Should we listen to Analysts/Former Players?

[Wade's Rings]

Former Players have a lot of Bias and talk nonsense. Barkley said post players need 1 move, then 10 seconds later says post players need 2 moves, then lists 3 of Kevin McHale's moves. Magic (I don't pay much attention to) is known to contradict himself according to other people.

Analysts like Skip Bayless, Bill Simmons, Stephen A Smith, Etc, all have Bias and talk nonsense some/all the time. Skip (who is right a decent amount), Stephen A with LeBron Homerism, Bill Simmons ( I just don't like him lol).

They don't usually don't look at stats and use the "eye test" which is Agenda based and tend to fill average Basketball Fans Heads with Nonsense.

I am a bit Bias towards Barkley because of His Wade hate but my Question is do you guys listen to what they say? Do you respect former players as players but not analysts? Do you take what they say with a grain of salt or just ignore them in general?

[ShawkFactory]

They're the media. I could explain to you what's wrong with that but it would take a while.

Take everything with a grain of salt.

[Milbuck]

They're the media. I could explain to you what's wrong with that but it would take a while.

Take everything with a grain of salt.
Pretty much this.

IIRC a few weeks ago Barkley was asked to name 5 players on the Bucks roster and his first guess was Jennings.

They have a ton of insight on some stuff (like what players are thinking during key moments of games, what goes on in the locker room, their takes on off-court stuff, etc)...but they have their fair share of retarded moments as well. Just gotta view it for what it is, entertainment.

[GimmeThat]

My ego suggests you to "consider" what they say as writing and printing out a form for you to fill in.

[ralph_i_el]

Charles Barkley couldn't tell you the starting 5 for half the teams in the league. He pulls about 50% of what he says directly from his B-hole

[AirBourne92]

Dude, when it comes to information, people are going to bias usually regardless.


Barkley is on TV, he has an agenda, and he has his own opinions coming from his own emotions--he just seems like an emotional person.

ESPN is completely editorial and bias, i don't know why people even take them seriously.

Combined, the whole system with the NBA and media is obvious.

Why do journalists decide who gets MVP, DPOY?

It's marketing. Do you seriously think there are new "best players" each year as the MVP changes it's recipient each year?

A player on a shitty team can't be valuable beyond measure?

Best thing to do, as with ANYTHING in life, hear all sides of the story, and form your own opinion.

[JT123]

Funny how OP accuses Stephen A of Lebron homerism, when everyone knows he's the biggest Wade apologist in the media. :oldlol: Every time he brings up Wade he always makes sure to mention what "close personal friends" they are. :rolleyes:
At the end of the day there is no such thing as an unbiased media source.

[Rake2204]

Taking things with a grain of salt is the absolute best approach. There's a lot of true and worthy things being said and written throughout the media, but they tend to come from different people at different times. Sometimes a particular analyst may be exactly on point, sometimes it'll seem like they're just saying something because they have on-air time to fill on a Wednesday afternoon, and sometimes what they mean to say will come out incorrectly with no chance of clarification.

I used to believe in the media a lot more frequently than I do now. I think I probably hit age 20 before I really began to step back and say, "Hey wait a minute... how can they be so sure?" I think the 2004 Finals is what really did it, when I saw a Pistons team that seemed prime to compete, yet I found myself surrounded with ESPN naysayers saying things like (paraphrasing), "Look how the Pistons celebrated after winning the Eastern Conference. They're satisfied. That was their championship."

[greatest-ever]

No, most former players don't know what they're talking about.

Did you see the Open court next 10 greatest? They spewed all kind of nonsense and said that Wade isn't a top 50 player ever and that Wilkins, Reggie Miller and Chris Webber are all better players than Wade. You had Shaq saying Penny is better than Wade even though he has worse stats, worse accolades and even worse longevity. You had Isaiah Thomas propping up McAdoo because of his ring as a role player. The reality when it comes to how Wade is perceived is, people have fresh in their minds the declining banged up version of Wade we've seen from 2012-the present and people forget that he was usually a top 3 player in his prime.

But yeah i don't take analysts' and former players' opinions serious at all.

[rezznor]

former players who have successfully transitioned into coaches and good former coaches should be listed to. somebody like JVG comes to mind.

guys like shaq and barkley are just personalities and are there for entertainment. shaq will always talk about how great he was and barkley will always hate the rockets. that's just how it's going to be.

kenny smith seems to know what he's talking about though and i seldom see bias from him.

[Patrick Chewing]

I could listen to Hubie Brown all day every day.

[Chadwin]

I could listen to Hubie Brown all day every day.

now this is the type of post you just love to see

[JohnnySic]

I'll take the analysis of former players over that of fat guys who never played (ESPN) any day.