Alternate take: without collective bargaining, most players in the WNBA couldn't afford to play in the league at all; the league wouldn't be economically viable, and Caitlin Clark's salary would be at zero, at least in terms of domestic basketball.
Great point! I didn’t consider this angle. I also didn’t know anything about WNBA salaries until this post
reply
This could be true - I don't know how the contract between NBA and WNBA works. It might be that the NBA would subsidize the WNBA with or without collective bargaining because they think it can be profitable over time.
Supposing it is true though - who is to say there wouldn't be other alternative leagues or opportunities for her that would be more profitable?
If there was no WNBA, maybe there would be a coed league of some sort that would be more productive? The Big 3 league offered her $5 million to play. Personally, I would rather watch coed 3-3 vs the WNBA. Women guards are fun to watch IMO. The part that is less fun is watching their post players. Throughout Clark's career I thought her game would be supremely elevated if the bigs on her team could catch, run, shoot, and dunk.
Of course that is speculation.
reply