Angel Reese recently made headlines with her bold demands for higher pay in the WNBA, even going as far as to suggest that players should boycott the league if they do not receive better compensation.

However, the timing of her statement could not have been worse, as her performance on the court immediately after was nothing short of a disaster.

While Reese is known for her confidence and outspokenness, her game in the Unrivaled league exposed a major flaw in her argument.

Fans and analysts alike were left wondering whether she was truly worth the millions she was demanding, especially after a performance that showcased an alarming inability to finish at the rim.

In her most recent game, Reese went 5 for 13 from the field, missing several wide-open layups, and at one point even hitting the bottom of the backboard. This came just days after her podcast appearance where she confidently asserted that if WNBA players did not receive the pay they wanted, they would sit out the season.

While standing up for better wages is commendable, the optics of her demand combined with a poor performance created a firestorm of criticism. Social media erupted with reactions, with fans pointing out the irony of demanding more money while struggling to execute basic basketball fundamentals.

Reese’s contract in the WNBA is standard for a rookie, earning approximately $73,000 in her first year as part of a four-year deal worth around $325,000.

However, she has previously stated that this salary does not even cover her rent, which she revealed to be $8,000 per month. This revelation sparked debate about financial responsibility, with many arguing that living beyond one’s means does not justify demanding a salary increase.

While it is true that WNBA players deserve better pay and improved working conditions, Reese’s approach to the conversation has drawn skepticism. Instead of leading a thoughtful discussion on the issue, her comments have come across as entitled, particularly when juxtaposed with her struggles on the court.

Adding to the controversy is her frustration that future WNBA rookies, such as Juju Watkins, may enter the league under a new collective bargaining agreement and earn more than she currently does. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of how professional sports contracts work.

Rookie contracts are typically locked in under the terms of the current CBA, meaning that even if salaries increase in future negotiations, existing players remain bound by their original deals. This has always been the case across professional sports leagues.

Her complaints, therefore, appear less like a fight for all WNBA players and more like personal dissatisfaction with her own contract.

Meanwhile, Caitlin Clark has continued to let her game do the talking. Despite facing significant pressure and being the target of physical play from opponents, Clark has maintained high levels of performance, setting records, increasing WNBA viewership, and drawing massive crowds to arenas.

Unlike Reese, Clark turned down a lucrative $1 million offer from the Unrivaled league, opting instead to focus on her WNBA career and continue building the league’s credibility.

This decision highlights a stark contrast between the two players. While Reese has chosen to make headlines with bold statements and controversy, Clark has quietly gone about elevating the game with her skill and work ethic.

The financial reality of the WNBA cannot be ignored. Despite a surge in interest and record-breaking TV ratings, the league still reported a $40 million loss last year. Unlike the NBA, which generates billions annually, the WNBA is still in the process of becoming financially sustainable.

For the league to justify major salary increases, it needs to continue growing revenue streams through media rights deals, sponsorships, and ticket sales. The recent $2.2 billion media rights deal is a significant step in the right direction, but players must recognize that these changes take time. Clark’s impact has been instrumental in increasing the league’s marketability, which will ultimately benefit all players, including Reese.

Reese’s claims that she is a major reason for the WNBA’s growth have also been questioned.

While she has certainly contributed to the league’s visibility, especially through her college rivalry with Clark, the numbers suggest that Clark has been the primary driver of increased attendance and viewership.

WNBA games featuring Clark consistently sell out arenas, while games without her draw significantly smaller crowds. Merchandise sales also reflect this reality, with Clark’s jerseys flying off the shelves compared to others in the league. Reese, on the other hand, has struggled to replicate the same level of fan engagement.

Even her games in the Unrivaled league have drawn underwhelming viewership numbers, further debunking the notion that she is a top ratings draw.

For all of Reese’s confidence, her on-court struggles have become a major talking point. Missing layups at an alarming rate while demanding a salary increase has only given her critics more ammunition.

Social media has been flooded with sarcastic comments suggesting she should be paid based on her field goal percentage rather than her name recognition.

The optics of missing easy shots while advocating for more money simply do not work in her favor. Fans expect top players to deliver on the court before making demands, and right now, Reese has not lived up to those expectations.

What Reese fails to realize is that the best way to advocate for higher pay is to prove her worth through performance. Instead of threatening boycotts, she should be focusing on improving her game, demonstrating leadership, and helping her team win. The WNBA rewards excellence, and those who perform at the highest level will naturally attract higher salaries and endorsements.

Players like Clark, A’ja Wilson, and Breanna Stewart have earned their status as highly paid athletes because of their consistent production and impact on the game. Reese has the potential to join their ranks, but only if she refines her skills and proves she can be a dominant force in the league.

The conversation about WNBA salaries is an important one, and it deserves to be taken seriously. However, Reese’s approach has turned it into a spectacle rather than a meaningful discussion.

Instead of uniting players around a common cause, she has inadvertently drawn attention to her own shortcomings. If she wants to be a true leader in the movement for better pay, she needs to lead by example and let her game speak for itself. Otherwise, she risks being seen as more of a distraction than a difference-maker.

Reese’s ultimatum also raises another key question: if she and other players do sit out, will the WNBA even feel the impact? Given that Clark is the league’s biggest draw, a Reese-led boycott may not have the effect she anticipates.

In fact, it could end up proving that certain players are more replaceable than they realize. If the league continues to thrive without her, it would further weaken her negotiating power.

This is a dangerous game to play, and Reese must carefully consider whether her current approach is truly in her best interest.

At the end of the day, Reese has the potential to be a great player, but she needs to focus on her development. Instead of demanding millions while struggling to convert layups, she should be in the gym, working tirelessly to prove she is worth the investment.

The WNBA is growing, and players will eventually see the financial rewards they seek. But for now, the best thing Reese can do is show that she belongs among the league’s elite. The question is, will she rise to the challenge, or will she continue to believe her own hype while the rest of the league moves forward without her?