The CC Show....

[Joes Place]

I’m comparing DT to the many players who would have been a better, more productive addition to Team USA.

No; you're not.

You are homering for CC.
I think CC will become one of the all time greats in the league. Just not a compelling argument for her to displace someone on the Olympic team this year.

If they wanted to replace Taurasi, Arike should have been there.

 

[TJ8869]

No; you're not.

You are homering for CC.
I think CC will become one of the all time greats in the league. Just not a compelling argument for her to displace someone on the Olympic team this year.

If they wanted to replace Taurasi, Arike should have been there.

This just proves for the 5,829th time that you don’t read the words I actually write. I have stated multiple times in this thread that there are numerous players who would have given Team USA a better chance of winning gold than DT. Even if you don’t think CC should have been next in line, my point is that DT doesn’t belong there and her presence nullifies the stated explanation that the committee’s #1 priority was putting together the best gold-medal team.

 

[cidhawkeye]

Then, going 0-7 from 3 pt land in the WNBA AS game should give you pause...

Which player would have the better resume from that game? Arike or CC?

Follow along. I believe I mentioned that Arike belonged before CC or grandma.

 

[cidhawkeye]

Which also means PREVENTING the other team from scoring points.

Defense is not CCs specialty at this point. In fact, she was a bit of a team liability on that early in her rookie season.

So if you hold the other team to zero you win? Nope, still need to score more than the other team. Keep trying.

 

[cidhawkeye]

That is how the Olympics work.

CC did not put up solid enough early WNBA numbers to justify a roster spot. Despite your opinion otherwise.

Better than an Olympic team member

 

[cidhawkeye]

She has the experience and leadership ability.

CC isn't there yet as a WNBA player - at least she had not yet shown that for a team that was 2-10 (or close to that) and with a stat line that was below most of the Team USA squad.

‘Most’
Not your best effort

 

[cidhawkeye]

No; the Ast/TO ratios were barely any different.

I also think Taurasi is a better defender, having played in that league for a decade.

Barely any different….. but one had far more assists…. Which are actual points scored….. can you tell us the % of turnovers that led to actual points?

 

[cidhawkeye]

Probably

But she's a proven defender at both the WNBA and Olympic level.

Clark is not. Yet.

Proven defender?
Hopefully you didn’t pull anything with that reach. If you want to say she has played defense at this level as ‘proven’ then rock on.

 

[cidhawkeye]

Except she has comparable offense numbers to Taurasi, and weaker defense.

The first impression the OC had of her were games where she was getting into foul trouble early.

And more points generated

 

[cidhawkeye]

Fouls per 40 minutes through June 10:

Clark - 3.68 (39 fouls in 424 minutes)
Taurasi - 3.97 (35 fouls in 353 minutes)

Ooops … details

 

[cidhawkeye]

No; you're not.

You are homering for CC.
I think CC will become one of the all time greats in the league. Just not a compelling argument for her to displace someone on the Olympic team this year.

If they wanted to replace Taurasi, Arike should have been there.

Arike saw the old lesbian selection process and passed

 

[cidhawkeye]

So stats aren’t on your side, fouls? Not on your side. You have ‘experience’ bring back Swopes, Miller and some other legacies if that is the criteria

 

[Joes Place]

This just proves for the 5,829th time that you don’t read the words I actually write. I have stated multiple times in this thread that there are numerous players who would have given Team USA a better chance of winning gold than DT.

Then why aren't you in a Diana Taurasi thread, instead of homering in a CC thread?

 

[Joes Place]

You have ‘experience’ bring back Swopes, Miller and some other legacies if that is the criteria

They are retired.

(In case that part was over your head here)

 

[Joes Place]

I believe I mentioned that Arike belonged before CC or grandma.

I've stated that multiple times.
Even before the selections were made.

 

[Joes Place]

So if you hold the other team to zero you win?

Generally speaking, if you hold the opposing BB team to 0 points, you are going to win >99.999% of the time.

 

[Joes Place]

Barely any different….. but one had far more assists…. Which are actual points scored….. can you tell us the % of turnovers that led to actual points?

If you've watched any Olympic matchups, you'd see that preventing TOs is actually a pretty big deal in international play.
Because they play very physical, good defense.

 

[TJ8869]

Then why aren't you in a Diana Taurasi thread, instead of homering in a CC thread?

Because the most compelling argument in favor of putting CC on the team is the fact that she has brought unprecedented attention to women’s basketball in both college and the WNBA and would do the same for Team USA on the world’s largest stage.

But Team USA said “Nah, fvck that. We don’t need Caitlin or her fans. Our tv ratings will be just fine without her. We absolutely have to put together the best team that gives us the best possible shot at a gold medal.”

The problem with that argument is that Taurasi’s presence on the roster proves it’s complete bullshit. They’re perfectly willing to disregard the “build the best team” concept when one of the old guard insists on hanging around way too long.

 

[Joes Place]

Because the most compelling argument in favor of putting CC on the team is the fact that she has brought unprecedented attention to women’s basketball

That's simply not a factor for the USOC.

You keep playing that card, but it's meaningless.

 

[cidhawkeye]

That's simply not a factor for the USOC.

You keep playing that card, but it's meaningless.

Nor is putting the best team together. Arike realizing how the process was going to go and withdrawing is evidence of that.
Was trying to find Chelsea Grays stats prior to the selection. In your eyes it would be the ‘well she had no turnovers or fouls so that is great’
Oh and ‘but she has experience’

 

[TJ8869]

That's simply not a factor for the USOC.

That’s abundantly clear. They don’t care about growing the sport. But they do care about letting a 42-year-old has-been selfishly pursue a 6th gold medal that she doesn’t deserve.

 

[cidhawkeye]

Generally speaking, if you hold the opposing BB team to 0 points, you are going to win >99.999% of the time.

100% chance of not winning if you don’t score. The chances of winning go up considerably with the players who create more points. Because the objective is to have more points than the other team

 

[Bro D]

Anyone arguing against her being on the Olympics clearly doesn't watch her play

 

[doughuddl2]

 

[Joes Place]

Nor is putting the best team together. Arike realizing how the process was going to go and withdrawing is evidence of that.

Arike "realized how the process was going to go"?
When did she say that?

 

[Joes Place]

That’s abundantly clear. They don’t care about growing the sport.

Why does the Olympics "care about growing the sport"?
Why does the USOC care about it?

Is there controversy over the US rowing team, because they "aren't growing the sport"?

You've kinda been landing all over the map here, trying to make something stick. But none of it makes any sense.

 

[Joes Place]

100% chance of not winning if you don’t score.

I never stated that.

I stated that if you do not have good defense, your likelihood of winning drops.
If you have excellent defense, it is higher.

If you hold the opposition to 0 points, you cannot lose.

 

[Joes Place]

Anyone arguing against her being on the Olympics clearly doesn't watch her play

I watched her play. And her early WNBA play was league-average for her position.

 

[Joes Place]

But they do care about letting a 42-year-old has-been selfishly pursue a 6th gold medal that she doesn’t deserve.

You should email your poutrage to them.

 

[TJ8869]

Arike "realized how the process was going to go"?
When did she say that?

https://nypost.com/2024/07/23/sport...sed-her-to-pull-out-of-olympic-consideration/

 

[Joes Place]

https://nypost.com/2024/07/23/sport...sed-her-to-pull-out-of-olympic-consideration/

She said she "didn't feel like"

Not the same as knowing how the process was going to go, but I guess that's good enough for you.

Meanwhile, Jrue Holliday: 0 minutes, 0 pts vs Puerto Rico.
Dude probably should not be on Team USA, right?

 

[BioHawk]

She said she "didn't feel like"

Not the same as knowing how the process was going to go, but I guess that's good enough for you.

Meanwhile, Jrue Holliday: 0 minutes, 0 pts vs Puerto Rico.
Dude probably should not be on Team USA, right?

She specifically mentioned the political nature of the decision process as why she didn't want to waste her time with it. Anyone who has ever played sports knows how politics can get you eliminated from a team before you've even shown up for the tryout.

 

[Joes Place]

She specifically mentioned the political nature of the decision process as why she didn't want to waste her time with it.

Perhaps she thought she was going to be "bumped" for Clark.

Or, worse: chosen OVER Clark, and didn't want to deal w/ the online hate.

 

[TJ8869]

Why does the Olympics "care about growing the sport"?
Why does the USOC care about it?

It’s literally an integral part of USA Basketball’s mission statement, Cletus.

As the governing body for basketball in the United States, USA Basketball is a worldwide leader in the sport through competitive excellence in international competition and by promoting, growing and elevating the game at all levels while ensuring that athletes and other participants compete and develop in a safe, inclusive and welcoming environment.

Is there controversy over the US rowing team, because they "aren't growing the sport"?

That might be the dumbest thing you’ve ever posted.

You've kinda been landing all over the map here, trying to make something stick. But none of it makes any sense.

I’ve been very consistent in my points. You just can’t read for shit. That’s a you problem.

 

[TJ8869]

Perhaps she thought she was going to be "bumped" for Clark.

Or, worse: chosen OVER Clark, and didn't want to deal w/ the online hate.

If that’s the case then boy, did she turn out to be wrong. If it was between Arike and Caitlin for the 12th spot I would have absolutely no quarrel with Arike getting the nod. But Taurasi shouldn’t even be in the conversation anymore.

 

[Joes Place]

If that’s the case then boy, did she turn out to be wrong.

Maybe she should have stayed in the running and taken Taurasi's place.

 

[jaxhawk06]

Perhaps she thought she was going to be "bumped" for Clark.

Or, worse: chosen OVER Clark, and didn't want to deal w/ the online hate.

Nice speculation

 

[Joes Place]

It’s literally an integral part of USA Basketball’s mission statement, Cletus.

As the governing body for basketball in the United States, USA Basketball is a worldwide leader in the sport through competitive excellence in international competition and by promoting, growing and elevating the game at all levels

And, unless CC is on the team, they cannot "promote or grow" the game.
All the other Olympians are worthless.

I see.

 

[Joes Place]

Nice speculation

So is all the speculation about Clark/Taurasi, etc here.

Meanwhile, no one is calling for Jrue Holiday to be off Team USA for his "performance" against PR...

 

[Joes Place]

That might be the dumbest thing you’ve ever posted.

So, your points only matter for the US Women's BB team.
No other sports, at all.