The wish and hope would be that this would be enough for the world to see Game 1 of the WNBA Finals – one of the most compelling, exciting, dramatic and competitive games to kick off a championship series in any sport – the narrative around them The series would change.

Like I said, “Wish and Hope.”

You've heard the word “strong” a lot in the series. Still could be. But it never referred to what would happen on the court between the Liberty and the Lynx. That would have been too much like deserved respect. Women's basketball – women's sports, to be honest – is never considered so unconditionally.

Instead, “strong” was the passive-aggressive word used to talk about the numbers, crowds and ratings the WNBA received during the playoffs to cap off a storied season. “Strong,” you must understand, was code for “not the best,” “not the best,” “not the same as back then.” she played.”

– “If WNBA viewership is below the record high of the Caitlin Clark Games, it will remain historically high heading into the Finals.” — Sportsmediawatch.com

– “WNBA playoffs TV ratings remain stable even without Caitlin Clark and Fever.” – Outback

— “Despite historic numbers for the WNBA, one can argue that ratings would have been much higher had Clark played.” — FoxNews.com

– “WNBA ratings have fallen since Caitlin Clark and Fever were eliminated.” – The New York Post

A hypercompartmentalized, predictable narrative. A sad but true story. One that will continue to cast shadows and shadows throughout the finale.

You'll hear that all 14 of the most-watched WNBA games of the season featured Clark and the Fever. You'll hear how Game 1 of the semifinal series between the Aces and the Liberty, a rematch of last year's Finals, drew a paltry 929,000 viewers, about half of what Game 1 of the Fever's first-round series against the Sun drew. (This also includes the fact that Game 1 of the Sun-Lynx series had almost 650,000 viewers.)

You'll hear how more than 20,000 fans turned out at Capital One Arena for Clark's first regular-season finale against the Mystics, a new record for a WNBA regular-season game, and like no game in the playoffs (including the just under 18,000 for Game 1 of the final) exceeded this number of visitors.

You'll hear how on a Friday night against a special Week 1 NFL game between the Eagles and Packers, a Fever vs. Lynx game that Clark attended still drew about 1.25 million viewers to television and phone screens .

What you'll hear constantly is that all non-Clark game numbers are down – and that the playoff and finals numbers, while still historically good, don't compare to what they would be if Clark was still would be involved, still on the pitch She does the magic she does. “If only she was in the final. . . .” You would hear a different story.

The incessant data being pushed by Clark – all of which is true but so far removed from the rise of the WNBA and the importance of the Finals – will end up doing the league and Clark more harm than good. It turns an already great finale into “the finale for people who hate Caitlin Clark,” which isn’t fair to Clark or the game.

The danger of the underlying plot is that nothing that happens in the finale or leading up to it has any “real” meaning because Clark is the only thing that matters, the only reason anyone watches women's professional basketball , the only reason why “W” still exists. It shapes an extremist view, approach and mindset among a self-marginalized audience that believes that “you player” represents the only greater good the game has to offer.

Although it is not racist, it is racially based. Although not sexist, it is anti-feminist-continuous. Although it's not blatant negationism, it's one hell of a topicalist. Clark's involvement in all things WNBA is very Taylor Swift-esque, reminiscent of Swift's recent take on all things NFL. It surpasses, especially in these Finals, the deserved appreciation for the Lynx's Courtney Williams, the continued and necessary growth in admiration for the brilliance of the Lynx's Napheesa Collier, the impact of the Breanna Stewart/Sabrina Ionescu tandem on WNBA history and the magnitude of it , what these two teams and the final represent and what they will ultimately evolve into.

Although numbers and popularity in themselves do not lie and have great meaning, they often fail miserably at telling not only the whole story but also the more important story. Once again, our introduction to the 2024 “W” Final was one of the most compelling, exciting, dramatic and competitive games in any sport to kick off a championship series. Just because potentially more than a million people haven't seen it should never be the deciding factor.

But here's the thing: Clark has emerged as the all-rounder when it comes to the state of women's basketball, especially as it approaches the Finals, and while the Caitlin Clark effect is very real, it isn't — nor should it be made come out to be – the be-all and end-all. Even she will admit this whether her “people” want it or not.