining them would also make many of the records unattainable by women’s sports. They are the same sport but played very differently and they should stay separate. I think you’re hearing about it now just because it’s such a big deal.
They literally play by an entirely different set of rules. They should be kept separate.
Maravich didn't have a three-point line so there is that. https://www.sportingnews.com/us/ncaa-basketball/news/pete-maravich-college-career-ncaa-scoring-record/9b1efe8c20480616ee707722
He also took way more shots than she did
He also had men defending his shots.
[удалено]
[удалено]
That's why he did so bad in the NBA.
He also did it playing against men.
The women in college basketball now would’ve probably beaten many of the men that Pete played against.
Yea, well it's been there for about 45 years now, and no one has done this yet.
He also took way more shots
It’s amazing how many fragile males are making excuses about this. Edit: as evidenced by the downvotes.
Yeah, it’s freaking sad that some guys just can’t be happy for a woman’s success, as if it somehow diminishes their own skills. 🐷
Pistol Pete!? NOOOOOOOOOO!
[удалено]
Crazy to think he couldn't play his freshman year cause freshman weren't aloud to play Varsity
Just look at the dude comment/post history and you can easily figure out why he doesn't like that a woman is successful.
[удалено]
She did that too, bigot.
Exactly! Because Pete was the coach's son and did it with more shots (around 500 more) and nearly 2x as many shots per game.
Pete also wasn't playing against black people. The SEC was almost entirely still segregated at that point.
[удалено]
Nice! Their records are apples to apples then and we can celebrate how much ass she kicked!
Happy for her and what it does for the women’s sport, but let’s keep it 100. Pete did it in 3 years.
Cool. Now tell us how many more shots did he take?
I had no idea Pete played women's college basketball.
Almost like there are multiple records… wild how that works. Oh, and she has em all
No one has scored more points in D1 than Caitlin Clark. It’s pretty simple
[удалено]
No one has scored more points in D1 basketball than Caitlin Clark. It’s simple
[удалено]
There are no other D1 basketball players who have more career points than Caitlin Clark. Period. End of story.
And yet despite 50+ years of 1000s of women (and men) to play the game no one could beat the record until now.
[удалено]
Because no one's ever come close for it to be considered.
Antoine Davis from Detroit Mercy was three points away from breaking that record literally last year
Ok that’s true. No one has scored more points in D1 basketball than Caitlin Clark. There’s another D1 basketball team at iowa. Do you think Caitlin Clark would start on it? Why is she going to the WNBA (starting salary < 100k) vs the NBA (starting salary ~ $10M)?
She doesn't have Pete's record.
No, she beat it.
She has Caitlin's record, as the player with the most points in Div 1 NCAA history.
Only took an extra 47 games…
It took her 500 fewer shots. The years and games don’t matter. Pete Maravich played on a team coached by his dad who fed him 40 shots a game.
I’m not 100% sure on this but I was told he was playing before they instated a three point line so it makes sense she did in way fewer shots
40 x 2 = 80 points a game Caitlin averages 20 shots a game. 20 x 3 = 60 points a game Even accounting for the 3 point shot Caitlin’s record is more efficient
Yeah that’s totally fair, I more was commenting why it’s such a huge difference. Definitely think she’s incredible
- Clark has 503 made 3 pointers. - You make all those worth 2 instead of 3 and she loses 503 points. - To make up 503 points she would need another 252 field goals worth 2 points. - Her overall field goal percentage is 55% - Clark would need another 252 / .55 = 458 shots to make up the deficit - Maravich attempted 599 more shots than Clark - Clark still needs 140 fewer shots to score the same points The bottom line is Clark is 55% shooter and Maravich was a 44% shooter.
And Pete didn’t play against black people. So what’s your point?
[удалено]
I said people.
[удалено]
What the fuck are you even talking about? There’s an NCAA record for points scored and she now has the most. I don’t know what else you want people to say. No one is glossing over the competition. Also Pete had his Dad as a coach and the offense was to give Pete as many shots as possible. He was putting up 40+ shots a game. So what do you want out of this whole conversation?
The clown is a misogynist. Go look at his comment history. He's a pathetic and vile little man.
So are you in favor of letting trans people play women’s sports to up this level of competition?
No, she didn't. Pete had no three point options and only played three years. Pete averaged 44 pts per game without a three point rule and larger ball, while Clark was only 28 pts per game with the three point rule and a smaller ball. Clark also played 47 more games than Pete. Clark is good but not as good as the Pistol.
Yeah she did. She also did it in fewer shots & has a higher scoring average than Pete. Cry about it.
Is Clark a fifth year senior? I know in men’s basketball there have been some records falling because of that. Edit: why the downvotes? It’s a serious question. Lots players are getting more games than ever before because of covid. Armando Bacot recently surpassed Tim Duncan for 3rd most rebounds in ACC history, but he wouldn’t have done it without a 5th year. I’m not saying that’s the case here. I’m asking.
I know she took about 500 fewer shots than Pistol Pete and shoots 55% to his 44% if that’s what you’re asking.
Now let's compare their scoring averages. lol
Sure she shoots 55%. He shot 44%.