“They Want More Shrimp — and They Deserve It”: Jemele Hill Breaks Down the WNBA Pay Debate

What started as a lighthearted complaint about shrimp turned into one of the most powerful metaphors in the ongoing debate over WNBA pay. Sports journalist Rob Parker joked about being served just five shrimp for nine dollars, claiming the WNBA’s financial struggles are similar — the players want more, but there’s simply not enough to give.

But Jemele Hill wasn’t laughing.

Appearing as a guest on Parker’s show, the award-winning journalist delivered a sharp, passionate rebuttal. Yes, Hill said, the players do want more shrimp. And they absolutely deserve it.

The Narrative: “There’s No Money”

Parker’s argument reflects a common narrative — that the WNBA is financially unstable, reportedly losing $40 million a year, and thus cannot afford to pay players more. He noted that some arenas still have empty seats, and despite Caitlin Clark’s star power, the league isn’t turning a profit. To him, the math is simple: no revenue, no raise.

But Jemele Hill exposed this narrative for what it really is — a carefully crafted illusion.

The Reality: Strategic Losses, Hidden Profits

Hill pointed out that professional sports owners, across all leagues, often intentionally make their franchises look unprofitable during labor negotiations. “Those books can look however they want them to look,” she said. Billionaires, Hill explained, use team ownership as a tax shelter — declaring paper losses while watching their franchise values skyrocket.

Case in point: the WNBA’s expansion. Hill asked, if the league is in such financial distress, why are five new teams being added by 2030? Why is the Golden State Valkyries franchise already valued at $500 million? These are not the signs of a failing business — they are indicators of explosive growth.

On top of that, a $2.2 billion media rights deal is on the horizon. That money is coming in fast — and players, Hill argued, should be first in line to benefit.

The Players’ Cut: A Disgraceful 9%

Hill revealed one shocking stat: WNBA players receive just 9% of league revenue. Even UFC fighters — long criticized for poor compensation — get around 18%. NBA players receive closer to 50%.

Hill isn’t demanding parity overnight, but she insists that 9% is indefensible, especially given the league’s upward momentum. “You damn right they want more shrimp,” she said — and the numbers back her up.

History Repeats: NFL and NBA Took Decades

Hill reminded Parker — and all skeptics — that neither the NFL nor the NBA was instantly profitable. It took the NFL 50 years to turn a profit. The NBA? Nearly 45. Yet players in those leagues were still paid and still fought for more.

In fact, NBA legend Kareem Abdul-Jabbar made more money in the early 1970s — when the NBA was on shaky ground — than today’s highest-paid WNBA stars, despite the WNBA now being on much firmer financial footing.

This Is an Investment — Not a Handout

Hill closed with perhaps her most critical point: paying women fairly isn’t just about justice — it’s about protecting and promoting the league’s biggest assets. Paying them well means they won’t have to risk their lives playing overseas in the offseason. It means they can rest, stay healthy, and remain available to grow the brand year-round.

“These women built this league flying commercial and sharing hotel rooms,” Hill said. “Now the boom is here. They’re not asking for charity — they’re asking for their share of the feast they helped cook.”

The question isn’t whether the league can afford it. The question is: who gets to eat?