RealGM

I actually like Buck and Phil. Sure, they are not perfect and they have some warts, but to me they are like family...you still love them. I also like they are homers.

The thing that bothers me most about the telecast is the panning to the crowd or the players on the bench, or putting up a display or replay when there is action on the court. That pisses me off to no end. I see that rarely happen on TNT or ESPN broadcast of games.

jim, my 12-year son is like a sponge. It makes me really have to try and be more mindful of popping off with an opinion. He repeats my views on things. Flattering but scary when I think about it.

As far as Buck and Phil go, I like them. Sure, they're homers and they have a schtick, but I want that from announcers. I think they are about on par with most announcers.

Nivek, I listened to the radio a lot of games before I got midseason NBA League pass. Johnson and Consor really do give a lot more detailed info and offer up very pointed opinions. I don't always agree with Consor postgame, but he's a passionate, knowledge host. Not a feel-good guy at all. He was all over McGee's dunk. He couldn't stand McGee. OTOH, Glen Consor loved Nick Young.

One thing he didn't do was call it like it was on Flip and EG.

dandridge 10 wrote:I actually like Buck and Phil. Sure, they are not perfect and they have some warts, but to me they are like family...you still love them. I also like they are homers.

The thing that bothers me most about the telecast is the panning to the crowd or the players on the bench, or putting up a display or replay when there is action on the court. That pisses me off to no end. I see that rarely happen on TNT or ESPN broadcast of games.

+1

I HATE THAT.

on a somewhat different topic...why does Craig Sager have a job with TNT?
Does he have pix of someone with animals? Does he really think he's making
some kind of intelligent statement by wearing ridiculous clothes? SMH.

Mel Proctor was the guy though...nothing really wrong with Dave Johnson
but Mel was really good, the Jon Miller of hoops playxplay.

I really enjoy discovering new writers. I was giddy this time last year when I found Sebastian Pruiti over at NBA Playbook, before he got his Grantland gig. So imagine my excitement and joy when I found a new voice writing about my beloved Wizards!

Some fellow named Todd Kliman writes for Washingtonian Magazine and has had a very accomplished career writing about things other than basketball; he's currently the magazine's Dining Editor. Here's his full bio.

He's apparently a big Wiz fan and wrote a piece in the wake of the lottery. I loved it! It offers great perspective on what landing the third pick means and goes through potential options to the pick. I'm biased because I agree with his conclusion that we should draft Beal, but the best part of the article is this dig:

With MKG hawking on the perimeter, John Wall at the point (his defensive awareness grew noticeably last season, an area of his game that such NBA know-nothings as Tony Kornheiser, Steve Czaban, and Thom Loverro of SportsTalk 980 and others never remarked upon, content to blather on only about his lack of a jumper), Nene and Kevin Seraphin in the middle, and Jan Vesely (who may flower into a sort of latter-day Bobby Jones) trapping frenetically and knifing into the passing lanes, the Wizards would create hell for other teams. But they would be hellish to watch on the other end, too.

Shots fired! I love it! It's so nice to see the "opinion-makers" be completely taken to task for their ignorance. Most of the guys that talk about (and many who write about) the Wiz for the major local media outlets wouldn't recognize an NBA nuance if it sat on their face (well, I guess that's a sort of paradoxical use of "nuance," but whatever).

So check the article out. I'm going to email this guy and ask him to keep writing about the Wiz. We need some more intelligent folks doing so.

Wow. His opinions are perfectly in sync with mine (and many others on this board).

Good find fish. I think Kliman must read this board. His article is an excellent synopsis of what many here are thinking.

Thanks Fishercob!

Damn, I wish I would have found that article myself, perform a cut/paste and then pass off as my own. I would've make the hall of fame post thread in record time.

Dat2U wrote:Good find fish. I think Kliman must read this board. His article is an excellent synopsis of what many here are thinking.

Yeah, I read it again and some of the similarities to what is discuss here are striking. I don't mean that negatively at all, not accusing the man of plagiarism. It's nice to see intelligent analysis of the Wizards in print.

What if Kliman is one of our regulars? Is it Ji???????

Only thing that I didn't like was his description of the team's defense -- the stuff about trapping and knifing into passing lanes. Trapping needs to be done selectively in the NBA -- it just doesn't work as a regular defensive strategy because there are too many competent ball handlers and there's just too much experience for guys to get rattled beyond maybe a surprise possession here and there. And trying to steal the ball is a good way to create open shots for the other team, which is bad. Theoretically, stealing the ball is a great thing. Individual players who can steal the ball can be quite valuable. The marginal effort required to boost steals isn't worth the extra steals it generates.

I know it sounds boring. I know it doesn't sound tough or manly or whatever. But, good defense in the NBA is mostly about making the other team miss by getting a hand in the shooter's face. Then get the defensive board.

Getting a turnover by being in good defensive position and forcing a bad pass is COMPLETELY different from leaving your man to gamble for a steal in the passing lanes. Two very different things that unfortunately get measured the same way.

Ouch

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WYU-rmToA0&feature=youtu.be[/youtube]

Ouch indeed

I had such high hopes for this team coming into the season until Wall got injured. Now, with Wall out for at least the first month and Nene sidelined indefinitely, it really dampers my expectations of them being a playoff team this year.

Simmons is such a smug sob though, takes shots at the Wizards every chance he gets.

Do we not have an Okafor thread?

Here is a very flattering profile of our new big man.


Emeka Okafor Finding Role on Young Wizards Team

I think they brought this guy in because they wanted to expose Wall and Beal (and to a lesser extent, Seraphin, vesely, Booker, etc) to his work habits, maturity, etc. They likely view his salary not just in terms of what he'll contribute to the win column this year but also of an investment in our young stars. The hope is that he accelerates their maturation process.

speaking of Buck and Phil (stale threadwise) as said above, I generally
like them and think they are fair but clearly Wizards fans. Which is exactly
what I want.

The last game when Webster made that spin move, Buck (I think) called
it a 180. JMU math me thinks. If you start and finish facing more or less
the same direction, seems to me that would be a 360. OK, I'm nitpicking.

dobrojim wrote:speaking of Buck and Phil (stale threadwise) as said above, I generally
like them and think they are fair but clearly Wizards fans. Which is exactly
what I want.

The last game when Webster made that spin move, Buck (I think) called
it a 180. JMU math me thinks. If you start and finish facing more or less
the same direction, seems to me that would be a 360. OK, I'm nitpicking.

That's just how fast Webster is. He gets through a spin in half the time.

I'm really not a fan of either. Their fandom is fine, but they are consistently using stats -- terrible, stupid, meaningless stats -- to try to illustrate some sort of point. The point is usually that the WIzards are doing something impressive, which is somehow magically incongruous with the team's suckiness.

I wish some producer at CSN would have the balls to make the switch to discussing stats in terms of the very simplistic Four Factors. The broadcasts would be so much better and it would promote a much better understanding of the game amongst viewers.

fish: I've tried for YEARS to get CSN to do something meaningful with their stats. No luck. They're so terrified that viewers "won't understand." Good stats will actually INCREASE their understanding of the game. I did make some headway with Glen Consor back when I was going to games on press pass, but he seems to have backslid some judging by the post-game show. Dave Johnson will sometimes drop in some funky stat I send him.

Here's my look at the Wizards preseason, with the full understanding that preseason numbers don't mean much of anything.

totally agree about the stats

they are useless at best and typically misleading