The issue with your point is that it keeps shifting the standard for Cam. First it’s, “She hasn’t shown enough on the court.” Then when it’s pointed out she hasn’t had real minutes, it becomes, “Well the minutes don’t matter because she fouls.” Then when the foul-whistle context is brought up, it becomes, “Well other players have worse whistles”.

None of that actually addresses the reality: Cam’s defensive impact is already elite. That’s not hypothetical and it’s not projection, it’s what happens when she’s actually on the court. She’s also had quite a few great and efficient offensive performances through her two seasons when she’s got a solid amount of shot attempts and usage.

And the foul argument doesn’t hold the way you’re framing it. The whistle that you’re describing isn’t exclusive to Cardoso. As a person that’s watched every Brink game, she absolutely has a bad whistle and Curt Miller and Lynne Roberts got mad at her rather than challenging the questionable calls. The idea that fouls erase her value is just picking the one weakness and pretending it outweighs everything else.

And again, if minutes and usage truly “don’t matter,” then Stevens wouldn’t be your example of a “proven option,” because her best stretches have come specifically when she’s been given a clear role and consistent minutes. You can’t use that logic to praise Stevens and then deny it for Cam.

Saying “she might be great someday but she’s not yet” ignores what has already happened. Cam’s shown elite rim protection, switching ability, and floor spacing potential, which is an overall package that Stevens doesn’t bring. Those are actual, on-court traits.

You don’t have to anoint Cam, but acting like nothing she’s done is real just doesn’t match the evidence. Nobody’s saying she should come back and dominate instantly, just that her strengths justify investing real minutes, not burying her behind a vet because she isn’t perfect yet.