I generally avoid speaking negatively about the WNBA, as I prefer to steer clear of unnecessary controversies. However, some claims warrant scrutiny—especially when a WNBA media member presents a biased opinion about a player while being expected to provide objective analysis.

The media figure in question is Natalie Esquire. Some may not be surprised by this, and frankly, neither am I. Truly unbiased WNBA reporters are rarer than you might think. According to a recent social media post, Natalie Esquire stated that Chelsea Gray is the best point guard in the WNBA. She argued that despite a down season following her injury, the disrespect toward Gray was unwarranted.

Chelsea Gray’s recent performance in an Unrivaled league game was impressive, scoring 26 points to help her team defeat the previously undefeated Lunar Owls, led by Nafisa Collier. In a postgame interview, Gray addressed her critics, saying, “There’s been a lot of chatter that I don’t have it anymore. But I’m here, man. I just keep playing my game, having fun, and enjoying it.”

It appears that Esquire’s post was in response to criticisms of Chelsea Gray’s slower return from injury. However, when such a claim is made, it’s natural for people to check the stats to determine its accuracy.

Let’s take a look at the numbers. Objectively, Caitlin Clark had an outstanding rookie season in the WNBA, averaging 19.2 points, 8.4 assists, and 5.7 rebounds per game. Meanwhile, Chelsea Gray’s most recent season, which Esquire acknowledged as a down year due to injury, saw her average 8.6 points, 2.9 rebounds, and 4.9 assists per game. Even in her championship-winning season with the Las Vegas Aces, she averaged 15.3 points, 4 rebounds, and 7.3 assists—solid numbers, but still lower than Clark’s rookie stats.

Looking further back, in 2022, Gray averaged 13.7 points, 3.2 rebounds, and 6.1 assists. In 2021, she averaged 11.1 points; in 2020, 14 points; and in 2019, 14.5 points. In no season has she outperformed Caitlin Clark in points or assists.

So, where does Natalie Esquire’s assertion come from? This is a WNBA reporter, someone people rely on for accurate and unbiased coverage of the league. Her post risks misleading her many followers, particularly those who may not verify statistics themselves.

To be clear, I support fans hyping up their favorite players—that’s the nature of sports fandom. However, when someone holds media credentials and is expected to provide factual, data-driven insights, their statements should be grounded in reality.

Chelsea Gray is undeniably a great player. She has been a key figure in the WNBA for years and has demonstrated clutch performances time and again. But is she statistically better than Caitlin Clark? No.

This situation also highlights a broader issue within WNBA media, where some figures allow personal biases to overshadow objective reporting. Esquire has previously downplayed Caitlin Clark’s accomplishments, even accusing her of stat-padding last season. Meanwhile, she has been vocal in her support of the Las Vegas Aces, at times making questionable rankings that favor them.

For contrast, take Annie Costabile from the Chicago Sun-Times. She has built credibility by breaking news and providing balanced coverage, even when it’s not favorable to her local team, the Chicago Sky. Her professionalism stands in contrast to some others in the WNBA media space.

Recently, Costabile weighed in on the issue of biased reporting in women’s sports, stating, “I think it’s because there are a lot of fans posing as reporters in the women’s sports space.” This comment is particularly relevant when discussing Natalie Esquire’s claims.

Ultimately, if Natalie Esquire were just a fan, her post wouldn’t be an issue. But as a media member with influence, she has a responsibility to provide factual and objective analysis. When people check the receipts, the numbers simply don’t support her claim that Chelsea Gray is the best point guard in the WNBA. The media should hold itself to a higher standard of accuracy—because in sports, as in life, facts matter.

Relative Articles

None found