I don't think that's the argument here. The addition of Clark would have pretty much zero to do with winning games. Team USA could/should win gold if the last player on the team is replaced by Clark or not.
Before her, relatively speaking, no one watched the wnba. The league has been subsidized by the nba since its inception and would've folded many times over if it wasn't for that financial backing. Crap, it probably wouldn't have even gotten off the ground.
Fast forward to 2024 (probably says enough just saying that), and we have arguably the most popular women's basketball player since Cheryl Miller? Lisa Leslie? Maybe ever? in Clark. The opportunity to expand the women's game is like no other that they've had before and they push it to the side because "she's not one of the best 12 players in the league" all the while complaining that no one watches or they don't get paid or this or that. Clark solves all of that, or at least it looks like she could.
The argument they left the #2 scorer off the team is just not a good one, either. NO ONE outside of the 8-10 die-hard wnba fans knows who that even is. EVERYONE knows who Clark is. That's the whole point here. Clark has been in the league a few weeks and she's more popular than every single player in the league.
This is about building support for the league, which, up until Clark landed in their collective lap, had next to none and turning away that opportunity is just foolish.