​If you’ve spent time on social media or browsing sports content recently, you’ve probably seen the surprising claim that WNBA players voted Caitlin Clark the 11th-best guard in the league heading into the All-Star Game. And, of course, people have tossed around plenty of opinions about that bit of information. But is it actually true? If not, what’s really going on? This is a situation where facts and logic are needed, so let’s break it down.
First, is Caitlin Clark an All-Star? Yes. Clark was named a starter alongside other stars like Aliyah Boston, Paige Bueckers, Natasha Howard, Breanna Stewart, and A’ja Wilson. So the big headline about her being left out or ranked poorly is not accurate in terms of her status as an All-Star.
Was there a player vote that could place her 11th? Well, there’s nuance. The All-Star starters are determined by a split vote: fans account for 50%, media members 25%, and players 25%. Do we know exactly how the players voted? We know how about 47% of them voted. That’s because, due to various issues, only around 85 of the WNBA’s 180 players submitted ballots for starters, according to ESPN. It appears many players didn’t receive their ballots in time, which is why the participation rate was so low.
So did the 85-or-so players who voted place Clark as the 11th-best guard? Not exactly. Reports indicate that Clark finished No. 2 in the fan vote, No. 3 in the media vote, and No. 11 in the player vote for guards. The key nuance is what that “No. 11” means in context.
The issue is that the player voting process wasn’t a straightforward ranking of all guards from 1 to 11. Instead, the WNBA asked players to vote for four guards and six frontcourt players. When it came to guards, players cast votes for their personal top four guards. After votes were tallied, there was an overall ranking based on how many votes each guard received, but no one submitted a ballot that explicitly ranked Clark at 11th. It’s more accurate to say that Clark received enough votes across various top-four placements to accumulate an overall tally that ended up with her at 11th in the guard category. In other words, 11th isn’t a direct “this is how players voted” position; it’s the aggregate result of a process where Clark likely appeared in several players’ top-four lists but wasn’t consistently ranked 11th by anyone as a formal ranking.
Would Clark have deserved a higher placement? Almost certainly, yes. She’s averaging 20.5 points (fifth in the league), 7.9 assists (second in the league), and 4.0 rebounds per game, and she’s widely recognized as the league’s most popular player. But the data we have doesn’t reveal a definitive ranking from every participating voter. It’s plausible that on many players’ ballots, Clark would have appeared in their top-four guards and could have ranked much higher, but they simply weren’t given the opportunity to vote for more guards than a top-four limit. Additionally, some players likely voted for teammates or friends, which can affect totals, particularly since fan and media votes might already have heavily favored certain names.
There’s a broader conversation to be had about Clark’s status and how players feel about her, but the notion that the player vote explicitly placed her 11th as a direct ranking isn’t an entirely accurate depiction. The 11th place figure is a byproduct of a complex voting mechanism and incomplete participation, not a straightforward, sole recommendation from players—that Clark was the 11th-best guard according to a unanimous player ranking.
If someone is chiding WNBA players for “s” (presumably for voting in a way that lowered Clark’s standing) for better SEO or sensational purposes, they’re missing the nuance of how the ballot worked and the realities of participation. The takeaway is that Clark’s All-Star status remains intact, that the player vote did not present a simple “11th best guard” ranking from every voter, and that the actual mechanics involved players selecting top-four guards within a broader voting framework.