Snowless winter, a Caitlin Clark spring!

A friend concluded an email to me, "you order this weather?" We must resist grousing about the weather in this second half of April 2024. Weren't we all blessed by the snowless winter? No chagrin or disputes over snow removal contracts. Our previous city manager advised "if you have a snowblower and your neighbor does not, go and blow out his driveway." 

No such issues for this past winter, no suspense about how much of the biking/walking trail would remain open. A normal winter would have us trying to speculate on when the trail would be mostly open. And then - hallelujah - when it would be totally open. It is a joy to see all the dogs out there. They have frolicked all winter. 

But on this Friday of mid-April the weather is "blah." Zero snow issues, that's for sure. Again I wonder if this is the kind of weather they have all winter in Missouri. You'd think the mild conditions relative to Minnesota would be a plus. We do not hear people raving about weather and climate of the middle portion of the U.S., though. 

I read a definitive op-ed about this once. The writer noted that if you drive through the central U.S. in winter, "you don't see anybody doing anything outside." Conditions are largely wet and with no reprieve from that. That's what we have in Morris as I write this. Dirt trails and roads are muddy. Is there anything you'd want to do outside today? I'd say no. 

The temperature of 40 degrees would be a dream in the middle of February. One might want to celebrate by taking a walk. But 40 degrees right now just has a biting quality. Seems like a no-brainer to stay indoors. 

Staying indoors means we would likely follow media. I can't really help it, as media was the raison d'etre of my active years. So I was amused reading today the comment by someone on the story of the bumbling Indianapolis newspaper columnist. The guy behaved right out of the 1970s. The event was a press conference featuring Caitlin Clark. The writer made what might be called an odd overture toward her. It violated the ethics of our present times. 

An article today shared how the violator was not new to behavior at the edge for such things. A commenter came to his defense in an odd but amusing way: "Reporters can be crazy just like the rest of us." So we're sort of a cross section? Maybe so. 

 

All hail

This indeed has been the spring of Caitlin Clark, the basketball prodigy. I have thought daily about how this prodigy truly got to top of the heap. Talented yes but she was in the NCAA Division I world where top talent is everywhere. These kids are obviously highly motivated. 

College women's basketball has been established a long time. There should have been a list of Clark-like stars by now. Fans who are intensely focused could rattle off names I'm sure. We all need to be proud of all the progress. But Clark simply soared. It was a no-brainer that "Saturday Night Live" would go after her soon after the tournament. She was such an incredibly fresh face in our pantheon of celebrities, made me rather misty, really did. 

Talented as she is, she had to have some circumstances fall in place for her. A friend pointed this out at coffee at McDonald's a few days ago. Regarding Clark's propensity for making the very long shots, my friend Dale Peterson said "her coach let her do it." Even the best athletes need a coach who gets on their side with tactics. "Other coaches wouldn't have let her do it." 

Coach Bluder, Clark ("sportico")

Or, look at it this way: What if she had missed her first 3-4 very long shots - always a possibility? Would she then have been forced into a more normal game routine? She's not particularly tall, at least she does not rely on this quality. Oh yes she's a whiz at everything including assists and having the proverbial "eyes on the back of her head." 

Wonderful. But she was playing in the Big 10. Our own Lindsay Whalen couldn't cut it as a coach in the Big 10. Many of us might now wonder if the U of M might make the climb to the rarefied air of this past winter's "Iowa women's basketball team." It was a team for the ages with players we'll all remember other than Clark. 

But therein is a paradox. We think of the likes of Kate Martin, Gabbie Marshall, Hannah Stuelke and Sydney Affolter among likely others. I'd have a hard time rattling off names of the U of M players - yes the men - outside of one or two obvious stars. And right now I could not even do the latter. 

Of course I don't have cable TV. But in spite of that shortcoming, look how well I do with names of the Iowa women. A "first." Also, a true exhibit of the strides being made by college women's basketball. 

Caitlin Clark could have been held back by a coach that was less than awestruck by her. You know how coaches can be. Persnickety? Following whims, or reacting to individual players based on personal biases not necessarily grounded in talent? Oh, some might resent sheer "star quality." "Hey, we're a team." 

Remember the assistant coach in the movie "One on One" (Robbie Benson) who gave a haymaker punch to the undersized hero player because of a perception of the player being a "hot dog?" I think there's a strain of thinking like that among coaches. "No one player is bigger than the team." Sounds passable in theory. 

But take a look at the Iowa women's basketball team: clearly a superstar and yet there wasn't a hint of internal jealousies. If this existed it was totally masked. I doubt it existed, and I think in fact Clark's celebrity quality became a rallying cry for the team. If the players knew what side their bread was buttered on, then the way was clear for them: support Caitlin, complement her. 

Remember that each of these young women had been notable in high school, a superstar shall we say. And yet they really had to shelve their ambition some when playing around Caitlin. In the long run the reward was for many of them to become "celebrities" in their own right. Kate Martin got drafted into the WNBA. I wonder if this would have happened had she not played beside Caitlin. 

Some men can't resist rating players on their "looks." Gabbie Marshall did well with that yardstick, according to what I've been able to pick up. 

Nice to see a player of color in the top list: Hannah Stuelke. 

How many women's basketball teams have established their presence like this? Iowa the first? We'll remember the players years from now - I surely will. I hope Martin makes it in the WNBA. 

OK how will Clark do? It's not a slam dunk, so to speak, that she'll do a repeat of college. Maybe she'll have to accept being more of a complementary player. 

Clark was very fortunate with her college coach Bluder. Bluder "let her shoot." Bluder let her test the percentages for making the "logo 3's." Shots from the logo on the court? You've got to be kidding. But man, Caitlin let the the ball fly. 

I submitted a comment to Yahoo! News reminding that the women's ball is smaller. I wondered how Clark would do with a men's ball. Someone responded to me by wondering how Clark would do wearing a men's-size shoe! Rimshot. But what rarefied air memories we have tucked away now. It has been the spring of Caitlin Clark just like it has been the spring of Donald Trump's "hush money trial." Only in America?

 

Addendum: On the subject of an athlete benefiting from a supportive coach, think of the exhibit which represents the opposite of that: Minnesota Vikings quarterback Fran Tarkenton and early coach Norm Van Brocklin! 

 

- Brian Williams - morris mn minnesota - bwilly73@yahoo.com