Bill Simmons: Good Luck With Your Life.

[soxfan121]

Didn't Simmons spend the first three years of the Rivers era wrting columns 

 
Yes...and he wasn't the only person to doubt whether Rivers was a good coach before Rivers was handed a roster with KG, Allen, Pierce, Perkins and Rondo. And said roster - really KG & Allen, two first ballot HOF'ers - are responsible for Rivers current reputation as a good coach. 
 
Prior to KG/Allen's arrival, Rivers' claim to being "good" was one season in Orlando. Prior to KG/Allen, there was much wondering on this board and elsewhere about whether Rivers was good. 

 

[CaptainLaddie]

I'm starting to think Bill Simmons fucked The Social Chair's mother or something.

 

[Stu Nahan]

Simmons is often and with good reason characterized here and other places as being very thin skinned. Doc definitely deserves the same criticism in this instance. He could have just said that Simmons is paid to give his opinion, and everyone is entitled to have one. Instead of doing that, Doc called him an idiot and played the extremely weak he's a fan, not an analyst card.

Doc is well liked by the both the Boston and national media. He has always gotten more than favorable treatment from them. One could even argue that he has gotten the kid gloves treatment, especially in his first few years in Boston. If he's harboring a grudge because Simmons didn't think he was a good coach during the first few years of his tenure in Boston, he must have a grudge against the vast majority of Celtics fans.

I'm sure ESPN will lean on Simmons to just drop this. Neither guy will look good the further it goes. Doc was allowed to opt out of rebuilding and go work where he wants. He doesn't however get to act like he's above criticism from people who think he bailed on the Celtics. Lashing out at Simmons just makes it look like that criticism is hitting a little too close to home for a guy who is used to having the media fawn over him.

 

[usernamedc]

Yes...and he wasn't the only person to doubt whether Rivers was a good coach before Rivers was handed a roster with KG, Allen, Pierce, Perkins and Rondo. And said roster - really KG & Allen, two first ballot HOF'ers - are responsible for Rivers current reputation as a good coach. 
 
Prior to KG/Allen's arrival, Rivers' claim to being "good" was one season in Orlando. Prior to KG/Allen, there was much wondering on this board and elsewhere about whether Rivers was good. 

 
Don't forget about PJ Brown. If he doesn't have the game of his life against Cleveland, Doc likely wouldn't have any titles.

 

[Vinho Tinto]

Sean Grande was on WEEI with Max yesterday afternoon. He said that Simmons and Doc spoke on the phone and indicated they have come to some kind of truce. 

 

[riboflav]

In regard to whether Simmons is knowledgeable on basketball, it depends on how one defines "knowledgeable." He certainly knows a lot of the history of professional American basketball. He's a virtual encyclopedia. He can tell you what Bird had to eat the morning of Game 7 of the 1984 Finals. Yet, I've never heard or read him breaking down an offense or a defense the way Hubie Brown, Zach Lowe, Bob Knight, etc. do. He seems limited in his knowledge of the college game, the Euro game, and the high school game. He's not exactly insightful on the up & coming coaches, scouts, and also seems adverse to advanced metrics. So, I think he really understands the NBA (i.e. the organization and personalities) and its history, but has a much looser grasp on the game of basketball.

 

[JCizzle]

Sean Grande was on WEEI with Max yesterday afternoon. He said that Simmons and Doc spoke on the phone and indicated they have come to some kind of truce. 

Well that's boring and disappointing. Simmons should have milked it.

 

[soxfan121]

In regard to whether Simmons is knowledgeable on basketball, it depends on how one defines "knowledgeable." He certainly knows a lot of the history of professional American basketball. He's a virtual encyclopedia. He can tell you what Bird had to eat the morning of Game 7 of the 1984 Finals. Yet, I've never heard or read him breaking down an offense or a defense the way Hubie Brown, Zach Lowe, Bob Knight, etc. do. He seems limited in his knowledge of the college game, the Euro game, and the high school game. He's not exactly insightful on the up & coming coaches, scouts, and also seems adverse to advanced metrics. So, I think he really understands the NBA (i.e. the organization and personalities) and its history, but has a much looser grasp on the game of basketball.

 
By this standard, about 500 people worldwide understand basketball. Including Fran Fraschilla.
 
However, Chad Ford is pumped and jacked to hear these standards being applied. 

 

[Dalton Jones]

 
By this standard, about 500 people worldwide understand basketball. Including Fran Fraschilla.
 
However, Chad Ford is pumped and jacked to hear these standards being applied. 

That's a pretty big number. How many do you think really have that kind of expertise AND can communicate it to a mass audience? Simmons is a fan, like the rest of us. He just writes better. But he doesn't know a hundredth of what the average NBA player knows about the game.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

That's a pretty big number. How many do you think really have that kind of expertise AND can communicate it to a mass audience? Simmons is a fan, like the rest of us. He just writes better. But he doesn't know a hundredth of what the average NBA player knows about the game.

 
Listening to Magic Johnson do color commentary makes me wonder if that is the case.

 

[kenneycb]

Listening to Magic Johnson do color commentary makes me wonder if that is the case.

There's no denying Magic knows the game, he just isn't able to effectively communicate it to a mass audience, which is Dalton's point.

 

[riboflav]

By this standard, about 500 people worldwide understand basketball. Including Fran Fraschilla.
 
However, Chad Ford is pumped and jacked to hear these standards being applied. 

 
I love Fraschilla. Great coach and great communicator. I try to catch him on the coaching clinic circuit any time I can. I don't think my standards are too high. I also think 500 is a big number (because the standards aren't that high) but it's probably more than that. It's easy in the Internet age to learn the game inside and out. There are dozens of web sites that dissect real game footage, teach Xs and Os, and break down individual skills. There are also hundreds of DVDs from the greatest coaches in the world that do the same.
 
I don't know honestly if Simmons knows this stuff or not, but he hasn't shown that he does. Maybe his thing is to be an encyclopedia of the NBA. And that's fine. Sometimes, it entertains me but mostly I like the reading about the technical aspects of the game so I go elsewhere.

 

[Bleedred]

Simmons is often and with good reason characterized here and other places as being very thin skinned. Doc definitely deserves the same criticism in this instance. He could have just said that Simmons is paid to give his opinion, and everyone is entitled to have one. Instead of doing that, Doc called him an idiot and played the extremely weak he's a fan, not an analyst card.

Doc is well liked by the both the Boston and national media. He has always gotten more than favorable treatment from them. One could even argue that he has gotten the kid gloves treatment, especially in his first few years in Boston. If he's harboring a grudge because Simmons didn't think he was a good coach during the first few years of his tenure in Boston, he must have a grudge against the vast majority of Celtics fans.

I'm sure ESPN will lean on Simmons to just drop this. Neither guy will look good the further it goes. Doc was allowed to opt out of rebuilding and go work where he wants. He doesn't however get to act like he's above criticism from people who think he bailed on the Celtics. Lashing out at Simmons just makes it look like that criticism is hitting a little too close to home for a guy who is used to having the media fawn over him.

This is a great post IMO and cuts to the heart of the matter.  Well Said

 

[Rocco Graziosa]

There's no denying Magic knows the game, he just isn't able to effectively communicate it to a mass audience, which is Dalton's point.

Man I'm not so sure about how much Magic knows about the x's and o's or intricacies of basketball.  He was an ATROCIOUS coach.  There is a massive sample size of him spewing pure jibberish when it comes to being a television analyst.  Its just a bunch of rah rah bullshit mombo jumbo.  And I'm not sure if this has to do with his inability to communicate his thoughts.  I understand him VERY clearly, and its just a bunch of shit.  
 
Its very possible to play the game at a high level and not know much about what is actually going on out there.  There are tons of guys were are successful at playing the game that don't even know whats going on out there.  Tony Allen comes readily to mind.  
 
Its very possible Magic Johnson has deep thoughts about the game of basketball but simply cannot communicate them to the viewer, but man I doubt it. 

 

[Van Everyman]

Sean Grande was on WEEI with Max yesterday afternoon. He said that Simmons and Doc spoke on the phone and indicated they have come to some kind of truce.



Well that's boring and disappointing. Simmons should have milked it.

Well, it was only a matter of time before Stern intervened.

 

[ifmanis5]

On the podcast today Bill explained to House that he talked to Doc on the phone for 45 minutes on Friday and 'hashed everything out." Bill also said the call was instigated by Wilbon who wanted to see peace between the two. Bill said the take away from the call was that they amicably agreed to disagree.

 

[nattysez]

Simmons must have a damn engaging personality.  This is the second time he's had a relatively well-known media person intervene on his behalf with an NBA star.  The first was Gus Johnson arranging the sit-down with Isiah, and now Wilbon helped arrange a meeting with Doc.
 
Edit:  Though I suppose the other explanation is that each media guy realized the other guy was going to continue being savaged by Simmons -- and realized how bad an impact that could have on the star's reputation -- and thus did the guy a solid by getting things ironed out w/ Simmons. 

 

[bankshot1]

I think it probably servers both their interests. to bury the hatchet. 
 
Simmons wants access to guys like Doc, and Doc has probably been reminded of the old saying, "Never argue with a guy who buys ink by the barrel".

 

[nattysez]

Oops:
 
https://twitter.com/BillSimmons/status/352122340345262080

 

[ifmanis5]

Oops:
 
https://twitter.com/BillSimmons/status/352122340345262080

No worries, I'm sure Bill's boss who spent about a half a billion dollars to secure Wimbledon rights is totally fine with that tweet.

 

[SoxScout]

Man this is amazingly funny: https://twitter.com/NBCSports/status/352136828322709504

 

[URI]

He's such a fucking dope sometimes.

 

[kenneycb]

Isn't it just a play on the old NBA joke he did when NBC had its rights? I seem to recall it a bunch in his old columns.

 

[nattysez]

Isn't it just a play on the old NBA joke he did when NBC had its rights? I seem to recall it a bunch in his old columns.

 
It's his go-to joke anytime any matchup in any sports is uninspiring.  But he doesn't seem to have realized ESPN had the rights this year:
 

Whoops! RT @NBCSports: The final is on ESPN. RT @BillSimmons "Radwanska! Bartoli!!!!! It's the Wimbledon Women's Finals on NBC!"

https://twitter.com/BillSimmons/status/352159609336762371

 

[JimBoSox9]

So it's not a banner matchup and he said so. Whoop-de-fucking-doo. I can't imagine more minor of a nit for the WWL to pick with him.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

So it's not a banner matchup and he said so. Whoop-de-fucking-doo. I can't imagine more minor of a nit for the WWL to pick with him.

 
I think that you're forgetting which cable company you're talking about. On ESPN, every game/match aired is EPIC, AWE-INSPIRING, AWESOME, etc. For an ESPN personality to say otherwise is akin to being a Russian and ripping the Kremlin. 
 
And oh yeah, this is precisely the kind of nit that ESPN would pick. ESPN has thinner skin than SImmons. 

 

[DJnVa]

So it's not a banner matchup and he said so. Whoop-de-fucking-doo. I can't imagine more minor of a nit for the WWL to pick with him.

 
You typically don't want your talent shitting on your programming...

 

[JohntheBaptist]

</p>

It was a 6.5 on IMDB.  That's not awful.  That's pretty much "C+" in every sense.
 
Other than HBO, sports docs have disappeared for the most part.  Then 30 for 30 came along and the VAST majority of them have been very good to excellent.  There are clunkers.  But even ones like "Broke" were hardly awful.  I guess we'll have to disagree about the quality of something.

<p>

I can agree with this actually, I'm looking back at what I said now and it seems harsh--they have been a really good "thing" as a whole even if you could quibble over the quality of some. I like how they've been willing to go with stuff a bit off the beaten path as well.

I guess I wish more was done w the documentary form itself from time to time, but thats hard to ask for at a place like ESPN, which I get.

 

[URI]

This annoyed me about 40x more than it should have:

I need to go for a walk or something.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

What annoyed you the most, when he insinuated you weren't a true Celtic fan because you thought he meant Reggie Dunlop?

 

[URI]

Yes

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

I'm sorry, URI.

 

[jose melendez]

Andrew Sullivan explains that Bill Simmons is a role model for him.  I will now light myself on fire.

 

[dirtynine]

That comes across like Sullivan is begging for a Simmons/Silver-type offer from some established media house.  

 

[SydneySox]

It totally does.
 
Even has the weird 'i just threw up in my mouth' reference which is not ironic and therefore is actually ironic.

 

[Dummy Hoy]

When you an opportunity to write an unorganized, rambling, thrown together column of 6000 words loosely based on using some quotes from a 25 year old movie...gotta do it!
 
Fuck it, let's make it a two-parter! 
 
Edit: I guess what really bugs me is that 20 year old Bill Simmons could have written that article (and did- change a few names and dates and it's the same old shit). He hasn't matured or improved since he was in his mid 20s; I find that a bit odd and unappealing. 

 

[Leather]

No, but, see, someone TWEETED about "Midnight Run" so it's still culturally relevant!

 

[Leather]

Oh and Dennis Farina died, so, you know, it's also, like, a TRIBUTE.

 

[Vinho Tinto]

Shoehorning in the movie angle to the article was terrible. I just ended up skipping over that stuff and reading what I could of the NBA offseason review. 

 

[OCST]

Andrew Sullivan explains that Bill Simmons is a role model for him.  I will now light myself on fire.

 
I don't have a problem with it.  Sullivan has written a lot about trying to find a good business model, and he thinks Simmons did a good job in finding one.  It's not necessarily an endorsement of Simmons' content, which I agree is on a downward trajectory.  That has less to do with the business model than with Simmons' own problems, which would be the same in any forum, I think (those being that he has run out of stuff to say and keeps digging into his old bag of tricks, with diminishing returns).

 

[dirtynine]

Thing is, Sullivan is attempting to build a true indie publication - he's bootstrapping the Dish and trying to make it work without outside involvement. As much attention as Grantland has gotten, which isn't insubstantial, the entire premise was bankrolled by ESPN, which included startup funding, talent placement and simplified access to corporate sponsorships. I'm not sure that there's any real way to know what Grantland is adding to, or subtracting from, ESPN's bottom line (no pun intended), or how Grantland would have faired as an independent project. It's certain that if Simmons did what Sullivan did - and Sullivan's approach was/is much ballsier - what form Grantland would have taken or how successful it would have been. That Sullivan is showering the "under the wing of a big media entity" approach with praise is interesting - to me it means that he's feeling the heat on his own, and sees people comparing his efforts (as a gravitational media presence) to Simmons and Silver, while he's getting none of the sweet perks they are getting.

Maybe the only way to be an indie "brand" in online publishing is to associate with a big platform and act like you're doing it all yourself.

 

[Rocco Graziosa]

Changing the subject for a moment, but I really really am starting to enjoy his podcasts.  I always did, but they're getting much more polished and Simmons is now VERY comfortable behind that mic.  He gets his guests to open up and the interviews have a great conversational tone.  
 
At this point I think he should just dump the writing and focus on the podcasts, 30 for 30, managing Grantland, and cohosting the basketball show.  

 

[Euclis20]

He's pretty much already there.  He just finished a six week stretch in which he wrote exactly 1 column.

 

[NatetheGreat]

100% agreed that the movie angle was totally superfluous. The thing is, I would totally be down for a lengthy column that just touched on every event in the NBA offseason, because it's been so eventful. But the Midnight Run gimmick sort of dragged it down.

 

[Dummy Hoy]

Agreed about wanting a long NBA article (although I do think the length of his pieces is a lack of skill in being concise), but it's not just the movie gimmick- it's all his gimmicks. 
 
You could win at Bill Simmons Article Bingo in three paragraphs.

 

[gtg807y]

I tried reading it but, having never seen Midnight Run, couldn't make it very far in. Obviously the '80s movie references are a big part of his shtick, but at some point you become Rich Little still doing impressions of people who have been dead for decades. I guess Midnight Run is at least a few years more recent than Teen Wolf, maybe it's just a really incremental evolution.

 

[Leather]

I tried reading it but, having never seen Midnight Run, couldn't make it very far in. Obviously the '80s movie references are a big part of his shtick, but at some point you become Rich Little still doing impressions of people who have been dead for decades. I guess Midnight Run is at least a few years more recent than Teen Wolf, maybe it's just a really incremental evolution.

 
That's kind of what puzzles me.  If you've seen and like "Midnight Run", maybe these little quotes add some humor but they are still completely detached from the NBA content so as to be distracting.  I've seen "Midnight Run" twice: once around when it came out, and once maybe three years ago.   So I read the quotes, try to remember the scene/context, and then I'm thrown back into NBA talk.  It's not clever or funny; it's just jarring. 
 
And if you haven't seen "Midnight Run", there's no appeal at all.   My guess is that Bill wants you to run out and watch it (and I have no doubt he imagines multitudes of his bro readers doing exactly that), but in my experience the "Lemme tell you about this funny movie that's really funny but it's old" trick never works on younger people.   If anything, it turns them off.  Try to get a younger person to sit down and watch "Airplane" or "Caddyshack" by telling them how funny it is.   No way, no how.
 
So, I just don't understand his motivation for this type of thing.  It only ever worked (tenuously) when the pop culture stuff he was talking about was recent enough to be universal.  It's not the movies themselves that made his columns fun, it was that every reader within his target demographic (sports fans between the ages of 18 and 30) knew what he was talking about.   "Midnight Run" was to readers in 2000 roughly what "Old School" is to readers today. 

 

[gtg807y]

 
That's kind of what puzzles me.  If you've seen and like "Midnight Run", maybe these little quotes add some humor but they are still completely detached from the NBA content so as to be distracting.  I've seen "Midnight Run" twice: once around when it came out, and once maybe three years ago.   So I read the quotes, try to remember the scene/context, and then I'm thrown back into NBA talk.  It's not clever or funny; it's just jarring. 
 
And if you haven't seen "Midnight Run", there's no appeal at all.   My guess is that Bill wants you to run out and watch it (and I have no doubt he imagines multitudes of his bro readers doing exactly that), but in my experience the "Lemme tell you about this funny movie that's really funny but it's old" trick never works on younger people.   If anything, it turns them off.  Try to get a younger person to sit down and watch "Airplane" or "Caddyshack" by telling them how funny it is.   No way, no how.
 
So, I just don't understand his motivation for this type of thing.  It only ever worked (tenuously) when the pop culture stuff he was talking about was recent enough to be universal.  It's not the movies themselves that made his columns fun, it was that every reader within his target demographic (sports fans between the ages of 18 and 30) knew what he was talking about.   "Midnight Run" was to readers in 2000 roughly what "Old School" is to readers today. 

 
Exactly, and I'm someone who loves old comedies and movies like Airplane and Caddyshack - I'll probably watch Midnight Run someday and enjoy it. Most people my age? Probably not. And it's one thing if your gimmick is something that "the kids these days" just don't relate to. But I'm not that young - firmly in my late 20s - and Midnight Run is close to a full decade behind my earliest pop culture sensibilities. It's not like he needs to stay "hip," but you can't lean on the pop culture so much when it's now keeping people under the age of 30 from enjoying and reading your columns.

 

[Skeesix]

In the new mailbag, what he claims is a pitbull with the x-man is clearly a doberman. I hope somebody got fired for that blunder!

 

[PedroKsBambino]

Man I'm not so sure about how much Magic knows about the x's and o's or intricacies of basketball.  He was an ATROCIOUS coach.  There is a massive sample size of him spewing pure jibberish when it comes to being a television analyst.  Its just a bunch of rah rah bullshit mombo jumbo.  And I'm not sure if this has to do with his inability to communicate his thoughts.  I understand him VERY clearly, and its just a bunch of shit.  
 
Its very possible to play the game at a high level and not know much about what is actually going on out there.  There are tons of guys were are successful at playing the game that don't even know whats going on out there.  Tony Allen comes readily to mind.  
 
Its very possible Magic Johnson has deep thoughts about the game of basketball but simply cannot communicate them to the viewer, but man I doubt it. 

 
Well said.  As much respect as I have for Magic the player, I do not think his coaching and commentating careers make obvious that he knows the xs and os exceptionally well.   Like Rocco, what I've heard Magic the commentator do is talk about 'heart' and 'winning' and 'taking over' and not assess what is going on at a deep level.   Magic the player clearly knew how to do the right things, but whether that was conscious, unconscious, or it is a talent he can share with others is, I think, HIGHLY open to question.