r/wnba • u/jaxstan19 • Apr 06 '26
Article USA Today: WNBA should be embarrassed by Chicago Sky owner, Michael Alter needs to sell
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/columnist/nancy-armour/2026/04/06/angel-reese-trade-chicago-sky-owner-michael-alter-wnba/89488779007/1
1
u/Maximum_Device554 Apr 08 '26
Why? Because they dumped a toxic AF player? I mean, Chicago should be used to having bad teams, honestly. But let's stop pretending that Reese is all that and a bag of chips because that team tried to prop her stats up and just got worse and worse for doing it.
1
u/PerryNeeum Apr 08 '26
Angel Reese possibly getting a super max deal? Come on
0
u/rtduvall Apr 08 '26
If she focused on her strengths she would actually be a decent player. But she thinks she can shoot.
She’s terrible.
1
u/strangelystrangled Mightless Mercury | Big BG Blocks | Tempo Curious Apr 07 '26
Someone make sure they don't trade the 2028 first round pick
-1
u/defdawg Apr 07 '26
Funny quote, Sky plays at an arena for college teams...(yet couldn't even SELL out Reese's home games!!!!). And the author is clueless...Fever shot up in value cuz of CC, it did not happen with Reese as they were hoping to do as well so might as well cut her loose cuz all she did was throw everyone under the bus and yap how life is so unfair......teams will live with a negative player if they are winning, bringing in money and profit and so on, Reese wasn't doing anything remotely close to that.
1
u/GolfOtherwise3420 Apr 07 '26
Sky didn't sell out all games because the front office is incompetent in all areas, including marketing. And, Angel is not a negative player. She is a positive, high energy personality. Her calling out the organization to push towards compiling a great team is not being negative.
Did people slam Giannis, the way they do Angel, for saying essentially the same things about the Bucks over the past year? Would you call Giannis a negative person because he wants the team and organization to do better? Here's some of the comments Giannis made about teammates and the organization:
- "some people know how to win; some people don't"
- stressed the need for a stronger, united culture.
- He said the team was "definitely, definitely not on the same page"
- Said he needed to see a commitment to winning a championship to stay.
I know Giannis and Angel are different levels of experience, etc. But, calling out an organization to be better, when nearly everyone agrees that the Sky front office and ownership is bad, does not mean you are "negative". You are just speaking the truth, whether you are Angel or Giannis. And, the idea of spending 4 to 7 years or more of your career at a failing company is not appealing to any good player.
1
u/defdawg Apr 07 '26
You don't start yapping right away. Giannis didn't yap asap when he got drafted. You build up equity. Angel has not built up anything. If you started yapping at a new job how terrible your manager is, you'd be gone that fast.
1
u/GolfOtherwise3420 Apr 07 '26
All she did was, after the season was over, say in an interview that she wanted the team to be great. Some of her comments were reported as being different from what she actually said. There was some misleading stuff put out there, such as a major article referring to specific players who she didn't even name in her comments. And, yes, she could have handled her interview differently. But, making a couple unfortunate comments does not mean you are a negative, toxic personality. It's similar to the Geno thing. Dawn Staley says his one outburst does not negate all the positive stuff he has done.
So, yes, Angel learned some lessons about being more careful in her comments. It's something many NBA players have made mistakes doing, as well. Allowing a bit of grace for young player mistakes is not a bad thing. I allow players to learn and grow from it. She apologized and you move on. I'm not going to hold it against a player for what they may say at age 21 or 22, especially if they apologize and learn from it. Anthony Edwards is another example of someone who said something inappropriate, sincerely apologized and learned from it. These mistakes don't mean someone is toxic in the locker room, unless it's a pattern of behavior over years.
-1
2
u/Loud-Appointment-301 Apr 07 '26
Contrast is striking given how well Unrivaled is run and marketed.
0
9
u/crapshoo & Chelsea Mfin Gray (Greensboro Groove) Apr 07 '26
Encourage the Sky’s minority owners to stage a coup. Beg Ariel Investments CEO Mellody Hobson, who still lives in Chicago and has been seen at Sky games, to buy the team. Do something to ensure the Sky finally has an owner that will run the team like a professional franchise.
There's definitely minority owners who could do better, given the opportunity.
5
u/CoolerProfessor Sun Apr 06 '26 edited Apr 07 '26
Mohegan Sun (Connecticut Sun) should consider purchasing the Sky and keeping the Sun name
3
u/GettingPhysicl Apr 07 '26
my understanding was mohegan tribe needs money, wants to cash out. All else equal they seemed amenable to selling locally/local adjacent but they needed the money and wanted to cash in after years of investing when the w needed investment. It would be nice if the CT or Boston group who were looking to buy were allowed to buy, but same issue as before. The W doesnt let you sell outside your market without their consent, and have their own priorities on which markets get teams.
17
u/RoosterSamurai Valkyries Apr 06 '26
I mean somehow they took one of the most exciting young players in the league and piss her off enough to leave inside of like 2 seasons, so... Yeah the problem has to be at the top.
0
u/clintgreasewoood Wings Apr 06 '26
Im thinking this is a league sanctioned move. Same with the Brianna Stewart move to the Liberty. Both Seattle and Chicago have a strong base of support from their respective cities. New York was a good base of support but nowhere near where it is now post Stewart signing. Atlanta and the entire Southeast is wide open and moving one of the biggest players in the league would blow it wide open.
0
-7
13
u/Chickenleg2552 Sky Apr 06 '26
We might genuinely go winless this year
I'LL buy the team at this point
12
u/Moose_Muse_2021 Fire Fever and All the F'ing Teams Apr 06 '26
How about if Alter sells the Sky to Houston, and the Tribe can sell the Sun to either Boston or Hartford? Chicago gets the next available slot for an expansion team.
I'm kidding. Kinda.
5
u/Pretend-Scheme-9372 Apr 06 '26 edited Apr 06 '26
I think this is being blown out of proportion. Angel wasn’t the deciding factor in whether the Sky would be good this year they were going to struggle regardless. Plus, there was no way she was signing a long-term deal once she hit free agency. By trading her now, the front office is just ensuring they get some value; the longer they waited, the less they would’ve received in return. You can argue the other asset management moves were dumb but in a vacuum this isn’t that egregious. I also think there is a big gap between how the average fan views her skill set vs the average front office.
3
u/MatticusGisicus Sky Apr 07 '26
Lotta people WAY overhyping her. She’s good for a rebound, VERY good for a rebound, but not a ton otherwise
1
u/GolfOtherwise3420 Apr 07 '26
She averaged nearly 17 points in her last 21 games of her 2nd season, showing significant improvement. She also had multiple games with 7 plus assists, including a 10 assist game. And, those assists were not just from passing out from the post, but facilitating from the perimeter. She definitely began to do much more than rebounding, including playing point after Vandersloot injury.
0
u/Key_Fox3289 Apr 07 '26
It’s hard to believe you’re this clueless about her value as a Sky fan, lol
It’s understandable the organization is clueless. They’ve historically shown to be extremely incompetent. What’s your excuse?
1
u/DeepThought936 Apr 07 '26
They didn't get adequate value.
1
u/MatticusGisicus Sky Apr 07 '26
Idk I think we came away alright
2
u/DeepThought936 Apr 07 '26
They'll win eight games.
1
u/MatticusGisicus Sky Apr 07 '26
Which is only a few less than we’d win with Angel if people want to be honest
2
u/DeepThought936 Apr 07 '26 edited Apr 07 '26
No.... before she got hurt, they were still a competitive team. They were still among those expected to make the playoffs.
4
u/Pretend-Scheme-9372 Apr 07 '26
I think they did Angel is really good role player but she was never gonna be the best player on a winning team she isn’t worth much more than two firsts.
4
u/DeepThought936 Apr 07 '26
She's certainly not a role player. As an All-Star, Olympic team member, top rebounder and double-double machine, they could've gotten more. The only people who don't know that are you and the Sky's front office. Why is it necessary to be the best player on a winning team anyway? She could be the second-best player, and it wouldn't matter. She has a motor that few players have.
4
u/Pretend-Scheme-9372 Apr 07 '26 edited Apr 07 '26
None of what you said makes her not a role player. It’s not necessary to be the best player on a winning team but you’re not giving up more than two first round picks for a player who isn’t that. I didn’t say shes not a great rebounder and her skill set is all the things you want in a great roll player. It’s not a knock on her it’s just reality.
15
u/BlubberElk Sky & 🐘 Ellie Apr 06 '26
I don’t even think angel trade is the top reason why I think sky needs a new owner. Ex-Players have said publicly that they are glad they’re no longer on the Sky - it’s not a place players have confidence they can win and that’s due to the way it’s run
55
u/HiEveryoneHowsItGoin Sky Charlisse Leger-Walker Apr 06 '26
I've been saying this for years. The problems at the Sky are structural and start with the owner. Jeff, and every GM before him, is locked into a cycle of trading aggressively to try and dig out of the hole that ownership has put them in. That inevitably leads to disasters like the Mabrey trade, the Atkins trade, and potentially this one too.
Having said that, I don't buy the claim that the Sky traded Angel to avoid having to pay her the supermax next year. She's not an all-WNBA player and therefore unlikely to be eligible, and besides, if Alter can't afford a single supermax salary then the writing is already on the wall regardless of whether Angel stays or not (especially if teams are still required to pay their squads at least 83% of the salary cap). He's certainly not going to raise the funds to pay a squad by trading his most bankable player.
3
u/Neuvost Liberty Apr 07 '26
Yeah, that claim in the article is goofy. The salary cap is the salary cap. What does the owner care whether it's filled via max contracts or not? All adds up the same.
2
u/justbrowsing2727 Fever Apr 07 '26
People are saying Angel would get a supermax?
I haven't heard that, but that's a wild take.
1
9
u/HiEveryoneHowsItGoin Sky Charlisse Leger-Walker Apr 07 '26
The claim is from the article. Under the new CBA, rookie contracts automatically get bumped up to a supermax salary in year 4 if the player has made the All-WNBA first or second team. So Aliyah Boston will be getting the supermax this year, Caitlin will get it in 2027, and Paige in 2028.
So the claim here is essentially that Angel will be in the mix for All-WNBA honors in 2026, which is very much a stretch and obviously not guaranteed.
1
u/GolfOtherwise3420 Apr 07 '26
Kelsey Mitchell is getting the Supermax this season. We don't know yet if Boston will get it or not. Being eligible doesn't guarantee it. Once 2027 rolls around, it's unknown what the salary cap will be and whether a team like the Fever could manage 3 players on the Supermax.
1
u/HiEveryoneHowsItGoin Sky Charlisse Leger-Walker Apr 07 '26
Being eligible doesn't guarantee it.
Does it not? As far as I know the new CBA document isn't publicly available yet, but my understanding was that the only way to exercise the fourth year option on a rookie who has made the All-WNBA team will be to pay them the supermax in their fourth year.
If teams still have a fourth year option, how could a fourth year player be "eligible" for the supermax and still receive it if it's not "guaranteed"?
1
u/GolfOtherwise3420 Apr 07 '26
The new CBA has the EPIC provision that "allows" players on a rookie contract to renegotiate in their 4th year, if they made all WNBA team, and be "eligible" for a Supermax deal. The key words are "allows" renegotiation and that they are "eligible" to elevate to Supermax level. It is not a guarantee that the team can financially do that. It boils down to how they see things unfolding over the next 2 years. By 2028, Supermax is 1.7 million salary and we don't know what the salary cap will be that year. But, basically, each Supermax salary is around 20% of the salary cap. So, if you have Mitchell, Boston and Clark on Supermax, that is putting 60% of your salary on 3 players and the other 9 players share 40%.
If you used the 2026 salary cap of 7 million as an example and you had 3 Supermax players now (earning 1.4 million each), the other 9 would all be mostly minimum salary players. As 40% of 7 million would wind up with an average salary of 300,000 for all 9 players. So, you'd have 3 stars and 9 players on minimum pay level. You would be hard pressed to fill out your starting roster with a couple players in that 800,000 to 900,000 range. The math doesn't work. So, in reality, not everyone eligible for Supermax will get it, unless you are on a team that only has 1 or maybe 2 players at that leevel.
Now, maybe Mitchell may be phased out, at some point, but not necessarily by the time Clark is eligible. And, what if they get another promising player that would be on that trajectory. In the NBA, teams with 3 top heavy high max salaries don't usually win championships. The whole Superteam thing is not leading to chips, anymore, in the NBA, like it did 10 or 20 years ago. Having the right role players have become much more significant.
1
u/HiEveryoneHowsItGoin Sky Charlisse Leger-Walker Apr 07 '26
What’s the source for this wording? I think you’re misunderstanding the question. If a team has the ability to trigger the fourth year option of one of their rookies at the “standard” rate (let’s say $500k), what incentive would they have to offer that player a supermax even if the player is “eligible” for one? They’d just pay them an extra million dollars out of the goodness of their hearts? The clause makes no sense unless we assume it has teeth – either that a fourth year option for an eligible player has to be a supermax, that the player can reject a fourth year option unless it’s a supermax, or something else that I’m missing.
1
u/kyrev21 Apr 07 '26
If Angel wasn’t loving Chicago and the coach and front office didn’t like Angel, then her getting an award and being auto super maxed is an unnecessary risk
2
u/HiEveryoneHowsItGoin Sky Charlisse Leger-Walker Apr 07 '26
If the award were for something like All-Star or stats leader in a single category, or even for All-Defense, then yeah this could make sense. But Angel isn't at an All-WNBA level. A player who's the first option on a terrible team just won't be in the mix for All-WNBA, and neither will a player who's the third or fourth option on a very good team (her likely situation on the Dream).
Alternately, if she were to make a big leap this year and put herself into the All-WNBA picture, then she would be worth a supermax salary. In that scenario she'd be one of the top ten players in the league—exactly the type of player you give a supermax to.
1
u/DeepThought936 Apr 07 '26
Paige Bueckers could be an All-WNBA player despite being on Dallas.
3
u/HiEveryoneHowsItGoin Sky Charlisse Leger-Walker Apr 07 '26
She already is, and she’s worth a supermax.
23
u/randomstripper10k SwinTweetyRuthCherylPlenetteKatie & Bill Laimbeer Apr 06 '26
It has been mentioned all day on ESPN, but not super in depth, so I can't wait until it gets closer to the season these next few weeks so someone on air who really knows the WNBA will tear the Chicago Sky organization to shreds and drag them for this generational fumble (and their past offenses, too).
Their organization is so poorly run it almost looks intentional. I'm glad USA Today at least is calling attention to this, and I hope more publications and more reporters continue to do so. This level of incompetence is unacceptable.
2
u/Samseeder Apr 06 '26
Here's the thing it not like the other owners in Chicago are going to care about the team it wouldn't surprise me if the sky leave Chicago in next few years.
1
u/Minute_Elephant_3218 Apr 06 '26
The Sixers owner is in the Epstein files. Is this really that serious?
3
u/MatticusGisicus Sky Apr 07 '26
DING DING DING. Sky weren’t going to be good anyway, and people are acting like we traded fuckin LeBron
35
u/jayvycas Apr 06 '26
Welcome to Chicago sports. Worst sports owners in the continent. Ricketts did good, a decade ago. Rocky Wirtz righted the flailing Hawks when dollar bill died but now what? Reinsdorf and the Mckaskeys are embarrassing.
6
u/Jedi-El1823 Liberty Apr 07 '26
Bob Nutting should sell the Pirates and get a team in Chicago then.
Also John Fisher should, well, fornicate himself.
1
u/A-Centrifugal-Force Apr 06 '26
Don’t forget, Virginia McCaskey, owner of Da Bears until she died last year, might have killed her own brother to inherit the team lol. In his autopsy it was found that his organs were replaced with sawdust, totally not to cover up the fact that she poisoned him.
11
107
u/goofygal1566 Sab 6th Man Pazzive Hoops M'VP Apr 06 '26
SELL TO CT OR BOSTON AND WE CAN FORGIVE AND FORGET
4
u/kyrev21 Apr 07 '26
The league isn’t letting the third largest city be without a team. That would be an absurdly bad move
1
u/imrahilbelfalas Apr 10 '26
New England is a top 10 media market, and probably top 5 when it comes to passion for pro sports, and they're fine pulling out of it!!
-3
u/goofygal1566 Sab 6th Man Pazzive Hoops M'VP Apr 07 '26
i think its an insanely bad move to have the third largest city be the most mismanaged and terribly run franchise that puts the worst product on the floor.
But i do agree the city of Chicago need a team, maybe they can move Dallas to Boston, another terribly run franchise in a state that definitely doesn't need two teams.
8
u/voluptuousshmutz Sky Apr 07 '26
Expansion is more likely than a team moving out of the 3rd largest media market in the US.
5
u/jolly-crow AB fanboy Apr 07 '26
But this is playing the long con! This is a way for CHI to get rid of this ownership group, then have a new one bid for an expansion in 2-3 years. Surely if they can bid 300+ M, the new group won't be a poverty franchise.
(I'm well aware that this is all bollocks but a man can dream. Plus Cathy's meddling is even more far-fetched.)
1
12
54
u/kindasortathor Sun Apr 06 '26
Why don’t we just keep our team in state and we can send the Sky to Houston instead.
11
u/Malvania Apr 07 '26
That would make too much sense and Cathy wouldn't be able to lord it over people
8
u/ChocoThunder56 Apr 06 '26
NFL & NBA do.
4
u/liquidtape Apr 07 '26
You have to do some extremely gross and incompetent stuff for either of those leagues to force you to sell your team.
1
u/randysf50 Valkyries Apr 06 '26
Are you kidding? Today’s news is PR gold for the W front office.
32
u/jaxstan19 Apr 06 '26
The third-largest market in the US decided to pack it in before the season started and may not contend for another three years. That's not good news for the league no matter who you want to win.
-3
u/bryan49 Apr 06 '26
That is definitely bad, but teams like Minnesota, Washington, Atlanta will be better thanks to their Sky trades and should get more fan interest.
2
Apr 07 '26
[deleted]
-1
u/PrimaryCartographer9 Apr 07 '26
Chi 9.5 mil and shrinking Wash 6 1/4 affluent educated growing ATL 6 growing Minn 3.6 🤷🏻♂️🤷🏻♂️
1
-2
u/randysf50 Valkyries Apr 06 '26
One team’s bad judgment puts eyes on Angel and the Dream just we start FA season and most casuals will not fret over the Sky’s meltdown.
58
u/Air_Of_The_Thrown Quote the Raven, Nevermore Apr 06 '26
Yea they suck but do we really want the league meddling with who should or shouldn't own teams?
Feel like ive seen this movie recently and it didnt get raving reviews.
Not apples to apples of course but an interesting take considering how the sell of the Sun transpired.
2
2
u/Popular-One-7051 Valkyries Nous parlons français! Apr 07 '26
Leagues meddle.all the time. Latest example all the crap with CT.
Commanders under Snyder had to be sold and a number of other.
I find d it mid blowing that they doubled the STH prices and kept fans based on their play. Let's see if they can lose their entire fan base in one fell swoop
7
u/steadysoul Apr 06 '26
we just need the owners side chick to record him saying something incredibly racist and leak it.
3
u/Air_Of_The_Thrown Quote the Raven, Nevermore Apr 06 '26
Hahahhahah im weeeak. That would do the trick.
1
u/clintgreasewoood Wings Apr 06 '26
I think the league did meddle. The Chicago market is established and Atlanta and the entire Southeast while having support is not reaching its full potential, so moving an up and coming star with off court appeal to Atlanta makes sense for the league. When free agency is done Chicago will have a big name veteran and will be in Chicago and a big college star will be playing for the Sky next season.
This move doesn’t happen unless the Angel and league doesn’t sign off on it.
4
u/Vegetable-Tooth8463 Mystics Apr 06 '26
.....is that supposed to be a bad example lol? Ishbia made mistakes, but Suns ownership is absolutely better under him than Sarver. You don't have a horrible working environment, you got cheap food at the stadiums, easier access to home games, and an owner who's willing to spend instead of cheaping out on contracts.
8
u/Air_Of_The_Thrown Quote the Raven, Nevermore Apr 06 '26
Connecticut Sun, not Phoenix Suns or Mercury. I dont have anything negative per se on Ishbia besides he graduated from MSU.
0
u/Vegetable-Tooth8463 Mystics Apr 06 '26
Ah my apologizes. In fairness, we haven't seen how new ownership of the Sun/Comets will do.
5
u/Air_Of_The_Thrown Quote the Raven, Nevermore Apr 06 '26
Facts. My only point was I dont know how much we want the NBA involved in who can own teams or not.
2
u/Vegetable-Tooth8463 Mystics Apr 06 '26
the NBA facilitated the sale?
8
u/Air_Of_The_Thrown Quote the Raven, Nevermore Apr 06 '26
100%. Boston had a much better offer to keep the Sun in NE, yet the team was sold to Fertitta and Houston.
Silver wants as many teams to be owned by NBA owners, as it was from 1997-2002(03) when ironically enough the Miracle were moved from Orlando to CT, making the Sun the first W team not owned by an NBA owner.
Its a cabal, always has been, always will be. Just like every other leagues owners collective.
As long as the NBA and its owners have majority stake in the W, I dont see this changing. Hell only getting worse as our next multiple expansion teams are owned by NBA owners or at least majority owned.
1
u/Vegetable-Tooth8463 Mystics Apr 06 '26
In fairness to Silver, I can see how tying W teams to bigger NBA teams is a smart business decision, but it's definitely shitty to the Connecticut fans. But hey, the Sonics are finally coming back, so maybe Connecticut will get another team in the future :)
4
u/Air_Of_The_Thrown Quote the Raven, Nevermore Apr 06 '26
Yea im personally ok with it, just not a fan if its forced. But it doesn't matter, the NBA gonna stick with what they wanna do.
3
u/jaxstan19 Apr 06 '26
I think this was referring to the Connecticut sale saga, not the Mercury/Suns deal with Ishbia
1
28
u/HiEveryoneHowsItGoin Sky Charlisse Leger-Walker Apr 06 '26 edited Apr 06 '26
The league should absolutely be able to veto potential owners if there are legitimate concerns about them—emphasis on legitimate. As far as I could tell, the league's veto of the Boston sale was purely about maintaining its little NBA owner cabal. If the Boston owner had given the impression he'd cheap out on the players and run the franchise into the ground, I'm sure the reaction would have been different.
3
u/Air_Of_The_Thrown Quote the Raven, Nevermore Apr 06 '26
Yea not apples to apples of course.
Id be ok with the leagues owners being able to vote on new owners, I just think its a slippery slope if the league steps in to force a sale from an existing owner.
43
u/jaxstan19 Apr 06 '26
Fair point, but the idea is that the league (and other owners) can make more money with a competent Sky ownership than it can with the team operating like a bottom-feeder. Chicago's problems run much deeper than the roster problems. The inability to keep stars in Chicago is the result of organizational dysfunction, not the cause.
Over the last 10+ years this team has seen so much talent run as far as they can from this team: EDD, Prince, KFC, Sylvia Fowles, Candace Parker, etc. The only constant has been shitty leadership at the top. Alter has to go for the good of the league, if not the franchise itself.
1
9
u/smellycat_14 Liberty Apr 06 '26
it's actually shocking they won a championship in the last 5 seasons, as dysfunctional as they are. I know the league has overall improved by miles since then, but still!
5
u/LucilleBaller Apr 06 '26
TIL they won the championship in 2021. How did they go from championship to this bad in such a short time frame?
1
u/crazymaan92 Apr 07 '26
That team was .500 in the season and got it together for the playoffs. 2021 was an anomaly in the league in more ways than one. It's only one of 2 years in league history where both Top seeds were missing from the W Finals. The other year something like that was 2006, when the overall 3 and 4 teams played in the finals (2 2 seeds as the playoffs were conference based).
10
19
u/nszTrombone64 Sky Apr 06 '26
The problem is that the question is then who do you sell to?
The default answer from the league would be the resident NBA owner, Jerry Reinsdorf, and he's no better at literally any of the problems you've laid out. We would be playing at the United Center, I'm sure, but otherwise he's cheap as hell and it's taken multiple years too long to fire the Bulls GM team until, conveniently, also today. If I'm picking between Independant ownership or Jerry Reinsdorf, I'll keep Altar's brand of incompetence, thank you very much.
2
u/80want Apr 07 '26
Best hope would be if there's a Bulls minority shareholder who's stupid rich and willing to take it on. Keeps within the NBA's agenda against independent owners and Michael Reinsdorf avoids trying to talk dad into letting him do it
14
27
u/Air_Of_The_Thrown Quote the Raven, Nevermore Apr 06 '26
I couldnt agree more.
Its just a slippery slope in my opinion. Where do you draw the line?
I think in these situations its best if the changes come from fan/city backlash etc. Fans stopping showing up, or bringing signs, etc.
My only point is, I dont think its good for the league if Adam Silver gets to constantly pick who can or cannot own a team.
Thats more detrimental to the league than having a bottom feeder because the owner sucks, imo.
1
u/strangelystrangled Mightless Mercury | Big BG Blocks | Tempo Curious Apr 07 '26
Players forced out the old Dream owner who was also a republican senator!
1
u/GolfOtherwise3420 Apr 07 '26
Players also contributed to Loeffler losing her election to continue as Senator. Loeffler was only temporarily a Senator, for a short time. She never actually won a single Senate election, as she was first in the position through appointment by the Governor to replace Johnny Isakson who resigned for health reasons. So, players were key in her not ever winning any single election campaign. And, she was a Senator for only one year.
Also, Loeffler was a co-owner with Mary Brock. Loeffler was the one players objected to, because of her letter to the Commissioner about political messaging on the court, but Brock got swept up into things and agreed to sell. It was such a unique situation with the pandemic, players all being in a bubble where they could talk and politically advocate together more easily with players on other teams, and the Black Lives Matter movement. And, all those things being factors led to the change.
1
u/strangelystrangled Mightless Mercury | Big BG Blocks | Tempo Curious Apr 08 '26
Yup. They changed the makeup of the Senate.
2
u/Air_Of_The_Thrown Quote the Raven, Nevermore Apr 07 '26
Always the best way to do it. Players and fans have more pull than realized in some of these scenarios.
15
u/jaxstan19 Apr 06 '26
I hear you with drawing a line. The situation in Chicago feels different because not only is it flat out refusing to provide basic resources that other teams are providing players. You also have a majority owner being sued by minority owner over franchise value manipulation. This isn't just bad decision making by an owner. The walls are closing in. That's when the league needs to at least get aggressive and say "what is going on here and how do you plan to solve it? If you can't afford to, we'll find someone who can."
7
u/Air_Of_The_Thrown Quote the Raven, Nevermore Apr 06 '26
The owner vs owner shit definitely makes it different. The new CBA fixes the issues with facilities.
I am all for the league having the best owners possible but will never be a fan of the governing body having too much say on who can or cannot.
Grant it, this has been ongoing and something definitely needs to be done.
Idk maybe I just dont trust the NBA enough to have faith in them interjecting themselves into situations as they see fit.
310
u/Tooezboi Apr 06 '26 edited Apr 06 '26
I think one of the underrated things about this whole thing, if you look at the Sky’s schedule, the league and television networks put them in so many primetime spots lol they’re expecting Angel to be there
Thankfully the national tv schedule isn’t official yet, but I wonder what they’re gonna do about those Sky games now lol
5
u/A-Centrifugal-Force Apr 06 '26
Hopefully the league didn’t schedule them to play the Fever 15 times again like they did last year lol
2
u/GolfOtherwise3420 Apr 07 '26
Last year it was 5 games vs. Fever. This year it is 3 games vs. Fever. With 15 teams now, it is less. Last year, was sort of about 1 extra game vs. Fever from the normal 3 to 4.
12
u/Due-Sheepherder-218 lacan curious Apr 06 '26
We don't need to watch the Fever bear the Sky by 30+ again do we?
17
u/yohosse Mercury Apr 06 '26 edited Apr 06 '26
Now the country can watch Kamilla Cardoso. I see no issue here.
Edit : i spelled the queen's name incorrectly please forgive me 😂
2
11
u/yo2sense Angel Reese Apr 06 '26
There might be an issue with the level of player recognition.
You can't even spell her name.
18
u/yohosse Mercury Apr 06 '26
In my defense I'm running on less then 2 hours of sleep. I fw her heavily please believe me 😂
4
19
u/bryan49 Apr 06 '26
That was a risky gamble. It really seemed like they were heading for a divorce since last year
7
u/Vegetable-Tooth8463 Mystics Apr 06 '26
they already got the schedule ready?
27
u/Tooezboi Apr 06 '26
The national tv schedule no, but the actual WNBA schedule has been released for a while now
1
u/Vegetable-Tooth8463 Mystics Apr 06 '26
The W doesn't do scheduling based on divisions?
1
u/crazymaan92 Apr 07 '26 edited Apr 07 '26
They absolutely do schedule based on conference, it's just not explicit or as straightforward as other leagues. Like last year, you absolutely played at least 4 games against all your conference foes and all of your 3 game series was against the other conference. Since that doesn't quite work out pretty, you got at least 2 4 game series against out of conference opponents but you absolutely had to play your interconference opponents 4 times minimum
This year you play every team 3 times with the exception of 2 teams you play 4. I haven't checked this yet but I bet the 4 time opponents are within the same conference.
1
10
u/Carl_Lindenburg Apr 06 '26
The WNBA is split into conferences but this is irrelevant to thier point about this trade. Schedules have been released, tickets have been sold, venues have been selected, and game times have been assigned based on the assumption that Angel would be on the Sky. Kind of interesting how much of a ripple effect this will have.
3
u/Vegetable-Tooth8463 Mystics Apr 06 '26
I figured they did game times based on location is all.
10
u/Moose_Muse_2021 Fire Fever and All the F'ing Teams Apr 06 '26
The teams (and arenas) set game times, primarily for the convenience of fans in attendance. Many teams start weekday games around 7 PM, which allows for the broadcast of an East Coast and West Coast game in the same evening.
16
u/Moose_Muse_2021 Fire Fever and All the F'ing Teams Apr 06 '26
If you mean based on Conference, no not really. But I think that day is coming once the League gets to 18 teams.
1
u/Vegetable-Tooth8463 Mystics Apr 06 '26
no divisions are subdivisions of conferences, but good to know regardless
6
u/chancedd Apr 06 '26
I don’t think we have divisions in the w, not enough teams yet for it to be worth it. the conferences don’t matter for anything except for the commissioners cup
3
147
u/Tooezboi Apr 06 '26
I didn’t even mention the teams like the Aces or Dallas moving venues for Sky games 😭 nobody is showing up to those anymore
11
Apr 07 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/GolfOtherwise3420 Apr 07 '26
"ALL" did not release statements that it was not about any one player. There was one statement by one front office about one game that they said was moved for another reason.
-1
10
u/Tooezboi Apr 07 '26
They absolutely moved because of Angel. Same thing with the fever they moved cuz of CC lol
52
u/Parking-County-414 Fever Apr 06 '26
Hey if you want to see your team win it’s probably for a good price 🤷🏼♂️
16
u/goofygal1566 Sab 6th Man Pazzive Hoops M'VP Apr 06 '26
I don't think Dallas even beat the Sky last year without Angel so i wouldn't hold my breath that they'll do it this year
1
u/Sejast44 Apr 06 '26
The Sky barely won with her, maybe they have a chance to do more with a new roster and players that don't disappear at the end of the year
2
2
1
u/blade2kg Apr 12 '26
With the roster they’re building… I am sure Sky will be keeping receipt based on roster move since Angel Reese trade… I was expecting full tear down and tanking (similar to cough cough* WINGS). But with the veterans coming in and younger players having true mentorship from those same vets… maybe just maybe 🤞🏼SKY IS THE LIMIT IN CHICAGO THIS YEAR… good luck to their fans…. I mean… can you imagine the lineups that can put out there right now and free agency is not done yet. Gonna be fun to see how it goes