Stephen A. Smith Slams Angel Reese’s Michael Jordan Comparison: “She’s No Caitlin Clark”

The WNBA has never lacked for drama, but this weekend, the league’s off-court storylines overshadowed the action on the hardwood. At the center of the latest firestorm is Chicago Sky rookie Angel Reese, who found herself in the crosshairs of ESPN’s Stephen A. Smith after a bold comparison to Michael Jordan set the basketball world ablaze.

It all started with a comment from J. Hill, who predicted that by the time Angel Reese retires, she’ll be seen as the “Michael Jordan of the WNBA.” Reese herself echoed the sentiment, fueling a debate that quickly spilled from sports talk shows to social media timelines everywhere. Enter Stephen A. Smith, never one to hold his tongue, who slammed the brakes on what he called Reese’s “ego trip”—and in classic Stephen A. fashion, he did it with all the subtlety of a slam dunk.

“She’s Not Caitlin Clark”

Smith didn’t mince words. “As much as we love Angel Reese because she is special, she’s not Caitlin Clark as a player. Caitlin Clark is on a different level. We just have to own that,” he declared, referencing the Indiana Fever’s breakout star who, despite being sidelined with injury, remains the league’s biggest draw.

The timing of Smith’s critique couldn’t have been more pointed. In a recent matchup between the Indiana Fever and the Chicago Sky, Clark watched from the bench, nursing an injury. It was a golden opportunity for Reese to step into the spotlight. Instead, she managed just four points—a stat line that Smith described as “a cry for help from someone who just realized they’re auditioning for an exit interview.”

While Reese’s hustle on the boards (she grabbed 12 rebounds) was undeniable, Smith argued that “rebounds without buckets are just collecting participation trophies.” The implication: in a league that rewards impact, not just effort, Reese’s performance fell short.

A Rivalry Rooted in College Drama

The roots of the Reese-Clark rivalry go back to their college days. Their fiery Final Four showdown—complete with taunts, trash talk, and viral moments—helped propel both players to national stardom. Reese, dubbed the “Bayou Barbie,” became a walking headline, her confidence and charisma making her a marketing dream for the WNBA.

But as Smith pointed out, “All that glitter means nothing when you’re putting up numbers that wouldn’t scare a junior varsity team.” Four points in a blowout loss, he argued, isn’t just underwhelming—it’s becoming symbolic.

The national conversation, Smith noted, has shifted. “Caitlin Clark, yes, the girl sitting out injured, is still dominating the league’s conversation without even playing.” That, he suggested, says everything about the current state of the rivalry.

The Pressure of Hype and the Reality of Performance

Reese’s arrival in the WNBA was met with enormous expectations. She brought college stardom, viral moments, and a ready-made rivalry. The league’s marketing machine was quick to capitalize, selling fans on a generational clash: Clark vs. Reese, Iowa vs. LSU, college royalty reborn as professional rivals.

But as Smith and others observed, hype only gets you so far. “The WNBA is not a charity—they don’t hand out all-star ballots for high-effort cardio,” he quipped. “You don’t get minutes for memories.” In other words, it’s not enough to be a brand—you have to be a baller.

Smith’s harshest criticism came when he questioned Reese’s contribution beyond rebounding: “I have yet to see a single example of Angel Reese being a leader outside of rebounding her own missed layups. What does Angel Reese do? What is her contribution? You tell me, because I’m not seeing it.”

Social Media Reacts—and So Does the League

The backlash to Reese’s underwhelming performance was swift and, at times, brutal. Twitter lit up with memes and hot takes, some poking fun at Reese’s four-point game, others lamenting what they saw as wasted potential. Even her staunchest defenders struggled to spin the narrative, with one viral post reading, “We need to talk about how Angel Reese is actually good—you just don’t understand basketball.”

To make matters worse, the game was marred by allegations of hateful fan comments directed at Reese, prompting the WNBA to issue a statement condemning all forms of racism and discrimination. The league is currently investigating the incident, and the Chicago Sky have vowed to protect their players at all costs.

The Stakes Have Changed

For Reese, the stakes are higher than ever. The WNBA is a league that moves fast—hype fades quickly when the box score doesn’t back it up. “Either you contribute or you’re gone. Simple as that,” Smith warned.

Meanwhile, Clark’s star continues to rise. Even in street clothes, she dominates headlines, her triple-doubles and clutch shooting already making her a household name. As Smith put it, “On her worst day, Clark finds ways to impact the game. She dishes assists, sinks threes, draws defenders like a magnet. Even off the court, she’s the storyline.”

A Lesson in Hype vs. Production

In the end, Smith’s message was clear: the WNBA needs players who elevate the game, not just their brand. If Reese wants to be mentioned in the same breath as Michael Jordan—or even Caitlin Clark—she’ll need to find her offensive rhythm, and fast.

Otherwise, as Smith warned, “We’re looking at an ESPN documentary 10 years from now called ‘Angel Reese: The Hype That Never Hit,’ featuring dramatic piano, slow-motion turnovers, and a narrator whispering, ‘What happened?’”

For now, the ball is in Reese’s court. The league is watching. The fans are watching. And, perhaps most importantly, Stephen A. Smith is watching—ready to light up the next debate, one hot take at a time.

Have thoughts on the Angel Reese vs. Caitlin Clark debate? Let us know in the comments below!