Questioning Candace Parker’s Criticism of Angel Reese Without Dismissing the Legacy

Candace Parker’s critique of Angel Reese has sparked debate—does it hold up under closer scrutiny?

Candace Parker is a legend. That part is not up for debate. But being a legend doesn’t exempt anyone from critique, especially when that critique comes from a place of genuine basketball analysis.

Angel Reese Ranked C-Tier?

When Parker recently ranked Angel Reese in the C-tier of her WNBA player rankings for Complex, many, including myself, were left confused, disappointed, and even a little offended. Not because Reese needs universal praise, but because the logic didn’t align with what we’re seeing on the court or in the stats.

Reese currently leads the WNBA in rebounding. She’s a double-double machine with 41 double-doubles in just 55 career games, meaning she’s hit that mark in more than 74% of her appearances.

The Leadership Argument Doesn’t Hold Up

Parker’s claim that Reese hasn’t proven herself as a leader might carry weight, if Chicago hadn't been on pace for a playoff spot before Reese’s wrist injury late in the 2024 season. In her absence, the Sky collapsed. Even now, the team clearly struggles in games where she underperforms.

Meanwhile, analysts have noted that the Indiana Fever have looked more cohesive at times without Caitlin Clark, even winning the Commissioner’s Cup while she was out and losing immediately upon her return.

Reese Does More Than Rebound

Parker described Reese as being great “in her role as an offensive rebounder.” But that phrasing undersells what she actually brings. First, there’s no need to limit her dominance to offensive rebounding when she leads the entire league in total boards. Second, if we’re talking about role expansion, Reese leads the Sky in points, rebounds, and assists. The offense runs through her.

If Parker needs to "see more" from Reese to consider her a top option, then it raises questions about how closely she’s watching the games.

A Disparity in Praise

This ranking also draws attention to a bigger issue: the inconsistency in how players are praised.

In a recent conversation with Cheryl Miller and Keyshawn Johnson, Parker and Miller rightly addressed how women in sports are often labeled as petty, dramatic, or jealous when rivalries emerge. They also touched on how race and appearance skew media narratives.

But in that same interview, Parker described Caitlin Clark as a “generational talent,” “freaking baller,” and “fun to watch.” It was Miller who jumped in to include Angel Reese in that conversation, calling her game “ever-evolving.” On rewatch, Parker never actually praised Reese, only Miller did.

Was the Interview Outdated?

I initially gave Parker the benefit of the doubt. Maybe the Complex ranking was filmed earlier in the season? But after comparing Parker’s hairstyle in the video to her recent Instagram posts, it’s clear the interview was likely recorded within the last two weeks.

And What About Paige Bueckers?

Parker’s inconsistencies don’t stop with Reese. She ranked Caitlin Clark at the A level while putting Paige Bueckers at the B level, another head-scratching move considering her own criteria of consistency and leadership. By that logic, Clark should be alongside Bueckers and Arike Ogunbowale in the B tier.

Bias or Oversight?

To be fair, Parker did admit her positional bias, saying “the fours run the league” after putting only power forwards (A’ja Wilson, Breanna Stewart, Napheesa Collier) in the S tier. As someone who revolutionized the power forward position, this lens makes sense. But it might also explain why Reese, a forward still finding her rhythm, is held to a stricter standard.

The Subtle Dismissal

Reese’s journey hasn’t been polished. She's had shooting struggles. She’s been accused of stat-padding. She's emotional. She’s vocal. But all of that, the growth, the grit, the fire is what makes her special.

And it’s ironic: in her discussion with Miller, Parker called for “balance and consistency.” Yet her own remarks about Reese lack both.

Final Thoughts

Angel Reese is generational, too. Her dominance in her role isn’t a limitation, it’s a starting point and launching pad. And if we’re serious about challenging how the media talks about women athletes, we must also challenge how we talk about each other within the game.

I don’t believe Candace Parker is a hater. I believe she’s a legend with high standards. But like many greats, she may hold this next generation to the framework she created without realizing they’re building something new in their own way.