ESPN Shows Caitlin Clark Incredible Disrespect In WNBA Rookie Rankings

ESPN wants people to believe Angel Reese is a better WNBA rookie than Caitlin Clark.

Clark has been on an insane run the past couple months, and is absolutely tearing up the WNBA after the Indiana Fever got off to a slow start.

Anyone paying attention knows she's just not the most famous player in the league, but she's also hands down the most talented and impactful rookie.

The people at ESPN were apparently never told or haven't watched much WNBA action this season.

ESPN dropped a piece Thursday ranking WNBA rookies off advanced metrics to find their total Consensus Wins added.

Are you sitting down? I hope so because ESPN came to the conclusion Reese is responsible for 3.3 consensus wins added for the Chicago Sky. Clark is only credited for 2.8 for the Indiana Fever.

It's moments like this when it's very hard to take the stat nerds seriously. Let's compare some basic facts on the two.

Caitlin Clark:

Angel Reese:

Furthermore - and this can't be stressed enough - the Chicago Sky are worse this season after adding Reese than they were last season without her. Is that her fault? No, she's having a solid season, but how can ESPN argue she's worth more wins than Clark when the latter has drastically improved the Fever.

The Indiana Fever could lose every single game remaining this season and still finish better than they did last year.

At some point, what happens on the court and what we see with our own eyes has to matter. Nobody can look at the resumes the two have put together and seriously think Reese is the better rookie. The Sky aren't even a lock for the WNBA playoffs. The Fever are after winning just 13 games last season.

Is Caitlin Clark the best rookie in the WNBA? (Photo by Paras Griffin/Getty Images)

There is no