Trump (who I despise with every fibre of my being): “Tigers are striped”
I don't think data/graphs are being used to tell folks' that their feelings are wrong that they don't like the product; as I've stated throughout these threads, we all have our preferences, which are entirely subjective and largely based upon the eras that we grew up on.As the dude from that tweet articulated in an essay he wrote years ago, sometimes solving a sport's inefficiencies can ruin what made the sport enjoyable. The athletes being reduced to automatons - as means to number-crunchers' desired ends - is just not a winning formula. And here's the thing about sports and politics: if the people are telling you "I don't like this" you can't keep throwing data in their faces saying "your feelings are wrong" and expect to come out on top. That's not how those arenas work. The consumers' feelings matter a lot, actually, and have to be considered. This isn't an argument in the classroom - you need buy-in from the audience. Pedantic scolding will not carry the day for you here. "Look at this graphic - I will prove to you that your emotions are mathematically unsound" is an extremely shortsighted tact to take.
It's important to remember we have this style of basketball in large part because the NBA rules were tweaked years ago because the product was stale and ugly. And now it feels the correction has become an overcorrection. Rules might have to be changed again. Analytics is unquestionably important in allowing people in the league and in the audience better understand the complexities of the sport. But there has to be strategic and complex thinking about the entertainment appeal as well. There's a balance to strike. Especially in this country where entertainment as sports is gaining a stronger foothold (Jake Paul being the extreme example, UFC being the major "sport" example, and NFL being the example of the perfect American sports product that actually fails upward because of its essential ingredients), you can't forget that sports that aren't purely entertainment have to at least remember to be entertaining to its fans. The NBA does have some reasons for concern to that end.
You're miscontruing the argument here.
And you're free to feel that way.
Except that is just your opinion.
It's to point out that y'all cats who claim the NBA has declined in viewership are just as disingenious as MAGA about it. Y'all are even using Right-wing propoganda pieces as sources to your claims.
People just gotta be honest and admit this. Gil Arenas (yeah, I know) makes it his personal mission to downplay and dismiss guys like Luka, Jokic, Giannis, and has been doing it for years, his reasoning is garbage but it's all because he doesn't wanna just come out and say he's xenophobic. I don't even like Luka's game but I can't just dismiss the production and the skill he possesses. This may be an NBA issue that I don't think they're realizing until it's too late though. I'll watch foreign guys hoop in the league I don't really give af, BUT I can understand the majority of Americans aren't gonna be cool with watching a foreign hooper because they want to relate to them in some way, even if just speaking English is the only way.
I don't know enough about how ratings are processed and calculated at this point to have an informed opinion on that. The league seems to be generating plenty of revenue via sponsorship deals, expansion into international markets, and tv deals. I don't think the league is unpopular, and I think the stars are still incredibly popular on the global scale.
That said, I do think people have a point in the thread with the parallel between Kamala's campaign, mainstream liberal orthodox thinking, and the conversation about the NBA: you have to stop letting the foils set the agenda. Just because racist Yaqubians were claiming Kamala wasn't really black and making up lies about her and generally advance regressive, nihilistic, hateful views and policies doesn't mean one can't recognize that she didn't run "a flawless campaign" and that in many respects she ran an embarrassing one. You can't let racist Yaqubians talk you into investing in bad product out of a misguided sense of defiance. That's a loss.
Similarly, I don't buy the gloom and doom talk about the NBA, and I recognize the critiques of the league are rooted largely in racism. So I block out the bad faith critiques. I take it as a given that the racist people are going to do what they do and I ignore that. Because I think there really are a lot of people who have obsessively followed the sport and the league forever, and who find the product less compelling now. And I don't think they're angry with the players, so much as they're pushing back against the front office dorks who believe the data always knows the truth, and that people themselves never understand what they're talking about, or how they feel.
I have been watching (on the busy nights of the schedule) 3-7 NBA games for years. This year I might watch 2 on average. I certainly don't hate black dudes and I couldn't love the sport of basketball more. But, fukk, the product just isn't hittin for me right now. I can pinpoint when I got really concerned - December 1. The 17-3 Cavs beat the 15-4 Celtics. Close game. Talent galore on the court. There were 18 FTs over the final 34 seconds. It was painful to watch. The Cavs decided to eliminate the 3 as an option, even up 4, on every trip down. The three point shot and its attendant strategic shifts (to create and prevent 3 point opportunities) have obviously altered the way the game looks, and how it flows. The NBA offenses and defenses might be the most complex we've ever seen in many ways. That doesn't mean people are wrong to dislike how it plays out.
I think there's a difference between hating the sport and its players and pointing out the product goes through peaks and valleys of being engaging. Sports - at their best - are not entertainment; but they do have to be entertaining. Part of what makes sports entertaining is unpredictability. Another major component is that athletes are, in a sense, brilliant artists. We want to see them - like musicians - do naturally cool and brilliant things live that we could never do. A lot of the strategy right now has sacrificed unpredictability and artistry at the altar of efficiency. Some people are fine with that. I find the product to be dulled. I think this is the same with baseball. A lot of traditional baseball strategy was stupid, but it also added the element of unpredictability to the watching experience, and gave people more to argue about (which, like it or not, it a part of what makes sports engaging). The Three True Outcomes style of baseball, and the inning limits for starters have sucked a lot of the fun - some good fun, some stupid fun) out of the game.
As the dude from that tweet articulated in an essay he wrote years ago, sometimes solving a sport's inefficiencies can ruin what made the sport enjoyable. The athletes being reduced to automatons - as means to number-crunchers' desired ends - is just not a winning formula. And here's the thing about sports and politics: if the people are telling you "I don't like this" you can't keep throwing data in their faces saying "your feelings are wrong" and expect to come out on top. That's not how those arenas work. The consumers' feelings matter a lot, actually, and have to be considered. This isn't an argument in the classroom - you need buy-in from the audience. Pedantic scolding will not carry the day for you here. "Look at this graphic - I will prove to you that your emotions are mathematically unsound" is an extremely shortsighted tact to take.
It's important to remember we have this style of basketball in large part because the NBA rules were tweaked years ago because the product was stale and ugly. And now it feels the correction has become an overcorrection. Rules might have to be changed again. Analytics is unquestionably important in allowing people in the league and in the audience better understand the complexities of the sport. But there has to be strategic and complex thinking about the entertainment appeal as well. There's a balance to strike. Especially in this country where entertainment as sports is gaining a stronger foothold (Jake Paul being the extreme example, UFC being the major "sport" example, and NFL being the example of the perfect American sports product that actually fails upward because of its essential ingredients), you can't forget that sports that aren't purely entertainment have to at least remember to be entertaining to its fans. The NBA does have some reasons for concern to that end.
I don't know enough about how ratings are processed and calculated at this point to have an informed opinion on that. The league seems to be generating plenty of revenue via sponsorship deals, expansion into international markets, and tv deals. I don't think the league is unpopular, and I think the stars are still incredibly popular on the global scale.
That said, I do think people have a point in the thread with the parallel between Kamala's campaign, mainstream liberal orthodox thinking, and the conversation about the NBA: you have to stop letting the foils set the agenda. Just because racist Yaqubians were claiming Kamala wasn't really black and making up lies about her and generally advance regressive, nihilistic, hateful views and policies doesn't mean one can't recognize that she didn't run "a flawless campaign" and that in many respects she ran an embarrassing one. You can't let racist Yaqubians talk you into investing in bad product out of a misguided sense of defiance. That's a loss.
Similarly, I don't buy the gloom and doom talk about the NBA, and I recognize the critiques of the league are rooted largely in racism. So I block out the bad faith critiques. I take it as a given that the racist people are going to do what they do and I ignore that. Because I think there really are a lot of people who have obsessively followed the sport and the league forever, and who find the product less compelling now. And I don't think they're angry with the players, so much as they're pushing back against the front office dorks who believe the data always knows the truth, and that people themselves never understand what they're talking about, or how they feel.
I have been watching (on the busy nights of the schedule) 3-7 NBA games for years. This year I might watch 2 on average. I certainly don't hate black dudes and I couldn't love the sport of basketball more. But, fukk, the product just isn't hittin for me right now. I can pinpoint when I got really concerned - December 1. The 17-3 Cavs beat the 15-4 Celtics. Close game. Talent galore on the court. There were 18 FTs over the final 34 seconds. It was painful to watch. The Cavs decided to eliminate the 3 as an option, even up 4, on every trip down. The three point shot and its attendant strategic shifts (to create and prevent 3 point opportunities) have obviously altered the way the game looks, and how it flows. The NBA offenses and defenses might be the most complex we've ever seen in many ways. That doesn't mean people are wrong to dislike how it plays out.
I think there's a difference between hating the sport and its players and pointing out the product goes through peaks and valleys of being engaging. Sports - at their best - are not entertainment; but they do have to be entertaining. Part of what makes sports entertaining is unpredictability. Another major component is that athletes are, in a sense, brilliant artists. We want to see them - like musicians - do naturally cool and brilliant things live that we could never do. A lot of the strategy right now has sacrificed unpredictability and artistry at the altar of efficiency. Some people are fine with that. I find the product to be dulled. I think this is the same with baseball. A lot of traditional baseball strategy was stupid, but it also added the element of unpredictability to the watching experience, and gave people more to argue about (which, like it or not, it a part of what makes sports engaging). The Three True Outcomes style of baseball, and the inning limits for starters have sucked a lot of the fun - some good fun, some stupid fun) out of the game.
As the dude from that tweet articulated in an essay he wrote years ago, sometimes solving a sport's inefficiencies can ruin what made the sport enjoyable. The athletes being reduced to automatons - as means to number-crunchers' desired ends - is just not a winning formula. And here's the thing about sports and politics: if the people are telling you "I don't like this" you can't keep throwing data in their faces saying "your feelings are wrong" and expect to come out on top. That's not how those arenas work. The consumers' feelings matter a lot, actually, and have to be considered. This isn't an argument in the classroom - you need buy-in from the audience. Pedantic scolding will not carry the day for you here. "Look at this graphic - I will prove to you that your emotions are mathematically unsound" is an extremely shortsighted tact to take.
It's important to remember we have this style of basketball in large part because the NBA rules were tweaked years ago because the product was stale and ugly. And now it feels the correction has become an overcorrection. Rules might have to be changed again. Analytics is unquestionably important in allowing people in the league and in the audience better understand the complexities of the sport. But there has to be strategic and complex thinking about the entertainment appeal as well. There's a balance to strike. Especially in this country where entertainment as sports is gaining a stronger foothold (Jake Paul being the extreme example, UFC being the major "sport" example, and NFL being the example of the perfect American sports product that actually fails upward because of its essential ingredients), you can't forget that sports that aren't purely entertainment have to at least remember to be entertaining to its fans. The NBA does have some reasons for concern to that end.
You’re right, but professional sports leagues sees the competition and entertainment as equal because it’s a product They are selling.
Not saying this applies to every person who doesn't find today's game entertaining, but I remember all too vividly that when this 3-pt boom took a sharp rise in 2015, folks' criticism, in general, was about 3s being a gimmick and not conducive to winning. Nobody was talking about 3s being boring or not entertaining. It was all about "you can't win shooting 3s".
No, it isn’t. Sports in the back yard is about that. Heck, even the cheesing people do in videogames is about that. But sports grow in popularity because people enjoy the product. It wasn’t just that Michael Jordan won - it was HOW he won and what it looked like that drove the NBA to those heights. The Spurs and Pistons had awful ratings for a reason. The average person wants a blend of competition and entertainment. The NFL and college sports can get away with having bad games because people identify with the franchises or sports teams and care more about them winning than anything. Michigan football was nasty this year but the stakes of Michigan - OSU drew the highest ratings of any rivalry game this year. I and other Michigan fans watched every game this year while laughing at how we were subjecting America to a terrible product.
sure but unless an org really dont give a fukk, they care about winning too
