For Indiana Fever fans, the sight of Natasha Howard’s name trending in the same sentence as Caitlin Clark’s is enough to cause a “traumatic experience.” It’s a gut-punch of panic, a flashback to a long, frustrating season defined by clogged paints, baffling shot selection, and a generational point guard struggling to create magic in an offensive system that felt fundamentally broken.

The 2024 season was an experiment, and the results are in. Now, as Howard hits unrestricted free agency, the entire Indiana Fever franchise stands at a critical crossroads. A recent viral video, showing Howard donating Caitlin Clark’s signature sneakers to a high school team, has stirred the pot, sparking fears of a potential return.

But a charitable gesture, one reportedly facilitated by Clark’s own brand partnership, does not and must not dictate roster construction. The numbers, the on-court evidence, and the basic principles of modern basketball all scream the same inconvenient truth: the Natasha Howard experiment was a failure. Running it back for another year wouldn’t just be a mistake; it would be “organizational malpractice.”

This isn’t a personal indictment of Natasha Howard. She is a three-time WNBA champion, a respected veteran, and a player who impressively stayed healthy and durable through the entire punishing campaign. The issue was never her effort. The issue was, and remains, her fit.

The central, non-negotiable problem can be distilled into one horrifying statistic: 18%.

In the entire 2024 WNBA season, Natasha Howard shot a “dismal” 18% from three-point range. In an era of basketball defined by spacing, and on a team led by the “best passer in WNBA history,” this number isn’t just a limitation; it’s a “fundamental” flaw that “completely breaks down” the entire offensive ecosystem.

The Indiana Fever front office knew exactly what they were getting in Caitlin Clark. They had a full offseason to acquire pieces to complement a “generational passer” whose entire game is built on “gravity.” Clark’s deep range demands help, creating open looks for her teammates. The front office’s primary job was to find players who could punish defenses for that help.

Instead, they “deliberately chose” to sign a starting power forward who “simply cannot shoot.”

The consequences were predictable and devastating. Defenses didn’t just disrespect Howard’s shot; they ignored it entirely. They “sagged off” her, “packed the paint” against Aaliyah Boston, and sent “aggressive help” at Caitlin Clark on every single pick-and-roll. Why? Because the absolute worst-case scenario was an open three for a player who would miss, on average, more than four out of every five attempts.

This roster construction forced Boston, a legitimate All-Star post presence, to spend large portions of games standing helplessly at the three-point line just to create a sliver of space. Her usage and efficiency suffered, not because she regressed, but because her own teammate was “clogging” her area of operation.

But the 18% shooting was, shockingly, not even the “biggest problem.” The larger issue was the baffling “shot selection” and “decision-making.” Fans watched all season as Howard, a career non-shooter, would “wave off screens to go one-on-one,” call for “isolations in the post,” or “dribble the ball up in transition” even when Caitlin Clark was on the floor.

It was a baffling display, one that flew in the face of her role. A veteran forward playing with Clark has a simple, clear job: set screens, finish at the rim, play defense, and hit open shots. The job is not, as Howard declared upon her arrival, to “win MVP.” That comment, which fans nervously laughed off at the time, turned out to be a “whoa, this ain’t going to work” red flag. It exposed a fundamental misunderstanding of her new role.

Now, that failed experiment is over. Howard’s exit interview at the end of the season sounded like a goodbye. “I don’t know what I’m going to do,” she said. “I’m going to dissect everything from this season.” It didn’t sound like a player planning to “run it back.” It sounded like a player who also “felt that frustration” and knew the fit wasn’t right.

The Fever front office must have the courage to agree. They cannot let a viral donation or a respected veteran’s reputation cloud their judgment. This is a “what have you learned?” moment for the organization. The answer cannot be “nothing.”

The path forward is clear. Names like Azurá Stevens, a 6’6″ forward who shoots the three and protects the rim, are the “profile you want.” It will take bold moves, possibly trading assets, to acquire such a player. But that’s what championship-contending teams do. They don’t just build to be “respectable”; they build to win.

The timing is urgent. Caitlin Clark has just announced she is “back to 100% health” with “no injuries,” ready to “do damage” in year two. This is the window. This is when you go “all in.” You don’t waste another year of her rookie-scale contract. You don’t waste another 82-game season trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.

Natasha Howard will be fine. Her legacy, including an honor like getting her jersey retired by Florida State, is secure. She can and should “move on,” perhaps to an expansion team where she can have a larger role, or to a contender that needs her veteran presence. Both she and the Fever will be “better off” for it.

The Indiana Fever front office failed the 2024 test. They prioritized reputation over fit and paid the price with a stagnant offense. They now have a chance to show they’ve learned from that “traumatic” mistake. Bringing Natasha Howard back, under “no circumstances,” should be an option. It would be an unforgivable, fireable offense—an act of “organizational malpractice” that tells Caitlin Clark, Aaliyah Boston, and the entire fanbase that they aren’t serious about winning. The numbers prove it. The fit proves it. The time to move on is now.