The biggest moments in a championship game can look very different depending on what a viewer chooses to measure. The box score may point toward one star, while the flow of the game can tell another story. After Team USA defeated France for gold at the FIBA Women’s Basketball World Cup, former Lakers guard Patrick Beverley offered a pointed view on Caitlin Clark. 

He argued that Clark’s impact deserved far more recognition than the finals honors suggested.

Beverley acknowledged Breanna Stewart’s official recognition before making his case for Clark. “They brought home gold. We know Breanna Stewart was the MVP of the game, obviously, but to me, I might sound biased,” he said.

Then Bev focused on the game’s turning point. “That game changed when Caitlin Clark got in the third quarter,” he argued. 

“Like, that game was a, you know, it was, it was, you know, USA was down, you know. But, you know, Mrs. Stewart, she deserves MVP, but when it comes to changing that game and impacting that game, if you watched it, like if you’re a basketball player and you watched it, it was all Caitlin Clark.”

His argument centers on impact rather than the official award. Patrick Beverley pointed to Clark’s arrival and the immediate swing that followed, saying, “She subbed in, they went up plus 10, plus 12. That game was a great game.” For him, that sequence mattered more than simply counting points, rebounds, or other conventional measures.

Caitlin Clark entered the tournament carrying considerable attention, and her role throughout the competition became a frequent talking point. She led Team USA in assists at 5.3 per game, but her minutes remained limited under head coach Kara Lawson.

That created a strange contrast. 

Clark could influence the offense, yet she often watched stretches from the sideline while Team USA searched for answers. 

That became especially noticeable against France. The French team built a 14-point lead while the star guard sat on the bench. It ultimately put the heavily favored Americans under genuine pressure.

Clark then returned to the floor and immediately added another dimension to the offense. She hit a deep three-pointer at the halftime buzzer, cutting France’s lead to two points and giving Team USA a crucial lift heading into the break.

The third quarter delivered the sequence Beverley had in mind. 

With the Fever guard involved, Team USA produced a 30-12 surge and completely changed the direction of the contest. Clark finished with 12 points and three assists in only 13 minutes, making her brief appearance one of the game’s most discussed stretches.

That does not erase Breanna Stewart’s contribution. 

Stewart posted 22 points and 10 rebounds, producing the kind of complete performance that helped earn her the official MVP recognition.

That makes the distinction between her performance and Clark’s impact central to Beverley’s argument. 

Beverley’s argument instead asks viewers to separate the best statistical performance from the player who most dramatically changed the game. Those are necessarily the same thing.

The debate also reflects the difficulty of measuring momentum. Players often recognize those shifts immediately, even when the stat line struggles to capture them.

That is where Caitlin Clark’s performance becomes particularly relevant to Pat Bev’s argument. Her three-pointer before halftime and the offensive surge after her return gave supporters of the eye-test case tangible moments to point toward.

Still, calling Clark the “snubbed” MVP remains an opinion rather than an official outcome.

Stewart received the recognition, while Beverley offered a different interpretation of who had the greatest influence on the final.

For Beverley, the answer came from watching the game unfold rather than simply reading the number. Stewart earned the official honor, but Clark’s impact created a competing conversation.