Recently, the league has been gripped by the return of two players: Paige Bueckers and Caitlin Clark. Bueckers made headlines returning from concussion protocol and illness, lighting up the score sheet with a career-high 35 points, including 13-of-19 shooting and 5‑of‑7 from three, but her Dallas Wings still lag at 1–10 in the standings. Meanwhile, Clark rejoined the Indiana Fever after a quad injury, erupting for 32 points, nine assists, and eight rebounds in a thrilling win that snapped the Liberty’s nine-game streak. 

These two exceptional performances have reignited comparisons—some welcomed, others less so. At first glance, the parallels seem obvious: both are early‑draft wonders adjusting to pro life while instantly injecting life into their franchises and fan bases. Clark’s passing and threes continue to catalyze crowd surges, while Bueckers’s arrival has had the Wings flirting with renewed identity. But beyond the stat lines that follow, the narratives built around them keep highlighting deeper tensions in how players are framed and what contexts get obscured.

Honestly, these comparisons are like putting peanut butter next to jelly and wondering which one tastes better, on its own. But that’s where Rachel DeMita swoops in, with a warning while laying bare her fears. In her words, “They were trying to put down Caitlin in order to prop up Paige and it’s just creating this weird disparity.” That critique follows actual patterns as headlines about Bueckers’ 35‑point return consistently leaned on comparing her to Caitlin Clark, narratives clearly crafted for clicks, effectively flattening two very different careers into a forced ranking.

While DeMita clarified that she doesn’t mind “comparing players,” she draws the line at forcing those comparisons. She voiced concern that while the Caitlin Clark–Paige Bueckers comparisons can still be steered in the right direction, the narrative surrounding Clark and Angel Reese has already veered too far off course to be easily fixed.

“I would honestly much rather people compare Paige and Caitlin than Caitlin and Angel,” she said. Her reasoning being that comparisons grounded in on-court similarities are fair and constructive, while those based on off-court narratives risk reducing the sport to tabloid content. “The Paige and Caitlin comparisons are much better if you want to stick to basketball,” she added. “But so much of it turns into something that’s not.”

Fair enough. Because Reese may drive conversation, but her game is far more interior, physical, rebound‑centric, with classic post/wing production. She’s been making noise early on with big rebounding numbers and helping the Sky stay relevant, so the hype makes sense. But comparing her directly to Clark kind of misses the point. Clark’s a guard—she runs the offense, sets up plays, shoots from deep. So, the roles are different.

Candace Parker on Reese-Caitlin rivalry

Caitlin Clark and Angel Reese’s rivalry talk picked up steam after their first matchup this season, when Clark was hit with a technical foul following a hard foul on Reese. Reese’s reaction, clearly fired up as she stepped toward Clark, added fuel to the fire. That moment became a flashpoint for the ongoing narrative, though WNBA legend Candace Parker chose to stay out of the drama.

Appearing on “Spolitics with Jemele Hill,” Parker made her stance clear, saying, “So I just think it’s like comparing apples and oranges. Caitlin Clark and Angel Reese, it’s like, what are we doing? I’m not falling into that, I’m not into the comparison. I think there are a number of things Angel can improve on—and will improve on—given her situation. And I think Caitlin Clark has already done that, even in her first year.”