Five Out: Fever say bye to Christie Sides, Natalie Williams gone in Las Vegas, and yes...the dunking discussion.

With the NCAA season looming, the WNBA decided they had a few more topline items to get us all talking. Some thoughts on the world of women's basketball for the week of October 28th.

Courtesy: Gregory Shamus/Getty Images

Folks, we’ve made it. The WNBA is now in the mainstream in the sense that once the season ends there is still plenty of news being broken. A big shoutout to Annie Costabile of the Chicago Sun-Times who has absolutely owned the Sky/Sun/Fever coaching triangle this week. We’ll analyze some of the recent moves, what’s to come and why it’s important. But this week is also about bridging seasons between WNBA and NCAA.

That is taking the form of the No Cap Space College Countdown. From Tuesday through Friday, we will be previewing each of the top four teams in the AP Top 25. In addition to written previews, we’ll also have podcasts with a player from each squad. We won’t tell you who from each team so tune in and subscribe!

Monday: In case you missed it, we’ll be re-upping our NCAA Preview that concerns the ACC this afternoon.

Tuesday: Our countdown begins with No. 4 Texas. That first preview drops in the morning and is followed in the afternoon by a re-up of our Big 12 preview. Texas has since moved to the SEC but it counts spiritually!

Wednesday: The countdown previews No. 3 USC. Later in the afternoon, our Big Ten preview will go live for you to see who will be fighting the Trojans at the top of the conference.

Thursday: Up next will be No. 2 UConn and a preview of a reloaded team after narrowly missing out on a national championship game berth last year. In the afternoon, we’ll be re-upping our Big East preview.

Friday: And finally, No. 1 South Carolina who are the defending national champions and looking to continue one of the greatest runs in the sports’ history. Our final NCAA preview, taking a look at the SEC, drops later that day.

Saturday: Rashard drops his power rankings for the NCAA season and the top teams to watch heading into the start of the year.

Sunday: We’ve got a watch guide coming for you to give you a full rundown of the best games to tune into.

Now, to the column…

Christie Sides left the Fever better than she found it. But it doesn’t mean she was the long term coaching solution.

I’ll start with Christie Sides’ tweet because I thought it was perfect in so many ways. More coaches should put out statements like a wide receiver in the middle of a trade request (shout to Tyler for that simile). But Sides isn’t necessarily wrong. She did, in many ways, help stabilize the franchise to a point. Now it’s time to get someone else in there and see what they can do. Naturally, there was plenty of discussion and debate about whether or not Sides should’ve been given the chance to see it through and if the Fever did her dirty. By all accounts, and courtesy of Annie Costabile’s reporting, keeping the Fever head coach was contingent on whether or not Connecticut Sun head coach Stephanie White would be available. As reporting trickled in that White’s arrival in Indiana would be imminent, it made sense that the Fever decided now is the time to move.

Is White the be-all end-all? It’s up to interpretation. The Sun have typically been a solid (if not flawed) franchise that’s made deep playoff runs for the last 7-9 seasons. But Alyssa Thomas has shown her ceiling in multiple playoff runs now and after Jonquel Jones left for the Liberty it was clear that they were interesting but still not a roster built to win a title, at least with AT as the centerpiece. There’s a bigger piece on that but we’ll keep the main thing the main thing. White made the Sun look more dangerous and more interesting but ultimately the results didn’t deviate too far up or down from when Curt Miller was in Uncasville. So I get the argument that treating White as a Cheryl Reeve type coaching figure might be a little premature. At the same time, the issue with Indiana was bench utilization, development and defense. In Connecticut, White unlocked Veronica Burton and Ty Harris, helped turn DiJonai Carrington into a Defensive Player of the Year candidate and integrated Marina Mabrey pretty flawlessly into the roster. She also outcoached Christie Sides in a head-to-head playoff series, so there’s that to consider too.

At the same time, I’ve said on many Youtube postgame shows that Christie Sides gave me enormous Paul Westhead vibes and that the Fever, much like the Showtime Lakers, needed a Pat Riley. There were more than a few moments this year where Sides was learning on the fly. A good thing in a first time head coach but when you have a generational player, how long are you willing to let that learning occur? Sides had a couple PR gaffes, some questionable late game management decisions and some head scratching rotations. Again, things that can be worked out. But this doesn’t seem like the type of place to continue doing that. It’s also important to consider history. Last season, there was plenty of weird vibes with the Fever. Aliyah Boston, a dominant rookie, was seemingly being phased out of plays by her teammates. Family members were going on social media causing problems. That’s still on Sides, in some way, shape or form. It appeared the team handled things better this year but not before it reached potentially toxic levels in May and June. To be clear, I think there’s still a WNBA coaching job out there for Sides. I actually wouldn’t mind seeing her start fresh with one of the expansion franchises in Toronto and Portland or maybe with a team with good bones like Washington. While there was a chance she could grow into her role in Indianapolis, it’s a huge gamble. Bigger than White would be. And do you really want to gamble when you have two (three depending on this offseason) lottery ticket players on the roster already?

What does the coaching turnover this year mean? It depends on the franchise.

I saw an interesting tweet saying that the lack of job security among WNBA head coaches might be a deterrent for those interested in the jobs going forward. On the surface, I think it’s a rather fair assessment. Coaching turnover this year has claimed…

• Teresa Weatherspoon (1 year)

• Latricia Trammell (2 years)

• Christie Sides (2 years)

• Eric Thibault (2 years)

• Curt Miller (2 years)

• Tanisha Wright (3 years)

That doesn’t feel great considering the fact that 8 of 12 teams make the playoffs every year. And four of the aforementioned six have at least one playoff appearance. But I think coaching carousels are like player drafts. Everything is about fit and organizational competence. Is Chicago the same situation as Dallas or Indiana or Los Angeles? Decidedly not. With that in mind, there are some things to glean from each hire.

As I said above, Indiana is clearly entering a win now mode knowing that Caitlin Clark is one of the best guards in the WNBA after one season. We’ve talked about it a lot on the No Cap Space Youtube shows but it seems the Fever didn’t actually think she’d be this good this quickly. Now, the calculus has to change because your window is officially open. That’s a great job and one that, if you get the right person, won’t probably have a lot of turnover if you hit the first (which it seems they believe if Stephanie White does indeed come to town). The Sparks are a bit of a wild card given that there’s been a history of underinvestment in the franchise. If Magic Johnson’s postseason comments are any indication, it feels that that’s likely to change. Plus, they have an excellent core and are a shoo-in to take Paige Bueckers first overall. As for the other franchises, it gets murkier. Chicago’s firing of T-Spoon feels a bit more chemistry and culture related (yes, those stories of locker room imbalance are true, per sources). But the disconnect seems to be between the front office and their franchise cornerstone in Angel Reese. Adding to the murkiness is the idea that the player with the higher ceiling might actually be Kamilla Cardoso and who do you prioritize if you’re Jeff Pagliocca? To me, that’s a very different scenario than the former two.

Then you have the Wings, Dream and Mystics. Dallas is notoriously uneven and dysfunctional. Their draft choices have been head scratching over the years, their franchise has cut corners from a cost perspective and will be going on their fourth coach in seven seasons. Trammell could’ve done better with this roster (particularly on the defensive end) but the injuries didn’t help her case. For years, I’ve been on record that the Dream are an underachieving franchise that are way too important to the WNBA (and its’ southeast footprint) to continually stumble around the way they have since 2020. It’s a very talented roster in need of some good young bigs but the bigger issue is ownership buy-in. As for the Mystics…well…they apparently want to follow the lead of their NBA partner club, the Wizards. Which, good luck with that!

All that is to say that each team has different needs and desires as well as varying degrees of attractiveness. I don’t think the turnover this year will turn away prospective coaches. It actually feels as though franchises see the windfall on the horizon, be that courtesy of Caitlin Clark, Angel Reese or in the future with JuJu Watkins, Paige Bueckers and others. So the goal is to buy in and create the infrastructure now, knowing that everything might be different when a new CBA is signed. If anything, I think that’s good for the league.

The Aces parted ways with Natalie Williams. Is Becky Hammon’s job really that secure?

I was surprised to see so many people poo-poo’ing the idea that Las Vegas Aces head coach Becky Hammon is teflon even after her GM got the axe. From a production perspective, both kind of coasted on past successes this year and the on-court performance reflected that. On the surface, it felt as though Williams being let go had something to do with the lawsuit filed by former player Dearica Hamby. But if that were the case, wouldn’t it also stand to reason that Hammon, who is all over that suit, be in danger as well?

Ironically, there is something to be said here about Williams potentially being the fall-person for the strange vibes surrounding the franchise all year. If anything, I’d argue that she did more than Hammon in terms of trying to fix some holes on the roster. The Kate Martin pick was solid and felt like a good bridge for an aging Alysha Clark. Candace Parker retires right as the season is about to begin, which limits the options for bigs in free agency. Williams also made sure to bring on Megan Gustafson, who had just had a productive year in Phoenix and did provide good minutes (offensively, at least) off the bench in Vegas. I also seem to remember an awful lot of bravado after Tiffany Hayes signed with the team at the end of May. That signing proved to be fruitful as she went on to win the WNBA Sixth Woman of the Year award.

Conversely, Hammon appeared weighed down by the lawsuit, suspension and subsequent investigation of alleged cap circumvention. She didn’t utilize Sydney Colson as much more than a meme factory until later in the season in which we inexplicably learned she has a good amount left in the tank. Kate Martin looked to be a fan favorite in Vegas but barely played on the back half of the Olympic break. A’ja Wilson’s minutes led to the greatest WNBA regular season we’ve ever seen but it also didn’t come without payment. She looked gassed come playoff time, especially in an Olympic year. Hammon is widely credited for taking the step with a talented Vegas squad that Bill Laimbeer could take to the playoffs but not much further. She has certainly earned the benefit of the doubt but I couldn’t help but feel like Williams was sacrificed to maintain Hammon’s standing and status as the head coach (and not want anyone else to get her in the process). Do I think there will be a change in Las Vegas? Not unless this lawsuit really ramps up. But at the same time, Natalie Williams is getting pretty crushed when the reality is she didn’t do *nothing* this year. Did she do enough? Probably not. But in Vegas, there’s blame enough to go around for how this year went.

Unrivaled are rumored to be making a huge offer to Caitlin Clark. Her choice could have labor implications…

So by now you’ve heard of Unrivaled, the 3x3 league based in Miami featuring some of the game’s best players, making a rumored godfather offer to Caitlin Clark to entice her to play. It would include equity and a Lionel Messi like rider (equity in the TV deal) that would allow Clark to profit significantly if she joined. Naturally, as it does with all things CC, the debate and discussion over making accommodations for one player went viral.

But I’m less curious about it from a basketball perspective. If you’re examining it from that lens, it would be ludicrous for her to play. She wouldn’t be gaining much, risking injury and continuing to play basketball when she could rest and train in the offseason for the W. Monetarily, she’d gain by joining and continue to make her brand and value even more powerful than it already is. It’s clear that the league’s top generals, Napheesa Collier and Breanna Stewart, want the eyeballs and notoriety Clark brings with her. We know all of this.

What we don’t know is if there’s something greater afoot here. I wrote a while back that Unrivaled has a potential to be a nice little labor leverage tool for the WNBPA. A 3x3 league just received a $100 million/6 year deal with TNT for eight weeks of games. Players involved have equity in the league and there’s a lot of money behind the operation, or so we hear. Clark’s decision, either now or in the future, could add a legitimacy to Unrivaled that could scare the hell out of owners and the NBA itself. What happens if Unrivaled decides ‘hey, we’re facing an impending lockout. Let’s take the infrastructure we have, stretch to 5x5, bring on some more teams and let the open market decide how much that’s worth?’

On some end, it does feel like if the negotiation got so toxic between the WNBA/NBA and WNBPA then Unrivaled provides a potential alternative foundation to build something new upon. If Clark decides that she wants in on that, it’s basically the big joker card. “We have another league and the biggest star in the sport is a part of it. Are you sure you want to try and call a bluff?” Which is why her choice becomes all the more interesting and why I personally am watching Unrivaled very, very closely from the business side. You should too.

The dunking discourse in the league is bad for women’s basketball for more reasons than we usually discuss.

I don’t want to spend much time on Shaquille O’Neal’s guest appearance on Angel Reese’s podcast. As of late, Shaq has moved extremely weird and it’s getting to a point where the weirdness is affecting his legacy. The cherry on top was the weird comments he was making to an adult woman, younger than his own children, who is the face of the company he is President of (Reebok basketball). It’s sad because that’s supposed to be a mentor, someone that puts their arm around you and guides you through life in a healthy way. Instead, Shaq just kind of leaned fully in to being a weird perv and that’s a really crappy thing for Angel Reese to have to deal with on the fly and then afterward. Because while those situations can be weird in the moment, they feel weirder and worse when you sit down and think about it later. All I hope is that her support system and team have their heads in the right place. Because all publicity isn’t good publicity and at the end of the day, Angel Reese is still a person and not just an ATM for people (content creators like us, included).

The piece of their conversation that I want to touch on more is the dunking discourse because I feel like we in the women’s basketball community need a better de facto argument. Any dude can say “lower the rims so there can be dunking. I’ll watch that” and typically the response will be either “No, you won’t” and “girls shouldn’t be handicapped to do that”. But even more than that, it would absolutely destroy the very equity we as a country have tried to build for women since Title IX. The very essence of the argument “lower the rims because women can’t jump as high” boils down to something very simple: women can’t do what men can.

Take it all the way back to the genesis of the game. In the 1920’s there was a national movement to try and stop women’s basketball competition. In some states, it actually succeeded (read The Legendarium’s piece on Western Kentucky for more on that). But the argument then was “the sport is too strenuous for women”. The concept of six on six basketball, in which the sport resembled something more like lacrosse, was because “the sport is too strenuous for women”. Lowering the rims is just a new age argument of a same old tired trope: “the sport is too strenuous for women”. If you lower the hoops, then you need girls basketball courts at public parks. You need them changed for girls games at schools. Pickup runs at rec centers are going to ask girls to shoot on different sized hoops. How is that going to help their development? The universality of the game as currently constructed is helping women’s basketball accelerate because it allows for girls and boys to play together. Why segregate that out again?

To be clear, women can dunk on normal sized hoops. Many just make the choice not to. Do we really believe A’ja Wilson couldn’t dunk in transition if she made it a focal point of her game? 6’4, lengthy and preposterously athletic A’ja Wilson?

Seriously?

The sport is coming along a bit slower than the men and that’s okay. But if you look on the horizon you can see the dunkers coming. USC’s KiKi Iriafen is on video working on it this summer, South Carolina’s Ashlyn Watkins did it in game last year. Stanford’s Fran Belibi was a dunking sensation dating back to high school. And those girls are not 6’6 or taller. These are athletes somewhere between 6’1 and 6’3. That’s Kyrie Irving (a guy who rarely dunks but we all seem to like his game just fine, mind you) sized. The game will progress and you’ll see more of it in the future.

Lastly, I don’t want the WNBA chasing only TV audiences like the NBA is doing. Nick Wright made a great point recently that the league prioritized itself as an entertainment and television product to the point that its’ hurting the watchability of the games themselves. The WNBA, I’d argue, is positioned to grow so much because it still incorporates so many elements of basketball— traditional back to basket posts, mid range games and tighter defense — that the NBA has done away with in favor of a more analytically driven approach. All it does is make the game feel less accessible.