The clock is ticking down to zero for the WNBA. With less than 100 days until the scheduled tip-off of the league’s 30th season, a high-stakes showdown in New York City this Monday will likely determine if there is a season at all. But as WNBPA leaders Kelsey Plum and Napheesa Collier jet in to face the owners, a harsh reality is beginning to set in: The players may be holding a losing hand.

The “Delusional” Demand?

The stalemate stems from the union’s December proposal, which demanded a $10.5 million salary cap and a staggering 30% share of gross league revenue. The league’s response? Silence. For four weeks, they didn’t even bother to counter, deeming the ask so detached from financial reality that it didn’t warrant a reply.

The league, which has allegedly never turned a profit in 29 years and is subsidized by the NBA, views this as a “non-starter.” They have offered a significant compromise: a revenue-sharing model equating to about 15% of league revenue, raising the average salary to over $530,000—a massive jump from the current average. Yet, players like Natasha Cloud remain defiant, stating, “We will not f***ing move until y’all move,” insisting that the players are the ones who “make the business go.”

The Caitlin Clark Reality Check

This is where the union’s argument hits a data-driven wall. While Cloud and others claim they drive the business, the numbers suggest otherwise. The “Unrivaled” league—a 3-on-3 venture featuring top stars like Breanna Stewart and Cloud but excluding Caitlin Clark—launched with hype in January 2025 but has struggled to generate significant viewership or mainstream media coverage.

Contrast that with the “Caitlin Clark Effect.” In 2024, Fever games featuring Clark averaged double the viewership of other matchups. Her presence drove a 325% attendance increase for Indiana. The uncomfortable truth for the union is that the massive growth they are trying to leverage is largely tied to a single player—a rookie who isn’t even part of the current negotiating committee and is locked into a rookie-scale contract through 2028.

The Nightmare Scenario

This creates a terrifying leverage imbalance. If the veterans strike, the league has a nuclear option: use replacement players.

Imagine a season where the established stars sit out, but the league proceeds with rookies, replacement players, and—crucially—Caitlin Clark. The Fever would likely still sell out. TV ratings might dip, but they wouldn’t collapse because the casual audience is tuning in for Clark, not the collective tenure of the league’s veterans.

In this scenario, striking players would lose millions in salary, while the league continues to operate, proving that the “product” can survive without them. It is a gamble that could break the union.

The Smart Play vs. The Pride Play

Union leaders like Plum seem to understand the stakes, emphasizing the timeline pressure. The smart play may be to bank the league’s current offer—which represents a life-changing financial improvement for most players—and live to fight another day when the league has developed more stars with Clark’s drawing power.

But if the union holds firm on Monday, fueled by pride rather than pragmatism, they risk walking into a lockout where the owners hold all the cards. The league knows it can weather a storm better than the players can. The question is: who blinks first? Monday’s meeting isn’t just a negotiation; it’s a reality check. And for the WNBA players, reality might be about to hit hard.