Playoffs discussion

[AussieWolf3]

Also, "qualified" in this case may legitimately include being a female if ABC/ESPN found that having one on their broadcast crew increased female viewership, thus expanding their audience (I have no idea if it does or not in Doris's case). Candace Parker is someone I've found to be really good, but she's with TNT.

Being an on-air personality actually can require some demographic criteria for hiring purposes. That's different than say a brain surgeon, airline pilot, civil engineer, or food safety inspector. You want folks with deep expertise in those fields and should care less about their physical traits.

"Representation" is often corporate performance, BUT it does matter.

Both my wife and daughter interest in hoops skyrocketed when I started telling them about the Lynx and how incredible they've been for nearly two decades and how awesome Collier is, and hearing a woman doing the broadcast definitely had my daughter (9 years old) sitting up in her seat with a "hey it's a woman talking basketball!" Look on her face.

So it does matter.

Generally speaking I only have the volume up to hear the noise of the game and crowd, the broadcast team is just background noise

I like how Aussie and Abe don’t wanna talk about this, but yet they continue talking about it

Come on D, is this all you have to contribute? First to call me a clown and now an attempt to box me in with supposed hypocrisy?

It's not difficult to figure out. I already conceded that I got froggy and as the new guy may not have as good an understanding for what is and isn't considered good conversation.

I made my point about cool's comment towards Burkes appointment to the finals booth having to do with wokism, which was to clear up what my original comment was actually about (which wasn't clear, a mistake on my part). And I've conceded that I was importing things other people have said in other arenas and I mistakenly projected that onto cools post.

And now several folks have followed up with additional discussion points, and are having an actual conversation about it. This stuff is worth discussing and if that's considered kosher here that's cool with me (as I said I initially overstepped my rank, so to speak).

[rapsuperstar31]

There are a lot of either poor or very biased announcers. Reggie Miller is one of my favorite players of all time, but he's a terrible play by play. Tom Brady is the best football player of all time, and Tony Romo eats his lunch when it comes to announcing. Either way it's not worth talking about.

[Coolbreeze44]

I have to admit I really like Breen. His "puts it up and in" line is great along with "it's gooooood". I feel he adds to the broadcast. We should enjoy it while we can, you hockey guys know what a major void Doc Emrick left when he retired. On the positive side, Mike Grady might be next in terms of network play by play talent.

[AbeVigodaLive]

Also, "qualified" in this case may legitimately include being a female if ABC/ESPN found that having one on their broadcast crew increased female viewership, thus expanding their audience (I have no idea if it does or not in Doris's case). Candace Parker is someone I've found to be really good, but she's with TNT.

Being an on-air personality actually can require some demographic criteria for hiring purposes. That's different than say a brain surgeon, airline pilot, civil engineer, or food safety inspector. You want folks with deep expertise in those fields and should care less about their physical traits.

"Representation" is often corporate performance, BUT it does matter.

Both my wife and daughter interest in hoops skyrocketed when I started telling them about the Lynx and how incredible they've been for nearly two decades and how awesome Collier is, and hearing a woman doing the broadcast definitely had my daughter (9 years old) sitting up in her seat with a "hey it's a woman talking basketball!" Look on her face.

So it does matter.

Generally speaking I only have the volume up to hear the noise of the game and crowd, the broadcast team is just background noise

I like how Aussie and Abe don’t wanna talk about this, but yet they continue talking about it

Fuck off with your disingenuous bullshit bait post.

Everyone in this thread sees through this post. This isn't THAT sort of site... nor will it be. So move along.

[D-Loser25]

"Representation" is often corporate performance, BUT it does matter.

Both my wife and daughter interest in hoops skyrocketed when I started telling them about the Lynx and how incredible they've been for nearly two decades and how awesome Collier is, and hearing a woman doing the broadcast definitely had my daughter (9 years old) sitting up in her seat with a "hey it's a woman talking basketball!" Look on her face.

So it does matter.

Generally speaking I only have the volume up to hear the noise of the game and crowd, the broadcast team is just background noise

I like how Aussie and Abe don’t wanna talk about this, but yet they continue talking about it

Come on D, is this all you have to contribute? First to call me a clown and now an attempt to box me in with supposed hypocrisy?

It's not difficult to figure out. I already conceded that I got froggy and as the new guy may not have as good an understanding for what is and isn't considered good conversation.

I made my point about cool's comment towards Burkes appointment to the finals booth having to do with wokism, which was to clear up what my original comment was actually about (which wasn't clear, a mistake on my part). And I've conceded that I was importing things other people have said in other arenas and I mistakenly projected that onto cools post.

And now several folks have followed up with additional discussion points, and are having an actual conversation about it. This stuff is worth discussing and if that's considered kosher here that's cool with me (as I said I initially overstepped my rank, so to speak).

I’m still pretty new posting here too, but long time viewer. This is a great board and I enjoy reading everyone’s takes including yours. Say whatever you want on here, or don’t, it doesnt really matter to me. Sorry for calling you a clown, not meant to be hurtful - more just my quick way of saying I disagree with what you’re saying or your perspective on something.

[AussieWolf3]

All good D! This site is great! So let's keep it that way

[D-Loser25]

"Representation" is often corporate performance, BUT it does matter.

Both my wife and daughter interest in hoops skyrocketed when I started telling them about the Lynx and how incredible they've been for nearly two decades and how awesome Collier is, and hearing a woman doing the broadcast definitely had my daughter (9 years old) sitting up in her seat with a "hey it's a woman talking basketball!" Look on her face.

So it does matter.

Generally speaking I only have the volume up to hear the noise of the game and crowd, the broadcast team is just background noise

I like how Aussie and Abe don’t wanna talk about this, but yet they continue talking about it

Fuck off with your disingenuous bullshit bait post.

Everyone in this thread sees through this post... c'mon man. This isn't THAT sort of site... nor will it be. So move along.

Huh? It was 100% intended to be seen through. I’m glad you’re so perceptive to be able to see through something that is completely transparent. OK oh powerful Abe, who apparently makes up the rules for this internet chat board as he goes, I’ll move along from your territory

[AussieWolf3]

I have to admit I really like Breen. His "puts it up and in" line is great along with "it's gooooood". I feel he adds to the broadcast. We should enjoy it while we can, you hockey guys know what a major void Doc Emrick left when he retired. On the positive side, Mike Grady might be next in terms of network play by play talent.

I don't listen to a lot of other broadcast outside of the Wolves, so maybe it's homerism but I just can't imagine it get much better than Grady

[Q-is-here]

Like most people who follow the NBA, I'm a fan of Mark Daigneault. I think he deserves the accolades he gets. But I question why he has abandoned the rotation strategy he employed all season in the finals. I commented in another thread how in contrast to the Wolves who only had their Great Eight average more than 15 MPG this season (and again, I'm not faulting the coaching staff if they observed the young guys weren't quite ready), OkC had 12! Like Carlyle, he trusted and used his bench, and I think that was a big reason both teams were able to play the fast-pace style that made them so successful this season. So why is Daigneault channeling his inner Finchy and basically going with an 8-man rotation against the Pacers? Small sample size of course, but are Indy's relatively fresher legs why they are dominating 4th quarters this series? In the 2 close games (1 and 3), Indy outscored OkC by 10 and 15 points, respectively, and that's why they are up 2-1 against a team most of us here thinks is better. I hope Daigneault learns from this, and more importantly, I hope Finchy is watching closely. If TC doesn't shake things up too much this off season by trading away some of our impressive depth, I think we have a chance to play a style similar to the two finals teams (or, at least the way OkC played before the finals).

We should normally avoid the temptation to take too much away from any given year's Finals matchup. It was just two years ago that Jokic, Murray, and Gordon methodically won a title with a precision half court offense and only three guys coming off the bench. Then a year ago Boston won it with a spread offense and a huge volume of 3's. Now it's two teams that go very deep into their bench and one of which is practically full-court pressing the entire game. Indiana is out-OKC'ing OKC - they are like the perfect team to play against them. SGA might be finally wearing down....

Having said that, OKC isn't going anywhere so Connelly and Finch have to put a team together that can beat them....and Houston....and Denver.....and San Antonio....and anyone else that might be a major threat in the West next season.

That's a long way of saying I agree with you, but may be with a slightly different angle. It's not just so that we can play 10 guys in a playoff rotation to preserve energy. It's because it may not always be the same 10 guys! Jaylin Williams hardly plays for OKC against Indiana, but he was important against Denver and gave them valuable minutes off the bench guarding Jokic.

I think one of Finch's big misses this past season as head coach was not leaning into Clark and Shannon more (and I suppose Dillingham to a lesser extent).

[FNG]

I have to admit I really like Breen. His "puts it up and in" line is great along with "it's gooooood". I feel he adds to the broadcast. We should enjoy it while we can, you hockey guys know what a major void Doc Emrick left when he retired. On the positive side, Mike Grady might be next in terms of network play by play talent.

I like Breen too...he's a real pro. I'm just saying I've never heard him say anything that I thought was a perceptive insight. But now that I think about it, that's not his job. His job is to call the game as smoothly as he can and to let his partners provide the color and analysis. He and Grady are both very good at this.