RealGM

So who else enjoyed the national media's take on yesterday's game? I checked all over for clips on it, but couldn't find anything anywhere that the general sentiment wasn't "there is some team that L.A.'s playing, and I guess they won, but more importantly L.A. played terrible and should be ashamed. L.A. L.A. L.A.".

There's something to be said for flying under the radar, and it's nice in a sense, but there's also something to be said for the slightest bit of respect, and I sure didn't see any on anything NBA.com or ESPN.com posted.

that's nothing new. last time one Yahoo columnist gave a lengthy mumble how Kobe is not to blame for that his elbow landed 2 millimeters below Artest's neck, therefore Artest's "story-telling" complaint to the refs and later to the media was laughable. There was not the least bit of criticism to Kobe, it's almost like that one should feel honored to be hit by Kobe below the neck, and anything other than kneeling down to demonstrate one's gratitude to Kobe is despicable and shall be damned to hell. I tell you, the media are going to hell.

hackle wrote:that's nothing new. last time one Yahoo columnist gave a lengthy mumble how Kobe is not to blame for that his elbow landed 2 millimeters below Artest's neck, therefore Artest's "story-telling" complaint to the refs and later to the media was laughable. There was not the least bit of criticism to Kobe, it's almost like that one should feel honored to be hit by Kobe below the neck, and anything other than kneeling down to demonstrate one's gratitude to Kobe is despicable and shall be damned to hell.

Yeah, I know. Still sucks. One day, I WILL figure out why the rest of the country looks down on Houston and all that's related to us so much, though. There's got to be a reason. To me, it's really not a bad city. Not a great city either, but far from bad. (perhaps with L.A. it's because they're jealous we actually produce things of worth, with N.Y. because we help fuel Texas' relative economic independence from the rest of the country, and with both because our city's name isn't abbreviable to a 2-letter-reducted acronym)

hackle wrote:I tell you, the media are going to hell

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Randolph_Hearst
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Murdoch
That's not new either. (tempted to put Turner on there because of CNN's suckitude, but he's a bit harder to read and really seems to be a pretty good guy - albeit one who sometimes notably sticks his foot in his mouth)

Well I will say this. LA didn't come to play at all yesterday. I've seen more effort in rec leagues. Their defense was atrocious. If we played any other remaining playoff team, except possibly the Hawks, we would've gotten blown out. LA seems to have entitlement issues and that may be their downfall in the next round vs DEN.

That said however, the national media of course has its poster child in the Lakers and it's largely drivel. Personally, I don't even find much substance in local media the majority of the time. I read basketball related articles for really only 2 things: 1) quotes and 2) behind-the-scenes looks. I really could care less about writer's opinions and perceptions that they want to push out there.

BaYBaller wrote:Well I will say this. LA didn't come to play at all yesterday. I've seen more effort in rec leagues. Their defense was atrocious. If we played any other remaining playoff team, except possibly the Hawks, we would've gotten blown out. LA seems to have entitlement issues and that may be their downfall in the next round vs DEN.

That said however, the national media of course has its poster child in the Lakers and it's largely drivel. Personally, I don't even find much substance in local media the majority of the time. I read basketball related articles for really only 2 things: 1) quotes and 2) behind-the-scenes looks. I really could care less about writer's opinions and perceptions that they want to push out there.

“I think everyone but us got the memo that we weren’t supposed to show up today without Yao,” Battier said.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-sim ... umn?page=2

This isn't national media, but it made me wtf laugh all the same:

Later, when I brought up the whole notion of the Lakers being an embarrassment to mankind -- receiving his permission to write it -- he added, "Was I angry at the team? Of course I was angry. They weren't ready right off the bat. You say as much as you can as coach, then the players have to execute."

I gather that we're so bad at this point, that losing to us is an affront to all existence?

it's a pain to us, as well. Remember last year the pre finals media was talking about how the Celts never really had a chance. It's like the Yankees- they get the press regardless and they get beat up more than any team in their league.

At least Phil called the media out on that and said give them some F'n credit for how they played.

At the same time, you guys are star depleted and it was an embarrassment to focus and talent for that kind of game to happen.

Phil Jackson was the only person outside of Houston and Rocket fans giving the Rockets any credit for yesterdays win.

Danny Darko wrote:it's a pain to us, as well. Remember last year the pre finals media was talking about how the Celts never really had a chance. It's like the Yankees- they get the press regardless and they get beat up more than any team in their league.

At least Phil called the media out on that and said give them some F'n credit for how they played.

At the same time, you guys are star depleted and it was an embarrassment to focus and talent for that kind of game to happen.

Yeah, I understand that losing out when you're expected to win sucks, any team would be that way. I think it was more the jaw-dropping amount of egotism and self-absorption inferred from the way the article's writer said it - like standing at the bottom of Angel Falls or the Burj Dubai and looking up. Ego, selfishness, and cockiness bug me, and past that, most people don't like being looked at as some mosquito whose sole purpose is to be brushed aside, so aaahmm, yeah I didn't appreciate the article. (or several others from the LA media either, but as you said, at least Phil gave us some respect, which was pretty damn cool of him)

As far as losing to us without our star power goes, it's not like we don't still have a ton of tools. There are a lot of guys on the roster who are really good at generating additional possessions and lowering the other teams' efficiencies, and they're at pretty much every position. That sort of thing goes a long way, especially when your scorers and offense can be rather streaky, and isn't the ability to sustain focus to hustle and play all-out for 48 minutes a talent?

Yao's going down still leaves us with, imo, our true core (PFs). It hurts us in several ways, yes, but also helps us in some others (faster lineup, faster and more unpredictable ball movement, more hustle players on the court, fewer post turnovers, but also less shooting steadiness, and weaker secondary penetration defense and team rebounding). I don't think we'll win the series, but I do think we're still a very challenging team, much more than our face value would lead one to think, and the Lakers also have situations with Odom and Bynum now that could throw a wrench in any predictions as well, so...

The same conventional NBA wisdom that says star (read: individual scoring) power is critical also makes the bulk of the annual draft picks.

I found this article, one of the worst of all time, by Sean Deveney.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=A ... &type=lgns

Haha that was pretty bad

What I don't get is this:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/spo ... 19522.html

Ratings smash

Game 3 of the Rockets-Lakers series on ESPN was seen by 4.4 million TV households and 5.9 million total viewers. It was the most-viewed conference semifinal game on the network and ESPN’s most-viewed program of 2009.

In Houston, the game had a 12.2 Nielsen household rating, which equates to an average audience of about 257,000 households. The national Nielsen rating was 4.8.

Sunday’s game on ABC had a 4.1 Nielsen major market rating and a 13.7 rating on KTRK (Channel 13) for an average audience of 289,000 households.

Haha that was pretty bad

What I don't get is this:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/spo ... 19522.html

Ratings smash

Game 3 of the Rockets-Lakers series on ESPN was seen by 4.4 million TV households and 5.9 million total viewers. It was the most-viewed conference semifinal game on the network and ESPN’s most-viewed program of 2009.

In Houston, the game had a 12.2 Nielsen household rating, which equates to an average audience of about 257,000 households. The national Nielsen rating was 4.8.

Sunday’s game on ABC had a 4.1 Nielsen major market rating and a 13.7 rating on KTRK (Channel 13) for an average audience of 289,000 households.

Are you implying this series is going to game 7?

I think the Rockets will let Kobe get his last win of the series tonight.

Dunno. Not really implying anything there, just really don't get how it may or may not fit into anything. I've read before that the NBA's TV contracts affect a LOT of the league's business decisions. Why would the Rockets not be more of a league darling when we've now produced 3-4+ of the highest rated games the last 2 years?

I can say that my recent posts should have pointed out my strong distrusts/dislike of big media though.