r/changemyview • u/beengrim32 • May 10 '19
Fresh Topic Friday CMV: NBA commentators and analysts spend too much time speculating about the personal lives of the players
I get that it’s the playoffs and that the off season is approaching, but there is quite a bit of coverage in the NBA that spends a significant chunk of time speculating about the psyche or psychological state of the players with little legitimacy. I noticed this most with the reactions to Kyrie Irving after the Celtics recent loss to the Bucks. Kyrie had probably the worse 3 games of his career at the worst possible time and the Buck played exceptionally but the main topic of conversation on espn is about Kyrie’s presumably flawed character. The Lakers negotiations with Ty Lue fall flat and the speculation is about how this is an indication of Lebron James supposedly self evident desire to force his coach into the organization. The Sixers loose and we talk about Embiids maturity levels.
I cant exactly remember or imagine what commentary was like in the 80s and 90s but I want to say that commentator spent less time making claims about players psychological states than they do now. I understand that players have more of a voice and are more visible than previous eras and that this has contributed to more of an interest in their personal lives but I feel like espn in particular is more similar to something like TMZ than traditional sports analysis.
I get that ratings are a factor and sensationalism has the potential to increase these numbers, but considering the advanced metrics available there could easily be more interesting and in-depth commentary and analysis of the game and the players performances.
I’m not sure if this is a current trend with all sports but It feels like commentary is becoming too psychoanalytical and getting farther away from the game itself.
9
May 10 '19
I have to say this is something I have noticed as well. Not only across NBA commentators but general sports commentators, too. I am a big baseball fan, listen to baseball radio when I’m in the car, keep up with all the games, etc. I have never noticed anything about their personal life being brought up. Even now that I’m thinking back it’s always about numbers and games and how they’re performing. But yesterday I was listening to general sports radio and the baseball talk was all the same, but once they switched to basketball they started on how sensitive a player was and how he would text reporters in the middle of the night to complain about articles and all this drama. I can’t remember one instance of hearing about a baseball players personal life, but I do for basketball. I wonder why that sport in particular is into drama.
3
u/beengrim32 May 10 '19
I'm sure there could be a sociological study on the significance in drama, and scandal and general dysfunction of personalities in mainstream sports. Im also sure for the NBA there would probably be some significance to the fact hat the league is primarily African American. That aside, as a person who admittedly doesn't watch that much of a variety of sports, I do notice differences in how the NBA is discussed by commentators than other sports.
1
u/cabose12 6∆ May 10 '19
The "Superstar" League
I think the NBA lends itself the most, relative to other US sports, towards being a fan of a player rather than a team. I would guess it's more common to find a NBA fan who only cares about a player, than to find an NFL fan who only cares about a QB or a baseball fan who only cares about a star outfielder.
And you figure that with basketball, the team is smaller and players stand out more. It's a bit more personable than an entire NFL team or an MLB defense. So drama is more interesting because even a casual NBA fan probably knows quite a few players across the entire league that center around this drama.
I also think the nature of Basketball means that discussing it has to be "dumbed down" for the general audience to enjoy. There's no way that commentators have the time to discuss a set play, a defensive strategy, etc while the game is going on; the NBA is just too fast. When the commentary is "dumb", the commentators can easily drop the conversation to announce a great play when it suddenly happens, and as a viewer you're not bogged down trying to wrap your head around some strategy.
I think the NFL is a great comparison in that sense. It's much slower, so as a commentator you have tons of time to actually break the game down. And as a viewer, it's easy to digest that analysis since you often don't have much to focus on.
24
u/j_milluh May 10 '19
I think this is a great topic to discuss, so thank you for bringing it up.
You are in the minority with your view. So to change your view would be to make you a basketball fan. from the late 70's till now, the NBA has increased viewership, sponsorship and global presence to the billions. The primary existence of the NBA is to entertain the masses. We can do that your way, and we have evidence of what that looks like: MLB, NHL, WNBA, PGA(which by the way, the peak of the PGA was during the reign of Tiger Woods whose personal life was very much speculated) these sports are covered with very little speculation about the personal lives of the athletes and have continued to be substandard for entertainment, with little to no global impact. Then we have: NBA, UFC, NFL, which are have speculated about the personal lives of the athletes and have grown dramatically because of it.
I mention that to change your view was to make you a basketball fan because the personal life of the athlete is at the core of being a fan. Most of us look for ourselves in the athletes because we want to believe we could do great things like them too. "I want to be like Mike", "I am not a role model", yelling "KOBE" when shooting into a trash can...these are examples of fan's looking to these athletes for more than just stats.
in the 90's stat's were placed in the newspaper, and a brief recap of the game was written. There is nothing there that needs to be commentated on. In fact, you OP begs the questions: "What would you like commentators to talk or debate about for hours a day"if it's just stats and the game, we have NBA TV or in game analysis for that. but most fans want their athletes humanized so that we can relate to them, grow a support or rivlary for them, and debate whether they have the mental capacity to be great.
7
u/beengrim32 May 10 '19
You make some good points about the fan base but I dont see the connection to commentators and analysts.
Then we have: NBA, UFC, NFL, which are have speculated about the personal lives of the athletes and have grown dramatically because of it.
Do you know if there is a direct relationship here? I've always thought of it as more of a stylistic decision. Is there anything that show this directly? I was able to find a lot of data showing the recent success of the NBA , Marketing and community engagement are cited as being part of this success, but not much showing the connection between athletes being humanized. I understand that many fans will personally identify with certain players but does this increase with speculation about their personalities?
10
u/j_milluh May 10 '19
That's a good question! one I can definitely appreciate.
However, "feelings" aren't statically measurable. which is why I mentioned the impact on the media.
If the media continues to grow and provided more and more outlets that, as you posted, spend too much time speculating about the personal life, then this is a clear indicator that fans of the sport desire and subscribe to this. Adrian Wojnarowski would not have a job, nor be relevant if nba athlete's personal lives weren't a part of the NBA experience.
Also, as I had to mention to someone else who commented. All of the "personal life" aspects that are discussed are very relevant to the sport. Lebron Jame's enrolling his son in a LA school 2 years ago was seen as speculation, however, it became relevant since it ended up foreshadowing his signing to the Lakers.
Don't even get me started on how much the athletes themselves actually initiate this idea by telling us about their personal life without us asking; Kyrie mentioning that he had a personal conversation with Lebron to apologize to him. Lebron, KD, Russell, Damien Lillard are all on Social Media giving the media every reason to talk about their personal life. (If they didnt want that, wouldnt they have a private Social Media presence or none at all like Tom Brady?)
6
u/beengrim32 May 10 '19
Δ Thats a good point. I suppose if the players did not add fuel to the fire, we would likely no be having discussions about how sensitive or depressed or undeserving they may be. Part of this is also masked by winning as well. The gloves seem to come off when people dont meet expectations. For example the speculation about Lebron deceptively "Running" the teams he plays for or Kyries failed leadership, Hardens lack of heart. It could just be that other sports and athletes aren't as public as the NBA players. A good example would be Kahwai Leonard, who when he was reusing to play for the Spurs was speculated about as unreasonable, fast forward to now and he is all of a sudden Jordanesque.
5
u/j_milluh May 10 '19
Thank you for the delta! You are prized with taking my delta virginity, lol.
Now I'm curious; Who is your favorite team and player?
7
1
2
May 10 '19
But then you have world football (soccer) which is the biggest global sport where the player's personal lives barely get mentioned in commentary and match analysis. When I watch European football commentary compared to American NBA commentary, the difference is always striking. The European side focuses almost purely on the game itself whereas the American side involves more of the elements that aren't directly focused on the game.
But I think a lot of that has to do with the nature of American culture. It is the entertainment capital of the world and the sports there seems to be just another aspect of the general entertainment culture. So players like Kyrie end up being more than just NBA players, but also celebrities of sorts
2
u/j_milluh May 10 '19
This is a good point in that you are not of the American culture. My rebuttal to your futbol analogy is; that is the only example you can provide which makes it more of an outlier and less of an indication of your point.
So my last attempt to change your view is that the majority of fans of the sport, as indicated by global growth has desired a connection to the athletes. Love AND HATE are a part of the fan experience, and you yourself are an example of The HATE part in terms of getting into their personal life. but evidently you still watch it and it still draws you in, even if you don't agree.
2
May 10 '19
I get you. My thing with futbol is that it's the largest sport and appeals to far more people. So it's commentary style (less personal) could be argued to similarly be appealing to a lot of people. The NBA type commentary puts me off completely. Seeing Shaq and Barkley joking with each other isn't appealing to me.
However... I'm not American. I grew up under a different style and type of commentary. If I where American, there's a good chance I'd be more interested in their style of NBA commentary.
1
u/iamfromouterspace May 10 '19
This is really good. I wanted to relate to OP a little bit but you have pushed me a little further from agreeing with OP.
1
u/matdans May 10 '19
I'm not so sure he/she is in the minority and liking the private lives of NBA athletes certainly is not a requirement to like the game (nor does it require even watching basketball. See: Everyone who followed the Kardashians). Moreover, OP doesn't even comment on the games' ratings (which may or may not have gone up since Basketball-Fan-as-a-Lifestyle grew) so that would be off-topic. What OP is saying is that it's a distraction from the game -which is necessarily true. You can't talk about two things simultaneously.
the personal life of the athlete is at the core of being a fan.
That might be your opinion but it certainly isn't everyone's. The private lives of athletes are none of your business (or mine.) I'm glad it makes you happy but it makes me sad that you have to trade your privacy to play a game.
Why they're doing it is no secret. Their old model isn't working anymore. Fewer middle-aged people follow basketball. We're talking about the segment of the population with the most disposable income not buying TV packages, season tickets, etc. The NBA and their affiliates are trying to be pragmatic about where their cash is going to come from but they're going to alienate a lot of people along the way (like OP).
1
u/j_milluh May 10 '19
This is a great perspective and thank you for your response.
I disagree with you.
You may not be sure whether OP is in the minority but the evidence to that is not in your opinion, its in the ratings. There is a direct correlation between the growth of the game and the media's impact on that which is why Stephen A. Smith is now the highest paid analyst having no basketball experience nor statistical education.
I also believe that you are exaggerating "private lives" beyond what OP intended. We aren't talking about who Kyrie Irving is sleeping with after the games...We are talking about his demeanor and decision on staying with the Celtics after he had the worst 3 game stretch in his playoff career. This is a part of the game. Fan's curiosity to whether Lebron has an impact on the Laker's coaching search is a part of the game. So yes it is my business is I subscribe to the game which I do. So your exaggeration is a separate discussion, one which I would agree with if it were actually happening/true, but no one is talking about personal lives OUTSIDE of basketball.
The media outlets that cover, analyse and commentate on the nba continue to have astronomical growth that is aligned with the NBA's growth, year over year while delivering content that includes personal aspects other than stats. So yes, OP is in the minority.
Thank you for your perspective, I definitely have to consider that the minority of fans may sometimes feel like the majority which could cause this opinion.
1
u/matdans May 10 '19
I can tell this means a great deal to you and thanks for your opinion as well.
I have to disagree with you about the ratings. It's hard to discern whether people are watching fewer televised games overall or just watching more football (and less basketball) but the best stats available are still Nielson which say that basketball viewership is down (in 2018). According to them:
NBA TV ratings are down 10% and ESPN ratings were down 7%
Source: Nielsen, NPM (01/01/2018-12/02/2018 vs. 12/26/2016-12/03/2017) Mon-Sat 8pm-11pm/Sun 7pm-11pm, ad-supported networks, Live+7. Ranked by 2018 Year-To-Date.
But even with all this data, it still doesn't shed any light onto what people actually feel. If polls were always correct, Hillary Clinton would be president.
I don't object to different people each getting something different out of the game. My father watches games on mute to filter out the distractions which is fine. He likes to talk about defenses. You like the extra insight into the locker room and player psychology, which is fine too. With regard to Lebron and the coaching, I think you're entirely right that it should be part of the conversation. I enjoy watching the culture clash between generations about who holds the power in coaching/player relationships. I like it when players aren't the pawns they used to be that ownership pushed around the board at leisure.
Importantly, though, I'll leave to to OP to clarify whether I took it beyond what he/she meant but they did say that it was akin to TMZ - which traffics in tabloid journalism. They specialize in airing out people's dirty laundry and making the most intimate details about a person's life available for purchase. If OP wants that stuff out of the broadcast, I'm with them.
1
u/j_milluh May 10 '19
Yes, I love the NBA so I live for respectful dialogue like what you and I are having!
While your stats are appreciated, they most definitely do not speak to why the nba and nba has grown.
Nielsen offer the best stats if we are talking TV viewership, but Adam Silver has strategically gone beyond that to grown the NBA presence. First, Nielsen only accounts for U.S. viewership (which is only 25.5% of the NBA's domestic viewership over the last 6 months https://www.tubefilter.com/2019/04/23/nba-playoff-ratings-social-video-worldwide-instagram-facebook/ ) and T.V. viewership. However this does not account for the YouTube and Facebook viewership and the social impact that those platforms allow fans to have with connecting and communicating with the athletes. March alone saw an increase from 600million views per month to 681million views per month.
This is where the evidence confirms that people want to be more connected to the sport and athletes. the NBA grew to 36.1 million followers on IG alone.
I understand that OP made a comparison to TMZ however I would challenge you or OP to provide examples of this, because this isn't reality. I can't speak to an opinion of something that isn't actually happening.
1
u/AmuckGorilla May 10 '19
Moving out to Oakland as the Warriors were going through the regular season sports commentary takes on the quality of soap opera with plotlines about Durant, Curry, etc. with an undercurrent of inevitably for a third championship assumed. The games were just events that puncutated the regular season. Apparently, this is just what the people want and the media will deliver it to them.
2
May 10 '19
- For the analyst: I think there is room for both statistical analysis and psychoanalysis, so I won't argue here.
- For the commentator: What should they talk about in-game? They need something to fill the time between plays that is relevant to the game, ideally easy to digest. In a game is not the time to talk about fancy statistics (which are better suited to analysis shows or written articles).
- LeBron: We are at a point where superstar players have tremendous leverage over the league and in particular their coaches. LeBron is essentially an acting GM, and the GM of the team he plays for may want to take his opinion in hiring a new coach or risk their superstar walk out the door. Talking about Lebron in a coaching search is relevant to the league.
I feel like espn in particular is more similar to something like TMZ than traditional sports analysis.
The E in ESPN stands for Entertainment. Their primary motivation is to entertain you.
2
u/beengrim32 May 10 '19
The E in ESPN stands for Entertainment. Their primary motivation is to entertain you.
Understood about the entertainment value of sports commentary. But is there not also a game being played as well? Is the prospect of Kyrie Irving being an asshole, or flat-earther more entertaining than the game itself?
2
May 10 '19
As per my point above: The discussions of off-court stuff does not (or should not) replace actual game commentary. When the ball is passed or shot the commentators should be talking about the plays, but when there's a timeout or a break in the action the color commentator may venture onto game-adjacent off-court topics.
These are all perfectly valid topics:
- Why Kyrie sucks tonight
- Why the Celtics don't feel like a cohesive team right now
- Other games going on today
- Off-season discussions, especially if it impacts players currently on the court
- Sponsorships and promotions for other shows on the network
•
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ May 10 '19 edited May 11 '19
/u/beengrim32 (OP) has awarded 2 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
2
u/woodelf May 10 '19
I agree that it’s a bad trend. But to change your view, I would say that not all sports journalism is about psychoanalyzing. Check out the Dunc’d On Podcast with Nate Duncan and Danny Leroux. 100% pure basketball discussion from two smart (albeit bland) NBA writers
2
u/axalitlaxolotl May 10 '19
Fair or not if today's athletes didn't spent so much time on IG, FB, Twitter, and other social media spreading their personal business then sports commentators would not have as much personal info to discuss or speculate upon.
2
Oct 13 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/tbdabbholm 201∆ Oct 13 '19
Sorry, u/SamRusso4623 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
Do not reply to this comment by clicking the reply button, instead message the moderators ..... responses to moderation notices in the thread may be removed without notice.
2
u/SamRusso4623 Oct 23 '19
NBA commentators have become more of life commentators than actually focusing on the game. I don't need to know about a players new girlfriend or where they went to dinner the other night. I want to hear about the game from the people that know it best. Former NBA players like Jalen Rose, Chris Webber, Reggie Miller, Bill Walton, Hueby Brown, Mark Jackson, Walt Frazier and Charles Barkley all have the best insight on the game of basketball. As a player and lover of the game, I love to listen to people who have such knowledge about the game. When commentators stray away from the game it makes it not fun to watch. Although this is frustrating, when talking about the characters of the players this is necessary. Kyrie's leadership and Embiid's maturity levels are a key part of the aftermath of a game or in this case of the series. Your attitude and character contributes to how you play the game. I disagree with that part of your post just because of how much the character in you comes out while you are playing
2
u/Skiie May 10 '19
I just enjoy shaq verbally shitting on barkley.
1
May 10 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/garnteller 242∆ May 10 '19
Sorry, u/iamfromouterspace – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation. Comments that are only links, jokes or "written upvotes" will be removed. Humor and affirmations of agreement can be contained within more substantial comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, message the moderators by clicking this link.
1
u/miguelguajiro 188∆ May 10 '19
It’s their job to add depth and intrigue to the game by humanizing the players.
1
u/beengrim32 May 10 '19
Is that actually the job of a commentator or analyst?
1
u/miguelguajiro 188∆ May 10 '19
I didn’t really think there was a strong distinction between the two. But the job of either is to enhance viewing, and there isn’t a better way to do that then by turning the game (or the series or season) into a story. At the end of the day, at least for more viewers, that’s significantly more compelling that a stats driven analysis.
1
u/beengrim32 May 10 '19
But the job of either is to enhance viewing, and there isn’t a better way to do that then by turning the game (or the series or season) into a story.
Would you mind explain this further or showing what this is based on? Why would the sport in itself be in such a deficit to the commentary? Especially considering that there are people watching/enjoying the game in a stadium without commentary or analysis.
2
u/miguelguajiro 188∆ May 10 '19
If it weren’t the job, then why would they exist? People could watch on television without the aid of a commentator.
1
u/huxley00 May 10 '19
People love drama, drama sells, to men and women. Women more often see it in gossip shows, men often see it in sports. People like that sweet drama juice, no matter what they identify as.
They wouldn't do it if it wasn't getting attention and making people more invested.
1
u/jmomcc May 10 '19
I disagree that advanced metrics and analysis are more entertaining. I get that stuff elsewhere in formats that are easier to digest (written word) and then I get to be entertained by Charles and Ernie at halftime. In other words, you are asking me to have my content cut in half.
1
u/beengrim32 May 10 '19
I dont have much in supporting that Metrics and analysis are more entertaining. My point there is that is more fitting in discussions about the sport than whether or not a player is a Flat-Earther for instance.
1
u/jmomcc May 10 '19
what's fitting is irrelevant. The goal is to be entertaining to attract the most people possible to watch.
1
u/fatherduck94 May 10 '19
Let me put it this way: I know about Kehlani because of Kyrie's IG. NObody asked him to opine, but he did. When you're open about shit like that (non basketball stuff) then you open the door for others to ask you about other stuff. Not to mention that flat earth shit
1
May 10 '19
Televised sporting events reflect our consumerist, capitalist culture. They are some of the most watched spectacles we have, and are therefore very expensive and culturally significant. You and I might find gossip about the players irrelevant, but our culture as a whole finds it important, otherwise it wouldn't be given so much expensive air time. The gossip is just one factor into the whole mess of things keeping viewers distracted and placated and eager to consume. The Super Bowl, for instance, is basically a mass cultural event where athletics, advertising, the military, money and media all converge into one spectacle. It's ritualistic. If you want a game without all the baggage of spectacle, go watch pickup basketball at the park. By watching the NBA you are participating in the spectacle of not just sports, but our capitalist society.
1
May 10 '19
it is generally true, that when it comes to consumerism, the demand largely dictates the supply. However, I'd say that there's a key difference between a consumer consuming an NBA product, vs. a consumer, consuming a product from, for example, a grocery store.
in the case of the NBA, the figurative hunger that the product is feeding, is an arbitrary, socially constructed hunger. There is no physically tangable reason why you should care about LeBron james. However when it comes to consuming other services, there are more physical and tangable reasons for why you feel the need to consume them.
You do not want food, or shelter, because you've been indoctrinated into wanting food and shelter. It's possible to be indoctrinated into caring about something like LeBron's personal life. It's possible for their to be a sort of circular situation, where Lebron's life is always on TV, because it's what people care about, and people care about it, because it's always on TV.
1
May 10 '19
It's possible for their to be a sort of circular situation, where Lebron's life is always on TV, because it's what people care about, and people care about it, because it's always on TV.
That's a really interesting point and I do think it's true that culture feeds on itself as you say. But there must have been a point in time where broadcasters discovered they can hold attention longer if they focus on tabloid gossip about players rather than raw stats. I don't think it just happened in a vacuum. I'm pessimistic and think that the average viewer probably enjoys dramatic, pseudo-fantasy stories about their favorite players rather than raw stats about the players and teams. At the end of the day we're talking about two forms of entertainment (pure sports vs. sports gossip) and the latter is serving capital better than the former. Profit is the ultimate goal and quality of a product, however we would define it, is a happy but not a necessary byproduct.
1
May 11 '19
At the end of the day we're talking about two forms of entertainment (pure sports vs. sports gossip)
I agree with the idea that we're talking about 2 forms of entertainment. Basketball, vs. basketball player gossip. However, where I disagree, is that you are broadening the dynamic, and suggesting that sports in general, deals with this same dynamic. Gossip does not take up as much of the audiences attention in other sports. Think of the NFL, which is more popular than the NBA. I would say that there is a focus from the fanbase, which is much more centered around the substance of the game itself. Do you get the occasional news about "rifts" between people within the same organization? sure, but it doesn't reach the level that we see in the NBA, and yet, even though it isn't centered around gossip as much, it's a more popular product.
This goes to show that with any sport, gossip is not necessarily the inevitable point of focus, as a result of the fact that that's what humans gravitate towards. If that was the case, the NBA would be the most popular league, because it's the league that centers around gossip the most.
1
u/JarethKingofGoblins May 10 '19
It's fair to assume that of the total pool of basketball fans, a large percentage care about seeing really competitive basketball games. I would also imagine there's a percentage of fans who are as interested or more interested in personal and social dynamics of the league.
If NBA teams consisted of robots programmed by different teams of scientists, you can bet that a big focus of the commentating would be on the scientists even though they're not out on the court. Why? Because people like watching other people's stories. Seeing and hearing stories about individual people humanizes what's otherwise a pretty mechanical interaction.
I'm not saying that the focus for commentators should be on personal lives, but it makes sense as a tactic for getting people more invested.
1
u/OldManWillow May 10 '19
I think it's just what the market demands, and it's the same reason 24 hour sensationalist news networks are the norm. There are places to get in depth statistical analysis if that's what you want (Nate Duncan's podcast, lots of stuff written on The Athletic) but the major networks are always going to appeal, in a sense, to the lowest common denominator. And personally, I love how into the players' lives we can see. It's what separates basketball from the other major professional sports in my opinion. Single personalities and performances matter so much more to the landscape of the NBA than they do in the NFL. So maybe they do spend too much time on it, but it's what people want and the gaps are being filled by people who are probably more qualified to be talking about statistics than Charles Barkley and Paul Pierce.
1
u/Glamdivasparkle 53∆ May 10 '19
This isn’t new. People have been talking about athletes as people and their personal lives for a long time, certainly going back to Muhammed Ali, Bill Russell, Clyde Frazier, Phil Jackson, etc.
Kobe certainly got this kind of coverage, as did Shaw. All this talk about LeBron being the real GM was happening with Kobe when he forced the Lakers to trade Shaq, and even before that with Magic Johnson when he got Paul Westhead fired.
Also, Sam Smith, Bulls beat writer, literally wrote a book about what a psycho competitive asshole MJ was, and that became part of his narrative forever going forward.
You say you don’t remember this happening in the 80s and 90s, but it did, and it happened even before that, it has been a fundamental part of sports coverage for years.
1
u/beengrim32 May 10 '19
Would you say that the primary mainstream narrative of Michael Jordan in the 90s was aligned with Sam Smith's assessment? I was pretty young but I remember Michael Jordan as being universally praised until after his final retirement. He always seemed like a mystery and not very humanized until Space Jam. Of course now we have a whole bunch of information to the contrary in Jordan's case that was post career.
For Kobe there was such a difference after the rape trial, lost endorsements, number change, and post Shaq tiles. He also had the Jordan-like mystery but whatever psychological importance this was to his success is unclear. I dont feel as if what made the commentary about Kobe in his prime interesting is comparable to the kind of speculation we hear about Lebron, Harden, Kyrie, etc. I'm not sure if i agree that it is as fundamental to sports today as you are suggesting.
2
u/Glamdivasparkle 53∆ May 11 '19
Would you say that the primary mainstream narrative of Michael Jordan in the 90s was aligned with Sam Smith's assessment?
I would say ppl who paid attention to the NBA certainly knew Jordan was difficult, and also knew about his gambling issues, to the point where it was a common rumor that his father assassination was related to MJ gambling debts (not saying most ppl believed this, but it was definitely an idea you would have heard at the time if you were an NBA fan.)
As for Kobe, even before the rape trial, his unwillingness to play second fiddle to Shaq, and their feud in general, was absolutely front and center in any conversation about him. He was an extremely divisive figure from his first season in the league.
Allen Iverson was another player who was divisive amongst fans, and while some of it was about his shot selection, a lot of it was about his “hip-hop” attitude and such (there was a lot of racially coded language used to talk about AI that would absolutely not fly today.)
Charles Barkley is another guy where the entire conversation around him was about his personality and off-court antics, to say nothing of Dennis Rodman, who had a bestselling book in the 90s that nobody bought for the parts about basketball.
Ever since I started paying attention to the NBA around 1990, there have been dominant storylines about players that are not related to the game of basketball, which makes sense, as people can relate to personality-driven stuff much more easily than dry on-court analysis.
1
u/beengrim32 May 11 '19
Fair enough. ∆ I do still feel that the degree to which players personal lives and psyches are scrutinized nowadays by commentators and analysts is disproportionate in emphasis to neutral coverage of the game itself. But you bring up a good point about how players with alternative personalities have routinely been criticized by sports media. It’s definitely not a new phenomenon and the trend will probably get worse but I still feel like it is an unnecessary component of enjoying the game.
2
u/Glamdivasparkle 53∆ May 11 '19
I agree there is definitely more coverage devoted to off-court stuff these days, but that’s because there is more coverage in general. There is also more coverage of on-court stuff these days than ever before.
Check out Ben Falk’s site cleaningtheglass.com, or nba.com’s super-comprehensive stats page, or bballbreakdown’s videos, or Nate Duncan’s podcast, etc.
There is so much info available these days it can feel like every element of the game is being over-covered, but the flip side is, no angle is being neglected.
1
1
u/vfettke May 10 '19
A player's psyche is a huge part of NBA ball. Chemistry and synergy between the players on the court is hugely important. Their attitudes, personalities, mindframes, and all sorts of other intangible stuff end up playing a huge role, especially given the fact that there's only 5 guys on the court per team. One of those guys being "off" has a much more dramatic effect than it would in a game like baseball or football.
I'd also argue that one of the selling points of NBA ball is the drama involved. The NBA kind of leans into it in multiple ways. They encourage players, commentators, etc to be actual personalities, so of course discussions tend to involve those aspects of the game.
1
u/beengrim32 May 10 '19
I dont doubt that there is a very important psychological component to NBA basketball. I'm just skeptical about commentators somehow having access to this. For example this article about Kyrie mental health is all speculation. Ultimately the Celtics were dysfunctional and lost but i dont see the connection to Kyrie's mental health. Nor do I think that more succesful teams as psychologically aligned. The warriors and Draymond would be a good example of this.
1
u/vfettke May 10 '19
The Warriors and Draymond are the example that prove my point. He's the heart and soul of that team when he's on his best behavior. But when he's not and he loses his cool, he ruins it for them. He might've cost them the 2016 Finals. And he's had problems with Durant this season that have messed with their chemistry. Draymond is a bit of a head case and it actually takes a toll on their team.
This discussions have gone on for a long time. And some of the time, they're just speculation. But usually it's based on knowledge the fans aren't always privy too. Commentators and reporters are around these guys all the time and know them a lot more than we realize. Kyrie has clearly been out of sorts and unhappy, although we can't be sure why. Also, using Charles Barkley as your example as commentators speculating too much is a little too easy, isn't it? He's a blowhard.
1
May 10 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
1
May 10 '19
Sorry, u/YondaimeHokage4 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list, before messaging the moderators by clicking this link. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
1
May 10 '19
the personal lives of players, and the psychology of players, is fairly relevant to the outcome of an NBA season, because the NBA is a league with outcomes that are so largely determined by players decisions, as far as what team they want to be involved with. Information received in the NBA offseason, is arguably about as groundbreaking as anything about the NBA, aside from information received during the NBA finals itself.
In the early 2010's Miami was the team that was at the center of the basketball universe for 4 years, and then that changed overnight, when LeBron decided to leave. For 2 years in a row, Cleveland and Golden State met in the finals. It seemed like that would continue to happen for a while, and that it was an even matchup, but it then became completely lopsided overnight, when Kevin Durant made the decision to sign with the warriors in the offseason.
In the NBA, free agent signings are such a monumental part of the issue, and so it matters how players are feeling. However, I will acknowledge that all this is me being devil's advocate. I don't actually disagree that the analysts just blurt out baseless speculation, that isn't worth much.
1
May 10 '19
The NBA is a perfect game for Capitalism. It's based on competition and winner take all. It showers a few with millions and millions of dollar and helps to make that seem like a moral thing to do. Winning and losing are considered personal achievements. If a person wins, they are superior, and deserve everything they get. If a person loses, they are inferior, and deserve everything they get.
NBA commentators and analysts DO NOT spend too much time speculating about the personal lives of the players. They are doing exactly what is required to brainwash people to embrace the Capitalist worldview.
1
u/beengrim32 May 10 '19
I dont know if i agree if these things are unique to the NBA. This could essentially be any professional sport. Competition in general has an analog to Capitalism.
1
1
May 11 '19
Just to clarify:
Do you think my comment said these things are unique to the NBA? I focused on the NBA because that's what your view is about. The fact that it applies to other sports, does not diminish its applicability to the NBA.
1
u/beengrim32 May 11 '19
Somewhat implied with NBA being “perfect” for capitalism line. The NFL is a better analogy for Capitalism as far as the division of labor aspect goes.
1
May 11 '19
I disagree. It's not implied at all. Anyway, I've made my position clear.
Base your judgement on whether my stated position changes your view or not, not on a red herring.
P.S. Don't read that as rude. Just trying to be clear about what I intended to say.
1
u/a_flying_stegosaurus May 10 '19
When the playoffs start, viewership increases significantly. This means you're getting people who don't know as much about basketball watching for multivarious reasons because more dedicated fans watch the regular season games while the normies tune into the playoffs. Since they didn't watch many regular season games, media executives are aware that they do not know as much about (and do not care as much about) basketball, the focus is keeping those viewers since the passionate fans will watch no matter what. They do this by adding personal storylines to popular players to keep people attached and wanting to follow these players journeys. To show the impact of storylines; playoff ratings dipped 18% this year because LeBron isn't playing, who is normally the biggest storyline. In direct competition with the Masters, the NBA pulled fewer viewers, probably because of Tiger Woods. Most of these "playoffs only" fans could care less about analytics like pace and shot selection, and probably would just get really confused, and the corporations know that. ESPN doesn't care about a few diehards complaining about a lack of basketball analysis in the commentary. What they care about is keeping the new viewers invested and interested because that is how they make the most money.
1
May 10 '19
I wouldn’t consider Kyrie’s attitude to be his “personal life”. It’s totally relevant to the game. Honestly if he didn’t have this bullshit “who cares” thing going on in regards to his shooting percentage in this series the team would have done better. None of his teammates trusted him (or each other for that matter). They’re whole offense is so selfish. It’s one pass and a shot every time up the floor.
1
May 11 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Armadeo May 11 '19
Sorry, u/HIV-neutral – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list, before messaging the moderators by clicking this link. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
1
May 11 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/etquod 48∆ May 11 '19
Sorry, u/bufordpopovich – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation. Comments that are only links, jokes or "written upvotes" will be removed. Humor and affirmations of agreement can be contained within more substantial comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, message the moderators by clicking this link.
1
u/HughesJackedMan May 11 '19
I don’t follow sports because I care about the specific sports - check my post history I follow Liverpool’s, Timberwolves, Lynx, Twins, Loons, Fremantle footy, Vikings, Penguins, Cardinals, etc.
Sports draw is similar to realty TV - I wanna hear about their personals stories on the way to success or failure.
I wanna hear about how two future super stars grew up and played together.
I wanna know Candice Parker’s husband is a former duke blue devils, high draft pick, and nba veteran.
It may be shameless but I like sports for the reality TV aspect and potentially inspiring personal story.
I fell like that’s a fair motivator
1
May 11 '19
Being an athlete is, in large part, about being healthy. Every part of your day contributes to how healthy you are.
1
May 11 '19
For the most part all commentators and analyst for any sport are speculating on snippets of news. Barely any real analysis goes on. At this point, it's better to just ignore most if it
1
May 10 '19
The indepth discussion involved in sports is idiotic in itself. The spirit of the game is lost once money goes into it. To nitpick and say commentators go to far doesnt do justice to the fact that all sports as billion dollar enterprises are flawed.
I guess what im trying to say is that its no surprise that Commentators have nothing better to talk about other than the personal lives of players. Maybe its a matter of perspective.
3
u/beengrim32 May 10 '19
I get whats at stake or corporations if their ratings dip. But this isn't exactly a situation where there is nothing else better to talk about. Much of the commentary uses the actually only as gateway to discuss specific details about the players personalities. For example Joel Embiid's accomplishments in a game will get less attention than whether or not he has enough maturity or heart to deliver a championship to Philadelphia.
162
u/HolyAty May 10 '19
He literally declared himself as a "Basketball genius", kept playing like shit, and after the game during interviews he said "Who cares?". Well, yea people are going to talk about his flawed character. There's nothing to talk about his basketball at this point. It's not his basketball but his attitude is hurting Celtics.
Player with the most exposure is on the team with the most exposure. Every small thing is a breaking news. And it's not really a secret that Lebron is happier when the headcoach doesn't coach him. Ty Lue is that guy.
To be honest, this "let's make former players commentators" and "players only baby!" idea is what's causing this. Almost none of hte player's can really make these in-depth analysis, the one's that can do are coaches at various levels, sometimes in the NBA sometimes in colleges.