The 2025 WNBA Draft delivered the storyline women’s basketball fans had been buzzing about for months: Paige Bueckers, fresh off an NCAA championship run with UConn, went first overall to the Dallas Wings. For a league eager to build on its historic growth, Bueckers’ arrival is a marketing dream. But in the rush to anoint the next Caitlin Clark, the media has spun itself into a frenzy of comparisons, hype, and—let’s be honest—delusion.

Here’s the reality: Paige Bueckers is not Caitlin Clark. And that’s not a slight—it’s just the truth.

The media’s obsession with finding “the next Clark” is understandable. Clark’s impact on women’s basketball has been seismic. She didn’t just break records; she shattered the glass ceiling of mainstream attention, drawing millions of new fans to the sport. Her 2024 WNBA Draft was the most-watched in league history, peaking at 1.46 million viewers—a 119% jump from the previous year. Her Indiana Fever games are national events, with 41 of 44 games broadcast on major networks. Preseason exhibitions sell out NBA-sized arenas, and teams literally move venues to accommodate the Clark effect.

No other player—not even Bueckers—has come close to generating this kind of electricity. Yet, the media persists. Articles argue that Bueckers deserves Clark-level attention because of her social activism. Pundits call her “transformative,” and ESPN curiously skips comparing Bueckers’ draft viewership to Clark’s record-breaking numbers. It’s a narrative built on hope, not reality, and it does both players a disservice.

Behind closed doors, league insiders and general managers are clear-eyed. They respect Bueckers’ talent but know she won’t replicate Clark’s impact overnight. “What Caitlin did last year was so special and unique,” one GM told reporters. “Paige is a special player. I think she’ll be a good player this year, but I’m not expecting a Caitlin-like impact.”

The numbers back this up. After Clark left college, NCAA women’s tournament viewership plummeted by over 10 million. The 2024 title game without Clark drew 8.5 million viewers—down from 18.9 million the year before, when Clark was the headline act. That’s not a minor dip; it’s a collapse. Meanwhile, Bueckers’ much-touted deal with the Unrivaled offseason league drew less than 12 million total viewers for an entire season—a number Clark can match with a single viral clip.

The difference isn’t just statistical. It’s stylistic, magnetic, and visceral. Clark plays with a swagger and showmanship that transcends the sport. The second she crosses half-court, you’re on the edge of your seat—will she pull up from the logo? Thread a no-look pass through traffic? She’s must-see TV, the rare athlete who turns every game into an event.

Bueckers is brilliant, but her brilliance is quieter. She’s the epitome of efficiency—mid-range mastery, intelligent playmaking, and clutch performances. She’s fundamentally sound, a coach’s dream, and a proven winner. But she doesn’t bomb 30-footers or rack up 40-point explosions with Clark’s regularity. She’s refined excellence; Clark is spectacle.

And that’s okay. The WNBA, like every pro league, is in the entertainment business. It’s not about ensuring equal fan support for every star—it’s about captivating audiences. Michael Jordan, Kobe Bryant, LeBron James, Steph Curry—these names became global icons not just for their skill, but for their ability to make you stop everything and watch. Clark brings that energy to women’s basketball. Bueckers brings something different, but equally valuable: consistency, leadership, and a new wave of college fans.

The league should absolutely hype Bueckers. She’s a genuine star and will help bridge the gap between college and pro audiences. The same goes for other young talents like Angel Reese and Haley Van Lith, whose college rivalry now becomes a WNBA reunion storyline. The league needs all the buzz it can get.

But let’s not pretend. Until another player dazzles with Clark-level flair and draws crowds with jaw-dropping athleticism, the popularity gap will remain. That’s not a knock on Bueckers or anyone else—it’s a testament to Clark’s once-in-a-generation appeal.

There is hope, though. This year’s second overall pick, Dominique Malonga of France, offers a glimpse of the future. At 6’6” with effortless dunking ability, Malonga is already being compared to NBA sensation Victor Wembanyama. Imagine the highlight reels: a powerful forward finishing above the rim, redefining what’s possible in women’s hoops. Pair that with Clark’s playmaking, and the league could have a one-two punch that brings even more fans to the game.

For now, let’s appreciate Bueckers for who she is—a phenomenal player and a vital new face for the WNBA. But let’s also recognize that Clark is operating on another level, and that’s not going to change anytime soon. The league, the media, and the fans would be wise to embrace this reality, celebrate both stars, and let the spotlight shine where it belongs.

Because at the end of the day, what matters isn’t forced narratives or identity politics. It’s talent, excitement, and the kind of basketball that makes you stop and watch. And right now, that’s Caitlin Clark’s world. The rest are just living in it.