I can't stand the "dumbing down" of mainstream basketball today

[CavaliersFTW]

ESPN, NBAtv, TNT. All of it.

NBA analysis today is all about hero-name dropping. "Can Kobe/Lebron/Durant pull out this win" Did "Kobe/Lebron/Durant" do something athletic tonight.

Nobody talks about actual basketball on tv. Nobody talks about great on-the-floor teamball and playmaking. It's literally all about creating stories about _____ star player willing their team to victory against ______ star player on the opposing team and above the rim highlights. It's all smoke and mirrors and no meat and potatoes. I love watching older Lakers games with Chick Hearn or games where Bill Russell is doing color commentating because they actually add insight to plays that are developing and they didn't just glorify the stars. I do not like the way the game is presented today, it is presented for casual mainstream fans who just want a hero not actual sport/basketball fans who want to see and understand a good game.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

Agreed.

[chosen_wun]

Its been that way since those stations started covering baksetball, sooo..forever. Stop being a hipster, save that stuff for music and art.

[WayOfWade]

Yeah, I especially notice this for the Heat. Even though they have star players, it's the system that helps them thrive with their "hockey-assists," their back door cuts (Wade's gotten terrific at it). Even when the stars sit, the team usually wins because they know how to swing the ball and play good defense whether they're stars are in or not.

[CavaliersFTW]

Its been that way since those stations started covering baksetball, sooo..forever. Stop being a hipster, save that stuff for music and art.
No it hasn't, and being a basketball fan makes me a hipster?

[Take Your Lumps]

http://www.globalnerdy.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/grandpa_simpson_yelling_at_cloud.jpg

[NugzFan]

i agree and its awful. get used to it.

espn is to sports now as mtv is to music.

[dynasty1978]

The recycled, tired cliches, counter-arguments, and arbitrary stats are what get me most. I blame ESPN primarily for lowering the intelligence of basketball followers by pushing their TV "analysts", bias web content, and contrived first take debates.

Examples of eye-rolling commentary:
"makes players around him better"
"replace player x with player y and the team is better/worse"
"team is better without star player x"

Too many variables to make simple-minded statements and pass them off as credible.

[CavaliersFTW]

Yeah, I especially notice this for the Heat. Even though they have star players, it's the system that helps them thrive with their "hockey-assists," their back door cuts (Wade's gotten terrific at it). Even when the stars sit, the team usually wins because they know how to swing the ball and play good defense whether they're stars are in or not.
Youd think it was all about Lebron/Wade's killer instinct/athleticism/will-to-win that is entirely behind the Heat's success the way the game is presented too us. Backdoor cut probably isn't even a vernacular they're allowed to use on sports networks anymore :lol

[ShaqAttack3234]

Yeah, it's why people call a team like the Spurs boring despite the fact they're the most unselfish and well-coached team in the league. In general, people don't seem to understand the value of coaching which is why they wonder when a team like the Lakers struggles so much.

But basketball has been going in this direction for years. It started with the fascination of the Magic/Bird rivalry, then went to another level with Jordan and it's just been ingrained more and more into the casual fan and media in the 2000s/2010s with Shaq, Kobe, T-Mac, Iverson, Lebron, Wade, Durant ect.


Youd think it was all about Lebron/Wade's killer instinct/athleticism/will-to-win that is entirely behind the Heat's success the way the game is presented too us. Backdoor cut probably isn't even a vernacular they're allowed to use on sports networks anymore :lol

It's similar to how people view Phil Jackson's Lakers and Bulls. People talk about the triangle, but many seem to consider it irrelevant because of the great players, when it was an essential part of those team's success.

No matter how great your stars are, or how much talent you have, you need the entire team to know what they're doing at both ends, and play together. If someone gets beat and there's consistently no help defensively, you're not going to win anything, and if you're not moving the ball, and players aren't moving without the ball, you're going to be very easy to defend.

[ripthekik]

It's always been this way. Basketball is always about "that dude" and not the entire team.

Also, basic marketing. Hero-ball creates stories. That brings jersey sales, merchandising, viewership. Money.

[chosen_wun]

No it hasn't, and being a basketball fan makes me a hipster?
Basketball fans watch games and couldn't care less about the dweebs who broadcast them.

I do agree that they need to start giving lesser players storylines, like when say Earl Clark or Chris Anderson etc. is tearing it up.

[CavaliersFTW]

Yeah, it's why people call a team like the Spurs boring despite the fact they're the most unselfish and well-coached team in the league. In general, people don't seem to understand the value of coaching which is why they wonder when a team like the Lakers struggles so much.

But basketball has been going in this direction for years. It started with the fascination of the Magic/Bird rivalry, then went to another level with Jordan and it's just been ingrained more and more into the casual fan and media in the 2000s/2010s with Shaq, Kobe, T-Mac, Iverson, Lebron, Wade, Durant ect.



It's similar to how people view Phil Jackson's Lakers and Bulls. People talk about the triangle, but many seem to consider it irrelevant because of the great players, when it was an essential part of those team's success.

No matter how great your stars are, or how much talent you have, you need the entire team to know what they're doing at both ends, and play together. If someone gets beat and there's consistently no help defensively, you're not going to win anything, and if you're not moving the ball, and players aren't moving without the ball, you're going to be very easy to defend.
I love catching Spurs games, that teams offense keeps everyone moving well without the ball - which is totally opposite of say, when Lebron played with the Cavs. In the Lebron-Cavs era Lebron's "teammates" weren't the problem, our (lack) of a moving team-offense was. Basketball involves all 5 players working together with or without the ball. Not 1 man dribbling at the top of the key "imposing his will" onto another team while 4 others stand around waiting which is often what happened with my team in the Lebron-Cavs era. The ESPN coverage loved presenting that too, even thought it was TERRIBLE basketball. They thrive off heroball. The National media always covered Lebron, and almost never "teams" like the dominant Spurs unless the Spurs forced the media to give them attention by winning a title. But even then it was presented like it was all about Ginobli, Duncan or Parker - saving the day/series whoever did better on a given night was given credit for winning the game.

Now like someone said, the Heat have a great moving offense where (similar to with the Spurs) there's always people rotating and there's a lot of off the ball movement. Yet ESPN still presents the sport as if it's just hero-ball like in Lebrons Cavs days and they just want to talk about Lebron. Exept now they talk about one other guy (Wade) if their stats go lopsided. Then it's "Lebron disappeared" and "Wade stepped up". It's frustrating because if I miss a game I've got no hope of knowing what actually happened, the TV networks will just talk about some weak narrative. And it seems to be brainwashing future generations of fans into being just hero-stans, without actually presenting the truth about how/why some teams and players are winning and others aren't.

[MtMutombo]

Good comment that if you miss a game, youll never know the story of it.

and **** off whoever says modern coverage = MTV and its everywhere so deal with it. That is a shamefully dumb opinion to have.
Milwad was trying to start an account for people to watch Rockets games so ppl could actually chat about what was going on in the games. If you go to the games, you get a different story than you do if you lsiten. There are less conventional ways to have a deeper basketball experience. Dont just deal with it.

It's not basic marketing, either. What in "basic marketing" says that people are drawn to hero-ball over anything else? There's no book that tells you what people are going to eat up. Its ALOT more complicated than that. Basic Marketing LOL. Didnt know harvard was so well represented on ISH :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

[Akhenaten]

http://www.globalnerdy.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/grandpa_simpson_yelling_at_cloud.jpg

:roll:

[PJR]

It's become more and more about the fulfilling of media narratives, than the actual game itself. It's pretty pathetic.

[plowking]

This seems to be another thread created by you which is more about your underlying bias and obsession against one player, then what you actually pose your threads as.

[Colbertnation64]

http://dubsism.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/george-mikan-marquee.jpg

[Legends66NBA7]

i agree and its awful. get used to it.

espn is to sports now as mtv is to music.

And I don't watch either.

So, you don't have to watch it to get coverage or "get used to it". I feel you can get so many different forms of information online.


This seems to be another thread created by you which is more about your underlying bias and obsession against one player, then what you actually pose your threads as.

Not really, since the OP and I have talked about this conversation before.

[Rubio2Gasol]

Hubie,Fratello,Weber all do a relatively decent job in breaking down the game , but I genuinely hate that idiots who know less about basketball than a 6 year old are getting paid millions to talk garbage.

[CavaliersFTW]

I'm going to get mocked for this and have more "old man" jokes (despite being only 26 years old) but I'm going to post an example of what is being shown today for fans to experience the game of basketball vs what was being shown, say... in the 1960's, and 1970's

------------------------------------------------------------------

Short sports segment from 1960 on the 1960 Olympic basketball team
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TL2zjev335Q
Explains some of the ins and outs of the game with some footage of team ball. Lots of use of words like "team".

Short sports segment from 1973 on the 1973 ABA ASG
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9VayNJ9G2s
Explains some of the ins and outs of the game with lots of footage. Plenty of coverage of everyone, majority of clips shown is of great team plays.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Sports segment on the 2012 Olympic basketball team:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Nboi2vwYmg
Non-stop hero-name dropping.

Sports segment on the 2013 NBA ASG:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pR2Til9KaqE
"KOBE AND LEBRON" - again, just hero name dropping - with some "stats" (of the hero's in question). No coverage of the teams, whole game, or other players.










I don't care that we have shows like ESPN first take, but I do care that we DON'T have some sort of channel or program we can turn too to get actual basketball insight presented too us today. There should be shit out there today that is way more educational than everything I've seen so far. Nobody is actually learning the game anymore with the kind of stuff presented today, we're just learning about hero's. It's embarassing how little information is presented about basketball today on "Sports" networks. It's just hero-talk.

[Rubio2Gasol]

Stats - and the extent to which they have penetrated all sports talk is a huge reason for this. Before someone cares to explain what players do for a team they just call out their stats.

Makes it impossible to have an actual basketball conversation.

[KyrieTheFuture]

All sports are headed this way, QB's in football and now even Baseball is getting this treatment which is hilarious. They make it seem like one pitcher or power hitter is the reason for a teams success

[Da KO King]

The "dumbing down" began with ESPN. They create heroes/legends. That's why Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, and Michael Jordan are the Holy Trinity of the sport. They are the first NBA players of the ESPN era of sports media coverage.

[CavaliersFTW]

This seems to be another thread created by you which is more about your underlying bias and obsession against one player, then what you actually pose your threads as.
No, this is a genuine complaint about the presentation of the game today. It's not about your hero. In fact, my complaints about ESPN and the overall presentation of basketball today is probably the underlying reason why you worship your "hero" the way you do and think everyone is out to get him and hate him.

[FKAri]

This has always been the case. This is not new and it happens in every sport. Sports is soap opera. It's not marketed to people who enjoy watching the sport at the highest level but to fans of teams and players who want to cheer their favorites on while watching the opponent fail.

[ShaqAttack3234]

I love catching Spurs games, that teams offense keeps everyone moving well without the ball - which is totally opposite of say, when Lebron played with the Cavs. In the Lebron-Cavs era Lebron's "teammates" weren't the problem, our (lack) of a moving team-offense was. Basketball involves all 5 players working together with or without the ball. Not 1 man dribbling at the top of the key "imposing his will" onto another team while 4 others stand around waiting which is often what happened with my team in the Lebron-Cavs era. The ESPN coverage loved presenting that too, even thought it was TERRIBLE basketball. They thrive off heroball. The National media always covered Lebron, and almost never "teams" like the dominant Spurs unless the Spurs forced the media to give them attention by winning a title. But even then it was presented like it was all about Ginobli, Duncan or Parker - saving the day/series whoever did better on a given night was given credit for winning the game.

Now like someone said, the Heat have a great moving offense where (similar to with the Spurs) there's always people rotating and there's a lot of off the ball movement. Yet ESPN still presents the sport as if it's just hero-ball like in Lebrons Cavs days and they just want to talk about Lebron. Exept now they talk about one other guy (Wade) if their stats go lopsided. Then it's "Lebron disappeared" and "Wade stepped up". It's frustrating because if I miss a game I've got no hope of knowing what actually happened, the TV networks will just talk about some weak narrative. And it seems to be brainwashing future generations of fans into being just hero-stans, without actually presenting the truth about how/why some teams and players are winning and others aren't.

Yeah, the Cavs offense or lack thereof was a big reason for their 2009 loss. Not much ball movement or player movement, and the result was Lebron averaging 39/8/8 while his teammates pretty much watched. There was a lot of talk about Lebron losing, and his teammates deficiencies, but not as much about why his teammates weren't involved or Mike Brown failing to make adjustments to Orlando's offense which is why Howard and Lewis killed them all series and why the 3 point shooters continued to get open shots.


Stats - and the extent to which they have penetrated all sports talk is a huge reason for this. Before someone cares to explain what players do for a team they just call out their stats.

Makes it impossible to have an actual basketball conversation.

Yeah, stats are fine to some extent, but the last decade or so has gotten ridiculous. Basketball is the sport where the least of what goes on can be accounted for with stats, yet we see people mash up all the stats into these ridiculous formulas with subjective values given to each part of the game, subjective adjustments and some flat out assumptions. It's a sad commentary that people actually give these ridiculous formulas credibility.

They're ridiculous even in a sport like baseball which has always been more of a numbers game(virtually every time baseball is discussed on ESPN you'll hear garbage like WAR mentioned) and even more ridiculous when applied to basketball. You'll actually hear nonsense like PER and win shares mentioned on TV at times, and I cringe when I do.

[CavaliersFTW]

This has always been the case. This is not new and it happens in every sport. Sports is soap opera. It's not marketed to people who enjoy watching the sport at the highest level but to fans of teams and players who want to cheer their favorites on while watching the opponent fail.
Did you not see the videos I posted? No it has not always been that way. It became that way over a period of time and from what I can tell has gotten progressively worse through the decades and is flat out awful now. There will always be some avenue for the "dumb down" version - and there always has even in the past, such as poorly written newspaper recaps by bias journalists and such. But the mainstream video presentations of games back then was focused on educating fans on the game not plugging hero's into everyone's mind. There is quite literally no mainstream avenue for actual intelligent basketball segments today. The NBA and other sports networks used to have a deliberate emphasis on educatition about the game. Perhaps for $$$ things changed. But they need to bring back some sort of educational interest in the game for at the very least, the sake of integrity. There are some ACTUAL basketball fans out there. Not everyone just wants to hear Skip and SAS yell at each other while dropping Kobe or Lebron's name 50 times in 5 minutes.

[nosfan773]

I love catching Spurs games, that teams offense keeps everyone moving well without the ball - which is totally opposite of say, when Lebron played with the Cavs. In the Lebron-Cavs era Lebron's "teammates" weren't the problem, our (lack) of a moving team-offense was. Basketball involves all 5 players working together with or without the ball. Not 1 man dribbling at the top of the key "imposing his will" onto another team while 4 others stand around waiting which is often what happened with my team in the Lebron-Cavs era. The ESPN coverage loved presenting that too, even thought it was TERRIBLE basketball. They thrive off heroball. The National media always covered Lebron, and almost never "teams" like the dominant Spurs unless the Spurs forced the media to give them attention by winning a title. But even then it was presented like it was all about Ginobli, Duncan or Parker - saving the day/series whoever did better on a given night was given credit for winning the game.

Now like someone said, the Heat have a great moving offense where (similar to with the Spurs) there's always people rotating and there's a lot of off the ball movement. Yet ESPN still presents the sport as if it's just hero-ball like in Lebrons Cavs days and they just want to talk about Lebron. Exept now they talk about one other guy (Wade) if their stats go lopsided. Then it's "Lebron disappeared" and "Wade stepped up". It's frustrating because if I miss a game I've got no hope of knowing what actually happened, the TV networks will just talk about some weak narrative. And it seems to be brainwashing future generations of fans into being just hero-stans, without actually presenting the truth about how/why some teams and players are winning and others aren't.

I'm with ya brother. You're not an old man by saying this, just in a pretty small minority. Its where the money is and everything trends to what sells the best eventually. Luckily team-ball still beats hero-ball most times so its not going away as much as the ESPN brass would like it to.

[Bandito]

[

Yeah, it's why people call a team like the Spurs boring despite the fact they're the most unselfish and well-coached team in the league. In general, people don't seem to understand the value of coaching which is why they wonder when a team like the Lakers struggles so much.

I honestly didn't know coaching was that important until last year with the Knicks. The difference between Woodson and pringles is like the sky and the earth. That is when I started to admire good coaching and what makes coaches like Pop and Phil so effective.

[Goldrush25]

ESPN, NBAtv, TNT. All of it.

NBA analysis today is all about hero-name dropping. "Can Kobe/Lebron/Durant pull out this win" Did "Kobe/Lebron/Durant" do something athletic tonight.

Nobody talks about actual basketball on tv. Nobody talks about great on-the-floor teamball and playmaking. It's literally all about creating stories about _____ star player willing their team to victory against ______ star player on the opposing team and above the rim highlights. It's all smoke and mirrors and no meat and potatoes. I love watching older Lakers games with Chick Hearn or games where Bill Russell is doing color commentating because they actually add insight to plays that are developing and they didn't just glorify the stars. I do not like the way the game is presented today, it is presented for casual mainstream fans who just want a hero not actual sport/basketball fans who want to see and understand a good game.

That's life in the US. Everything and anything that makes money is produced for mass consumption. Goes for food, entertainment, everything. You have to do your own searching for hardcore/old school basketball coverage. That stuff doesn't get the ratings that would justify broadcasting it. It's just the way it is.

[Rake2204]

I don't care that we have shows like ESPN first take, but I do care that we DON'T have some sort of channel or program we can turn too to get actual basketball insight presented too us today.I feel your pain. Though, I do care that shows like First Take and Sportscenter are the way they are. I used to be able to count on Sportscenter to provide an informational and succinct wrap up of all that day's sporting news and events. Now it is a monster largely made up of your aforementioned hero talk, rumors, speculations, and arguments (with an occasional 30 second Lakers highlight mixed in somewhere).

I'm not necessarily looking for Basketball 101 shows (though I wouldn't mind having one out there). I'd just like to be able to turn on ESPN and NBATV and not immediately feel frustrated with the nature with which they attempt to shove mindless drivel down our throats. Why can't there just be basketball highlights with the host leading the narrative and analysts providing actual analysis? Why does it always have to go like this:

Rick Kamla: Early third quarter, Brandon Jennings scooping inside for two...

Dennis Scott: HO! B-Jenn-Jenn slicin' inside for the scoop job!

Brent Barry: Yeah, Jennings did a great job of sliding inside there and you saw that with the scoop.

WHY!?!?!?!

[Heavincent]

You guys should check out the bballbreakdown youtube channel if you want more x's and o's talk http://www.youtube.com/user/bballbreakdown/videos

[CavaliersFTW]

You guys should check out the bballbreakdown youtube channel if you want more x's and o's talk http://www.youtube.com/user/bballbreakdown/videos
I know I've been a subscriber of his since almost the beginning, but see the problem is he isn't getting paid on TV to offer his well-informed opinion and share his knowledge with widespread fans. Skip Bayless and SAS are the "experts" that most fans are forced to see. Guys like Coach Nick need MUCH MORE exposure in the mainstream (because currently he and others who have his kind of knowledge get ZERO exposure - or in the case of former professioanls - aren't being greenlit to offer their legitimate knowledge of the game because it doesn't fit the script). Guys/shows like SAS/Skip on First Take need much LESS exposure and air-time. They need to at least share airtime with some legitimate shows. Youtube isn't good enough for a guy like Coach Nick.

[Leftimage]

I know I've been a subscriber of his since almost the beginning, but see the problem is he isn't getting paid on TV to offer his well-informed opinion and share his knowledge with widespread fans. Skip Bayless and SAS are the "experts" that most fans are forced to see. Guys like Coach Nick need MUCH MORE exposure in the mainstream (because currently he and others who have his kind of knowledge get ZERO exposure - or in the case of former professioanls - aren't being greenlit to offer their legitimate knowledge of the game because it doesn't fit the script). Guys/shows like SAS/Skip on First Take need much LESS exposure and air-time. They need to at least share airtime with some legitimate shows. Youtube isn't good enough for a guy like Coach Nick.

Like you, I prefer more in-depth and less sensationalized analysis than what the mainstream has to offer. But this is the case in any medium. Fact is, a lion's share of nba viewers are casual fans. They don't want the x's and o's, they want the Oh's and Ah's, and that is perfectly reasonable...

Gotta dig a little deeper for the good stuff. This has always been true.

[crisoner]

http://www.globalnerdy.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/grandpa_simpson_yelling_at_cloud.jpg


LMAO

Man I'm starting to become that way as well. lol

[CavaliersFTW]

Like you, I prefer more in-depth and less sensationalized analysis than what the mainstream has to offer. But this is the case in any medium. Fact is, a lion's share of nba viewers are casual fans. They don't want the x's and o's, they want the Oh's and Ah's, and that is perfectly reasonable...

Gotta dig a little deeper for the good stuff. This has always been true.
Again though, it hasn't always been like this, and we shouldn't have to settle for it either. In fact literally the opposite was true 40+ years ago. The "ooh's and ah's" plays were ones that used to be hard to come by in coverage about the league and the intellectual ones were the norm. I've been skimming through basketball videos from every decade all day today and I'm noticing the 1980's is when content started getting over simplified and hero-fied. Now into the '10's it's literally flip flopped and there is literally nothing intellectual presented on tv about the game anymore. Surely there should be some broadcasted programming oriented to fans with higher IQ's. Heck I even remember a few years ago I used to enjoy a few of Kevin McHales breakdowns. But he's gone and replaced with Shaq who's just there for more drama. There's nothing to watch on tv unless you want a good laugh, or catch the actual games. If you need a recap or would like to learn some more insight about the game or some teams your SOL.

[ThaRegul8r]

Again though, it hasn't always been like this, and we shouldn't have to settle for it either. In fact literally the opposite was true 40+ years ago. The "ooh's and ah's" plays were ones that used to be hard to come by in coverage about the league and the intellectual ones were the norm. I've been skimming through basketball videos from every decade all day today and I'm noticing the 1980's is when content started getting over simplified and hero-fied. Now into the '10's it's literally flip flopped and there is literally nothing intellectual presented on tv about the game anymore. Surely there should be some broadcasted programming oriented to fans with higher IQ's.

Unfortunately, this is true of visual media in general. The belief is that in order to achieve mass appeal, one must "aim low." High IQ fans are not who they're targeting, as there aren't enough of them for them to concern themselves with. As Leftimage said, the lion's share of NBA fans are the casual viewers, so they're who it's geared for. Mass appeal is the goal, hence the simplism and sensationalism, since that's what "most people" want to see.

[diamenz]

remember back in the eighties when the play by play announcing was so good, you could look away from the tv and still be painted a perfect picture? it was like listening to the radio so to speak.

[2LeTTeRS]

You would think that with all the networks that show sports now that someone would get back to the basics and start covering sports the way they deserve to be covered.

[Amar'e_Juwanna]

A little OT...

When it comes to local media coverage of NBA, I feel like smaller market teams, those which usually do not have the "heroes" that mainstream media talks about the most, have a problem which is different but which springs from a similar place... Homerism.

watching league pass, and being a knicks (as well as mets) fan, I am disgusted by the amount of homerism displayed by professional commentators. Is it really too hard to allot any, ANY, respect to the opposition? obviously i'm spoiled by having walt clyde frazier and mike breen, who are two of the best in the game, but its just ridiculous. If i had more that 100 posts or whatever the number is, I would make a thread about it. I'd probably mention Tommy Heinsohn in the OP.

Clyde was the reason for this post as he is constantly dropping not only classic clyde-isms, which I understand are not to everyone's taste, but also basic bball knowledge and strategy. Along with his extensive vocabulary, delightful vocal tone, and aforementioned unbiased (especially for a former Knick) position, this is why I place him above most other NBA color announcers. Hubie and Van Gundy are up there too for me, so its not like I have a NY bias or anything...

[La Frescobaldi]

[ I honestly didn't know coaching was that important until last year with the Knicks. The difference between Woodson and pringles is like the sky and the earth. That is when I started to admire good coaching and what makes coaches like Pop and Phil so effective.

I have an old friend that I've been trying to get on ISH for a couple years..... all he follows is coaches. He has gotten autographs of assistant coaches from like 1978 Bucks or the 90s Griz........ guys nobody ever heard of, he claims how they incremently shifted the game over the years, tiny little improvements in defense that came from guys like Brad Greenberg on the '80s Knicks. Whoever heard of him? Rudy says he came up with a defensive rotation that is used all over the country.... don't ask me :confusedshrug: or Cliff Ray.... to me he's the center on the 75 Warriors, right? but he's been coaching in the League for aeons and lotta players love the guy to death. Or Jimmy Cleamons.... P Jax always showered the love on that guy for the way he got players to go to the wall for the team... dude coached the Bulls and did okay.... coached the Lakers and did okay....
yeah there's a lot to that, no question

[Maniak]

thats because the nba revolves around kobe, lebron, durant, etc. everyone else is irrelevant

the game sucks pretty badly, to be honest.

as long as "superstars" get superior treatment the nba will always be shitty unless you like really non-fundamental and solid basketball and/or are dumb.

[MARLO]

The evolution of twenty-four hour sports media coverage and technology combined with celebrity worship has brought us here.
The NBA decision to specifically market individual players instead of teams; exploiting these social trends, has brought us here.
What we have now is a 24/7 media conglomerate(ESPN) that exploits any tidbit of sports news in an all consuming, unsatiable thirst. It gleefully feeds into the emotions of sports fans with overdramatic rise-and-fall accounts of their built-up hero's and martyrs, creating news mutants along the way, such as Tim Tebow and Jeremy Lin.
What we have is basketball in an ADHD age, where most people just watch the game recap and and whatever 2 minute blurb is being shouted by a sportcenter talking head. The actual fans come to places like this. You ever get into a good basketball discussion on the street or in a bar with a knowledgable person?
It doesn't happen often..
Most "fans" will usually just recite some sportcenter feel-good crap about whichever superstar is currently being hyped.

[luckylucy]

You guys should check out the bballbreakdown youtube channel if you want more x's and o's talk http://www.youtube.com/user/bballbreakdown/videos

I subscribed to that channel some years ago, I don't know if you guys know of another channel like this, it would be great.

[treadster]

yeah, but they also need that superstar talk to gain attention. no one want's to hear small market team or player on regular basis, they need that attention to keep them business alive.

[Dro]

Good thread...I agree with the OP...

[Dro]

yeah, but they also need that superstar talk to gain attention. no CASUAL FAN want's to hear small market team or player on regular basis, they need that attention to keep them business alive.
Fixed...TRUE basketball fans enjoy good basketball and enjoy hearing about who is playing good basketball, regardless of what city its in...

[Anaximandro1]

The NBA decision to specifically market individual players instead of teams; exploiting these social trends, has brought us here.
This

The NBA is a hype machine designed to lure casual fans.



I love catching Spurs games, that teams offense keeps everyone moving well without the ball
I'm guessing you haven't watched a Spurs game since Feb :lol

the Spurs are playing truly terrible basketball right now :(

[JohnnySic]

I agree with the OP. The was the NBA is covered and presented is an embarassement. It really is little better than pro wrestling. Nothing wrong with wrestling; at least they're open about the fact that its all a show.

Solution?

- Dont watch ESPN
- Dont talk shop with casual fans

Find knowledgeable fans, and talk with them. The internet makes this easy.

[andremiller07]

Find knowledgeable fans, and talk with them. The internet makes this easy.

Yeah completely agree with this great point even tho at times it seems like trying to find a needle in a haystack. Even tho the most internet sites are filled with trolls/idiots if you use your ignore tool properly its really not that bad and there are a number of people on here who I always check in to see what there two cents is on a matter.

[ILLsmak]

Rick Kamla: Early third quarter, Brandon Jennings scooping inside for two...

Dennis Scott: HO! B-Jenn-Jenn slicin' inside for the scoop job!

Brent Barry: Yeah, Jennings did a great job of sliding inside there and you saw that with the scoop.

WHY!?!?!?!

haha. It's general stupidity in the human race, tho... everything is dumbed down. I don't think many people understand stuff. I was reading this:

http://www.evolveidea.com/creativity/creativity%20and%20the%20levels%20of%20knowing.php

It seems like more and more people are not even on the 2nd level. They just hear and say "it must be true because I heard it." So many people say things that are just wrong or that may be right, but the reason why they think it's right (that is, the argument they use the fact to prove) is wrong.

I think of commentary as comedy. I don't look for insight.

-Smak

[K Xerxes]

The best teams always win championships, not the best players. The best players can help make their team better, but on a bad team, they have no shot. And, by team, I also mean the coaching, which is arguably the most underappreciated aspect of basketball. I value a play to get a role player an open shot at the end of the game rather than a contested jumpshot by a superstar. Always. Doesn't work always, but works out better in the long run.

[I.R.Beast]

The recycled, tired cliches, counter-arguments, and arbitrary stats are what get me most. I blame ESPN primarily for lowering the intelligence of basketball followers by pushing their TV "analysts", bias web content, and contrived first take debates.

Examples of eye-rolling commentary:
"makes players around him better"
"replace player x with player y and the team is better/worse"
"team is better without star player x"

Too many variables to make simple-minded statements and pass them off as credible.
I am with you 100% on this one bro. They do it all without using any context.

[MtMutombo]

D League now live-streams its games on youtube.

With online streaming sites like VIP BOX and live-stream youtube, maybe its possible (or near possible) to cover live games, yourselves... There's alot of potential in that.
Would also set a fire under ESPN's legal team's a$$ but you cant take on the internet.

"Never get involved in a land war IN ASIA"

[rlee]

Cavaliers, you are so right. Listening to all the home market analysts on League Pass this year, it was clear that there only a very few that call the game the right way. Matt Guokas (Orlando) stands out. Ditto Fratello (Nets).
Only a few others: the best of the rest are probably Jack Armstrong (Toronto)and Fiorentino (Miami). Scott Hastings (Denver) has improved a lot over the years and now does a good job. Malik Rose (6ers): not bad. I wonder what you think of the Cavs' Austin Carr - to me, he never seems to say anything particularly insightful. Here in Sacramento, Jerry Reynolds really "dumbs it down".

[secund2nun]

My biggest problem is when the NBA artificially creates a superstar like Rose or Harden through undeserved hype in order to increase ratings to the casual fan. That is the worst of the worst. They will always ignore "boring" defense, rebounding, and big men and give all of the success to flashy perimeter players no matter how inefficient they are.

The dumbing down can be annoying as well.

[michaelray]

ESPN, NBAtv, TNT. All of it.

NBA analysis today is all about hero-name dropping. "Can Kobe/Lebron/Durant pull out this win" Did "Kobe/Lebron/Durant" do something athletic tonight.

Nobody talks about actual basketball on tv. Nobody talks about great on-the-floor teamball and playmaking.

Its just a totally different Era.

Its a transition from "Team Basketball Age" to "Hero ball Age".

And its from a "two-point league" to a "three-point league".

Also look at the way they dribble, until the 80s they're not allowed to palm/carry/travel like the stars did now. It starts with MJ (dribble from side of the ball to change direction) and MJ did get away a bit, But today's player benefit a lot more.

The rules are changed to open up the middle, streetball-type play are encouraged to bring more entertainment.1-on-1,not 5-on-5,is what they want to transfer.

The emphasis of the league is once on "competitiveness", now on "business".

[rlee]

Michaelray: hand on the side of the ball is not palming/carrying. Per the NBA rules, the hand must be under the ball, bringing the dribble to a pause. http://www.nba.com/videorulebook/category.html?cid=77

[BlazersDozen]

Its the same way with baseball except MLB Network has some great analyst who break down everything. Harold Reynolds is dat dude!

[Frozen1]

I agree. Skip Bayless is one of this names who only discuss the star players stories and does not do an insight based on a team view.

I still laugh at first take episode when Mark Cuban OWNS him and let him speechless.

[pudman13]

Dick Stockton is the worst example of this, and he's been around forever. All he would ever talk about is how many lead changes the game had or who's the high scorer, or how the teams' stars were doing. The fact that hewas given so many high profile games shows that this is how the NBA wants to market itself.

[NBAller]

It's a business. I made a thread about this, but everyone looked past it.

I like to think of Gladiator times when talking about basketball, football, anything major that's held inside a arena.

Back in the Gladiator days, they would hype the baddest guy up. The baddest guys name would be spoken from everyones tounges. They're the main event. That's who people want to see.

apply that to today, and you get people like LeBron, Kobe, Durant, etc.

Hardly anyone back then just like hardly anyone now watches each pass carefully or the technique of the sword being swung.

On the flip side I remember guys like Barkley giving Spurs credit for playing basketball. But there's always going to the that next guy. Someone after LeBron will be talked about like MJ and Bron, and so on until they need to change it up.

They play for a living, and the businessmen hype these guys up for a living. Money's a major factor that musn't be ignored.

Take it to the park with the same people, and we have a whole different story.

It's also like if you want to see good driving (or good basketball) would you watch someone drive a fordfocus(kwame) or watch a lamborghini(bron)? Don't nobody give a shit about a fordfocus.

[chips93]

ive posted this at least once before, but it made a lot of sense to me.

chuck klosterman (a writer) explained it on the bs report once. its like, diehards who will actually appreciate more in depth analysis, we are gonna watch the game regardless of whether its dumbed down or not. We love the game too much, we are gonna watch it no matter how stupid the coverage is, if you are producing an nba show, you dont have to worry about this audience.

but its the fair weather fans you have to worry about. if you are the producer, you actually have to worry about these people watching.

So in essence, the nba is marketed to people who only kinda like the nba.

You dumb down the analysis so as not to alienate these fair weather fans. If a fair weather fan turns on TNT or ESPN, and sees the analysts talking about anything complicated, he wont understand it, and wont watch, and while us diehard fans might appreciate it and watch. But if the show has simple, easy to follow discussion, the fair weather fans can understand and enjoy it, and us diehards will watch regardless, because we actually love basketball.

[Pointguard]

Its funny sometimes to catch coaches in their attempts to dumb it down. You can actually catch Nate McMillian thinking of the the dumb down way to say things. So yeah it comes from the higher ups. Mark Jackson visibly went into shock at NBC's coercing him into another level of it. He got so mechanical that it totally took away his humor.

When Kobe was destroying the word team in the beginning of the year, you weren't supposed to mention it. I thought Worthy was going to get fired but he eventually changed his tone. Even the written press was at a loss as to what to say. Kobe was totally killing any chance of the best Center Forward combo of having big games but you had to say Kobe was carrying the very same team he was destroying and bringing down to humiliating levels. Articles like Kobe should pursue the scoring title were popping up. You wondered where were the articles that asked, can Kobe help right the ship by passing? This was just too much thinking.

No articles on who pulled Kobe's coat about changing. No articles on what was Kobe's priorities. No articles on, can a coach talk to Kobe. You didn't see one on Kobe's pacing problems over the past three years or the wear and tear of his long last three years. When Kobe rights the ship, they low keyed that as well. There will be no articles on the torch has to be passed now. While everybody with a thinking head is pondering should the team should be given to the guy who right now is the best center in the game if he stays? but you wonder if the dumb down wants it like that.

[chips93]

i have no problem with journalists, sure there are dumb ones out there, but there is plenty of great articles written everyday, you just need to know where to look.

plenty of articles were written criticising kobe's play at the start of the year.

[Pointguard]

i have no problem with journalists, sure there are dumb ones out there, but there is plenty of great articles written everyday, you just need to know where to look.

plenty of articles were written criticising kobe's play at the start of the year.
Where were those articles. Please share a couplel

[tobethdope]

what else wud u expect if even news-shows are merely entertainment-shows in disguise nowadays?

[wakencdukest]

ESPN, NBAtv, TNT. All of it.

NBA analysis today is all about hero-name dropping. "Can Kobe/Lebron/Durant pull out this win" Did "Kobe/Lebron/Durant" do something athletic tonight.

Nobody talks about actual basketball on tv. Nobody talks about great on-the-floor teamball and playmaking. It's literally all about creating stories about _____ star player willing their team to victory against ______ star player on the opposing team and above the rim highlights. It's all smoke and mirrors and no meat and potatoes. I love watching older Lakers games with Chick Hearn or games where Bill Russell is doing color commentating because they actually add insight to plays that are developing and they didn't just glorify the stars. I do not like the way the game is presented today, it is presented for casual mainstream fans who just want a hero not actual sport/basketball fans who want to see and understand a good game.


Chick Hearn was great. He called the game the way it was supposed to be done, play by play and still managed to entertain the viewers. He was also pretty objective, he would call the Lakers out when they weren't playing well. I've heard him say the Lakers were stinking up the joint plenty of times. Announcers and analysts today are pretty boring, and they talk a whole lot without saying much. That's why I don't watch pre game, halftime, or post game shows. There's nothing any of these guys can say that I don't already know.

[schism206]

ESPN, NBAtv, TNT. All of it.

NBA analysis today is all about hero-name dropping. "Can Kobe/Lebron/Durant pull out this win" Did "Kobe/Lebron/Durant" do something athletic tonight.

Nobody talks about actual basketball on tv. Nobody talks about great on-the-floor teamball and playmaking. It's literally all about creating stories about _____ star player willing their team to victory against ______ star player on the opposing team and above the rim highlights. It's all smoke and mirrors and no meat and potatoes. I love watching older Lakers games with Chick Hearn or games where Bill Russell is doing color commentating because they actually add insight to plays that are developing and they didn't just glorify the stars. I do not like the way the game is presented today, it is presented for casual mainstream fans who just want a hero not actual sport/basketball fans who want to see and understand a good game.

That's why I like certain announcers like Steve Kerr. He tells it like it is and has better insight than most, and doesn't get caught up in the star power as much.

[markymark]

The recycled, tired cliches, counter-arguments, and arbitrary stats are what get me most. I blame ESPN primarily for lowering the intelligence of basketball followers by pushing their TV "analysts", bias web content, and contrived first take debates.

Examples of eye-rolling commentary:
"makes players around him better"
"replace player x with player y and the team is better/worse"
"team is better without star player x"

Too many variables to make simple-minded statements and pass them off as credible.

Totally feel you man. That's why a lot of casual hoop fans blurt out sh*t like their facts since that's what they've been conditioned to believe. There's a lot of ways to manipulate fans' perception of a team or player by showing biased angles and making them appear factual.

Off-T, they should seriously ditch those coach interviews every other Q. Retarded as f*ck.

[JimmyMcAdocious]

Remember back in the day where being athletic and tall meant you had the opportunity to be the GOAT basketball player?

[Dr.J4ever]

ESPN, NBAtv, TNT. All of it.

NBA analysis today is all about hero-name dropping. "Can Kobe/Lebron/Durant pull out this win" Did "Kobe/Lebron/Durant" do something athletic tonight.

Nobody talks about actual basketball on tv. Nobody talks about great on-the-floor teamball and playmaking. It's literally all about creating stories about _____ star player willing their team to victory against ______ star player on the opposing team and above the rim highlights. It's all smoke and mirrors and no meat and potatoes. I love watching older Lakers games with Chick Hearn or games where Bill Russell is doing color commentating because they actually add insight to plays that are developing and they didn't just glorify the stars. I do not like the way the game is presented today, it is presented for casual mainstream fans who just want a hero not actual sport/basketball fans who want to see and understand a good game.

Well, I don't know if "nobody" today discusses it on tv. Doug Collins used to be pretty good at it(he should stick to tv and away from my Sixers). Overall, I agree, though. It's marketing, man. That's what sells at the end of the day.
Aside from TV, Charley Rosen discusses a very traditional view of basketball, and hates just like you the "hero ball" mentality. I can't stand hero ball mentality either, and it usually caters to younger and less sophisticated fans.

[Dr.J4ever]

Also, this "hero ball" mentality contributed to the US getting shut out internationally in basketball from 2002 to 2006. Twice, 02 and 04, we sent a rag tag team of individuals only to discover that Iverson and Marbury couldn't juke and crossover their way to the Olympic Gold against dug in defenses from the Euros and Argentinians, and even the Puerto Ricans. Surprise surprise, a team of individuals cannot beat a real team.

Sorry to say that Iverson contributed heavily to this "hero ball" mentality during the early 2000's. I love his competitiveness being from Philly and all, but he was the poster boy of "hero ball".

Fortunately, the influence of Coach K with Team USA, the influx of international players and concepts, plus rules changes in 2002 regarding allowing of zones and others have begun to change a lot of "hero ball" with teams like the Spurs leading the charge. It is still a problem, however.

[chips93]

Where were those articles. Please share a couplel

pretty much anything zach lowe from grantland writes is great

sbnation has a ton of great blogs, espns truhoop network too. id mostly read cavs blogs from there, but other teams' blogs are pretty good from bits ive seen.

draftexpress is great for draft stuff, hpbasketball is very good, but a bit, abstract? not sure how to describe it, but very different.

the point forward nba blog at sports illustrated is pretty good too.

or i just follow a handful of writers on twitter, and whenever they write soemthing, they will link to it, guys like; zach lowe, kevin arnovitz, beckley mason, tim ziller, jared dublin, brett korenmos, rob mahoney, john schumann, tom halberstroh, kirk goldsberry.

[michaelray]

Michaelray: hand on the side of the ball is not palming/carrying. Per the NBA rules, the hand must be under the ball, bringing the dribble to a pause. http://www.nba.com/videorulebook/category.html?cid=77

They cannot dribble from side of the ball from 60s to 80s.
Look at great ball-handler like oscar,pistol,tiny archibald ,isiah thomas,
If they could push the side of the ball to change direction,
it would be much more easier to penetrate.
its strictly called palming then.

http://i1.hoopchina.com.cn/u/1304/22/317/4261317/559d0d69big.gif

http://i34.tinypic.com/2vtp3dw.gif