People often accuse me of “hating on” Angel Reese. I reject that label because it misrepresents both who I am and what I do.
After spending more than two weeks flying back and forth between San Francisco and Atlanta to cover the 2026 WNBA Finals, I came away more convinced of something I’ve noticed throughout my coverage of Reese: For many of her defenders, criticizing her quickly becomes a referendum on the person doing the criticizing.\
WHY ISN’T ANGEL REESE HELD TO CAITLIN CLARK’S STANDARD WHEN FANS ATTACK HER TEAMMATES?
During the Finals, I repeatedly encountered the same accusation on social media: My criticism of Reese meant I had a problem with Black women. I received hundreds of posts saying that I am a racist for daring to criticize Reese.
One post in particular caught my attention.
On Oct. 17, an account called Apex Jones posted a five-minute, 39-second video promising to “EXPOSE Outkick and Dan Zaksheske for targeting Angel Reese for YEARS.” The accompanying post declared, “Outkick is anti-WNBA and anti-Black Women.” The account has nearly 10,000 followers on X, and the post drew about 1,100 likes and more than 220 reposts.
The video included questions I asked Reese about her move from Chicago to Atlanta.
“What role did you play in that trade?” I asked on Oct. 16, media day for the WNBA Finals.
Reese said Chicago was trading her and worked with her on the destination. Atlanta wanted her, and she wanted Atlanta. I followed up by asking how she balanced staying somewhere to build a winner with seeking an opportunity to win elsewhere. She discussed her move from Maryland to LSU and wanting a coach who would push her.
I did my job: I asked her questions and she gave answers.
But Apex Jones argued that my coverage was going to make Reese look bad either way. When Chicago traded her, I questioned her value. When she reached the Finals with Atlanta, I questioned what joining an established winner said about her winning mentality. His accusation was that I changed the argument while keeping the same negative conclusion.
His criticism leaves out half of what I wrote. In April, I argued that either Chicago didn’t value Reese the way her biggest cheerleaders did, or she had pushed for a trade. “It’s possible that Reese demanded a trade from Chicago,” I wrote at the time. Asking her in October what role she played in the move followed directly from the question I had raised six months earlier.
ANGEL REESE’S LATEST WNBA CONTROVERSY SHOWS HOW VICTIMHOOD BECAME CENTRAL TO HER BRAND
I also gave Reese an opportunity to address a criticism many people had raised: that she had forced her way out of Chicago to chase a ring with Atlanta. I included her explanation in my coverage. Giving her the chance to answer her critics is part of covering her fairly.
People are free to disagree with my assessment of Reese or the questions I ask her. But the claim that I have a problem with Black women requires more than disagreement with my coverage of one basketball player. She is an individual, and holding her accountable for what she says and does isn’t an attack on Black women.
Have I been hard on Angel Reese? Absolutely. My columns contain pointed opinions, and I use sarcasm in my social posts. But disagreement with the tone doesn’t answer the underlying questions.
Love her or hate her, Reese draws strong reactions from people. That is a valuable skill in professional sports, especially in 2026. She deserves credit for that.
Another criticism I’ve heard many times is that I’m “obsessed” with Angel Reese. The truth is that the audience is obsessed with Reese.
My post about Reese arriving for Game 5 wearing a “Protect Black Women” shirt generated more than 1.7 million impressions and 3,400 replies on X. Another criticizing a play in Game 2 drew nearly a million impressions and more than 1,300 replies. People were watching, arguing and responding.
If posts and stories about her didn’t draw significant interest, I wouldn’t cover her nearly as much.
Now, as far as how I cover Reese, that depends on what she says and does. If she talks trash and then struggles, I’m going to call her out. If she plays a great game, I’ll say that, too.
After Game 2, the headline of my story was, “Angel Reese dominates Game 2 as Atlanta Dream even WNBA Finals against Golden State Valkyries.” After Game 3, my headline read: “Angel Reese delivers another double-double as Atlanta Dream take 2–1 lead in WNBA Finals.”
Reese played incredibly well in Games 2 and 3 and helped carry Atlanta to those two victories. I had no problem saying it, either.
And I’ve written about Reese’s strong performances in the past. In June 2025, after a strong stretch in Chicago, I wrote: “I feel a duty to point it out when Reese does well” in a story headlined, “Angel Reese Posts Another Strong Performance, Will It Quiet The Haters?”
Interestingly, these stories never seem to come up when people are labeling me as a racist.
As much as people like to call out my reporting and writing as setting the narrative, the truth is that Reese determines the narrative. After Game 3, Reese taunted Golden State with a “too small” gesture, followed by sarcastically waving at them as they left the court.
Ahead of Game 4, she said she could “take their confidence and just try to do whatever to mess them up.” I attended the postgame press conferences featuring Reese after nearly every Finals game. After Games 2 and 3, she sounded like a player who had already won a championship.
That’s fine. Talk your talk. But if you want the smoke, you better back it up. Reese didn’t.
Over the final four games of the WNBA Finals, Reese scored 38 points on 12-for-45 shooting. She shot 26.7 percent from the field and committed 19 turnovers. She had more turnovers than made field goals in each of those four games.
Thus, my tone changed. “Angel Reese struggles badly after bold comments as Valkyries beat Dream to even WNBA Finals,” my headline read after Game 4. Was that me inventing a narrative? No. Reese taunted her opponents, explained how she was in their heads, and then proceeded to score 8 points on 2-for-12 shooting.
But, apparently, pointing that out is racist?
In Game 7, Valkyries star Gabby Williams scored 28 points in the second half. Reese scored 3 in the second half, making just one field goal. Reese said during the Finals that players become great when they “win and impact winning.” She simply didn’t do that when her team needed her most.
If she wants to be a superstar and treated like one of the best players in the WNBA, she can’t disappear when a championship is on the line.
For some fans, though, the argument seems to end at identifying a critic as a hater. That saves them the trouble of explaining her poor performance.
There is something else I have learned covering Reese: Her teammates and coaches ride for her.
I was in Albany after LSU lost to Iowa in the 2024 Elite Eight. Flau’jae Johnson and Hailey Van Lith strongly defended Reese.
“Y’all do not get to Angel Reese. So you might want to throw the towel in because you’re wasting your energy,” Van Lith said. She also praised Reese’s toughness and described her continuing to show up despite the hostility. Johnson said Reese is a “caring, loving person.”
Her coaches have shown that support, too. Kim Mulkey, who coached Reese at LSU, was in Atlanta cheering her on during Game 3 of the Finals. In May, Dream head coach Karl Smesko said, “She wants to be held accountable. I mean, she’s an All-Star player, but she wants to be the best player.”
Additionally, Reese deserves credit for making herself available to the media after every Finals game. Toward the end of games, reporters received emails listing the players scheduled for the postgame podium, usually that night’s top performers. More than once, Reese wasn’t listed, but she appeared anyway.
As Atlanta’s most prominent player, she should have been there regardless of performance. Still, I was surprised the Dream made her available every time, especially when she wasn’t on the initial list. That was perhaps the most impressive thing I noticed about both Reese and the Dream during the WNBA Finals.
After Game 4, Reese took responsibility for her poor performance and said, “I’ll just be better.”
That’s what I want to hear more often from Reese. Unfortunately, after Game 5, she changed her tune. Asked about her eight shot attempts and Golden State’s defense, Reese pointed to the officiating.
“A lot of us are getting fouled, and they are not calling it,” Reese said. She acknowledged Atlanta’s shooting struggles elsewhere in the press conference, but complaining about referees after a second straight bad game isn’t the best look.
THE CRAIG CARTON SHOW–UNFILTERED, UNAPOLOGETIC AND UNMISSABLE. DOWNLOAD HIS DAILY PODCAST NOW!
My own experience covering Reese also raises questions about how she handles criticism. During the Finals, I noticed she had blocked me on X. I’m a reporter covering the WNBA. I have never tweeted at her or tagged her in a post. Yes, I post about Reese because that’s part of my job.
And I understand blocking internet trolls who direct offensive language at you. But there is a massive distinction between online trolls and a reporter criticizing your performances and public statements without ever contacting you on the platform.
To me, blocking that reporter suggests a willingness to shut out coverage she doesn’t like.
Here’s my advice to Angel Reese: If you want to be treated like a superstar, accept being evaluated like one. When you taunt opponents and then struggle, both belong in the story. Own the performances that fall short as readily as you celebrate the ones that live up to your expectations.
And here’s my advice to Angel Reese fans: Root for her to succeed. And go ahead and defend her when you think criticism is unfair. But explain why it’s unfair. Calling me a hater or a racist isn’t a substitute for a counterargument.
If you believe Reese is one of the best players in the WNBA, hold her to that standard, too. You can support her without defending everything she says and does.
And please, for the love of God, stop claiming that criticism of Angel Reese amounts to criticism of all Black women.
