used the words Duncan did but there is absolutely no doubt that Swoopes has been looking for ways to diminish credit for the contributions of CC. I've seen her on some podcasts where former NBA players are calling her out over this open disdain for CC. She just keeps pushing it aside and gives CC backhanded compliments if that even while looking at veteran players tell her she is clearly wrong to pooh pooh CC.

I could care less if she likes Angel Reese more or considers her the favorite for ROTY. From everything I see she is dishonest in her evaluation of the Angel Reese rebounding stats. Most of the W is chronically bad about boxing out and the referees in the W have been very lax and inconsistent in calling fouls on rebounding. So you can come in hard and late and come over the back with a lot of contact and you likely won't get called for it on a regular predictable basis. But it's more the lack of boxing out that I see as a big reason for her rebounds of the shots of other players. It's fine to point out that she is smart to take advantage of what the other team allows her to do but if a team were to consistently box her out her numbers would be lower. How much lower? Probably 2 or 3 rebounds per game on the conservative side. Maybe a few points also. It is tough to estimate because that "loose" ref attitude is inconsistent.

So many players in the W play poor defense with too much reaching and grabbing when they get beat on defense. Not enough concentration on moving with your feet for position and then a quick player like CC and others are going past you and then the natural tendency is to reach and grab. It's not easy to fight that tendency but you have to work at it and focus. The same with boxing out. To do it successfully on a regular basis you have to place yourself in a good spot to react to moving to box out. You can't be late on it. You have to focus on it and get the timing right.

From an offensive standpoint the missed, largely uncontested layups in the W drive me crazy. I can see missing a few if you've got defense on you but there are still way too many "bunnies" being missed. I wonder if the teams keep that stat for each player. It would be interesting to see it as a stat in a box score. Sort of like it would be for the NBA players who blow a dunk or an uncontested layup. That stat should be there as well.

Does Angel Reese have talent? Absolutely and she is able to take good advantage of weak play under the basket. Good for her. Does CC have talent? Of course and even when she is double teamed and dogged full court she makes incredible plays for her teammates. Is one better than the other? What are the criteria for a decision? Angel Reese is a powerful, physical player with size who gets great rebounding stats staying in close to the basket. She takes advantage of teams generally not doing a good job on boxing her out. Smart play. CC is lightning quick, sees the floor in an incredible way, can leave opponents grabbing at thin air as she draws them and then spins them as she reverses course and drives to the bucket to either hit the shot or make an incredible pass to a teammate. She steals the ball, she rebounds, she blocks shots. All as a guard.

At this point I favor CC for her play in all aspects and her performance as the guard setting up what happens on the floor. But everyone can find her turnovers as a problem but we have to keep in mind that some of those do happen because a teammate mishandled a pass. The passer gets the turnover. So are we using stats for criteria or Win/Loss record or some combination or some other things to decide? One thing is clear though and that is I and many others will discuss, analyze, critique and try to provide some insight into the basics of the actual play of the game. Swoopes does not do this and just seems to rely on her reputation and making statements about one player or the other without getting into the nuts and bolts of the actual playing. She has an attitude toward a phenomenal guard that is unexplainable to me.

I would not want her scouting talent for me if I owned a team because I don't think she has demonstrated being able to objectively, without copping an attitude, evaluate the nuts and bolts basketball skills of the players and their athleticism and their pluses and minuses and potential down the road. She has demonstrated pettiness towards a great rookie who has never had a bad word to say about Swoopes. Because of all of this I don't find her statements to be useful or truthful. I contrast her with former NBA players who do actually get into the aspects of actually playing the game, what is happening that results in having certain stats etc. Swoopes has her attitude and that is apparently enough for her. But it doesn't mean a thing to actually looking at the play of players and how the players playing against them figure into those stats as well.

I love the W and have been watching women's hoops since the AAU teams back well over 60 years ago. I used to follow the Real Refrigeration Girls team and looked for their results all the time in the Milwaukee papers.

I agree with nearly every point 100%.
Most ridiculous is that Indiana would be in the playoffs without Clark.
Clark is on the Fever because they were the 3rd worst team in the league last year. (And, the worst team in the Eastern Conference)
Now, they're good enough to make the playoffs without what is obviously their best player? That's objectively stupid.
I don't quite have the same take about Reese's rebounding numbers. She's a pit bull & would get rebounds under different rules.
That Saud, I think her double-double streak is very overrated. If she was 25 & 12, I'd have a different attitude. But, the Sky had a winning % of .450 last year. This year, it's. 417. If they finish the season playing. 500 ball (and there'slittle evidence that will happen), they finish with the same record as last year. The double-double thing feels like an empty stat.
By contrast, the Fever were .417 last year, & .423 this year. But, they were 2 & 7 in their first nine games, and have played .529 ball since. If they play .500 ball the rest of the season (and there's proof of concept on that) they end up with a winning % .033 higher, even with the dreadful start. Yet, nobody on the Fever had a double-double streak.
I've had an attitude about double & triple doubles for a long time.
It stemmed from ESPN coverage of a Bull/Lakers game. The Bulls won the game, Jordan scored 42, with 8 assists & 9 rebounds. Magic had 18/11/11. The game coverage on Sportscenter began with Magic's triple-double! That made no sense to me. Jordan had 24 more points, 3 fewer assists, & 2 fewer rebounds. And, he won. Who really had the better game?

you are right to point out the questionable emphasis by the media on triple double/double double. Back in the day of Oscar Robertson etc. nobody even talked like that. Media creation mostly. ESPN has been one of the worst for slanting reporting to fit a desired narrative. I'll give an example that was fairly standard for most media in fact.

The first South Sudan game. I am a fan of Lebron however the reporting of the last half minute of the game was atrocious. Yes he made the drive that put the US team ahead. The media screamed all about how Lebron won the game for the US team. But they entirely ignored giving credit for what happened after he scored. South Sudan had time on the clock and was able to inbound the ball and their player attempted a floater into the post and Anthony Davis played great defense and challenged the shot forcing the shooter to have to go high off the glass. Davis did so without fouling. Another South Sudan player got the rebound deep in the post and had time for a put-back or dunk but Anthony Edwards and Derrick White played great defense and stripped him of the ball again without fouling and after the strip there was still 1.3 seconds on the clock when Davis again comes into the play and grabs the loose ball.

But the media almost without exception credited "winning the game" to Lebron. Only part of the story. Without a great last 8 seconds of defense South Sudan would likely have been the winning team. The video highlights were all about the Lebron drive to the basket. But nowhere did I see a slow motion play of the defensive stand and a breakdown and explanation of how the players involved positioned themselves and then the actions they took.