Bill Simmons: Valuing Trades More Than Friendships

Vandalman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
676
SE Mass
They finally did The Shawshank Redemption on The Rewatchables and it was worth the wait. It was Bill, Chris Ryan and Bill's father on the podcast and it was nearly as long as the movie! Great insight into a classic they all loved. Fortunately, I had seen it just a few days before this. One thing that bugs me, though, is that no one brought up the remarkable resemblance between the character Bogs Diamond (head of "The Sisters" rape gang) and Dallas coach Jason Garrett.
 

cromulence

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 25, 2009
4,472
They finally did The Shawshank Redemption on The Rewatchables and it was worth the wait. It was Bill, Chris Ryan and Bill's father on the podcast and it was nearly as long as the movie! Great insight into a classic they all loved. Fortunately, I had seen it just a few days before this. One thing that bugs me, though, is that no one brought up the remarkable resemblance between the character Bogs Diamond (head of "The Sisters" rape gang) and Dallas coach Jason Garrett.
It was a good listen, but there was zero reason for Bill's dad to be there. He brought nothing to the conversation at all - it seemed like he was there solely because he used to call Bill and tell him when it was on TNT. In fairness, I pretty much always feel that way when Bill's dad is on the podcast, so maybe it's just me.
 

Vandalman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
676
SE Mass
It was a good listen, but there was zero reason for Bill's dad to be there. He brought nothing to the conversation at all - it seemed like he was there solely because he used to call Bill and tell him when it was on TNT. In fairness, I pretty much always feel that way when Bill's dad is on the podcast, so maybe it's just me.
This is the first time I've heard Bill's dad and, you're right, he didn't add a whole lot to it. He jumped the gun on a few segments ("We're not picking nits yet, Dad,") but the others seemed to cover for him.
 
I won't listen to any podcast (or podcast segment) that Bill's dad is involved with - or any other member of Bill's family, actually. I don't know why I should care what they have to say, and I don't enjoy their delivery, and I don't see the point. The "Around the NFL" podcast has a recurring segment where the host, Dan Hanzus, calls his Jets fan father for a quick hit of commentary: they go into it with a funny jingle ("His name is Keith, he's Dan's dad, no doubt about it he's a big Jets fan - what is he gonna say about the game today? What is he gonna say about the game today?"), he speaks for around 30 seconds, or a minute tops, and he's out and that's it. *That* is how to work a family member into a podcast.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
11,531
Maine
I won't listen to any podcast (or podcast segment) that Bill's dad is involved with - or any other member of Bill's family, actually. I don't know why I should care what they have to say, and I don't enjoy their delivery, and I don't see the point. The "Around the NFL" podcast has a recurring segment where the host, Dan Hanzus, calls his Jets fan father for a quick hit of commentary: they go into it with a funny jingle ("His name is Keith, he's Dan's dad, no doubt about it he's a big Jets fan - what is he gonna say about the game today? What is he gonna say about the game today?"), he speaks for around 30 seconds, or a minute tops, and he's out and that's it. *That* is how to work a family member into a podcast.
I can understand not caring what his dad or son or cousin or whomever has to stay about the NBA or NFL or whatever. But for a podcast about movies, what's the difference? What sort of expert opinion does Bill or Chris Ryan bring to a discussion of Shawshank Redemption that Bill's dad doesn't? I'm not saying his presence elevated the episode or anything (though I was mildly amused by Bill having to repeatedly admonish his dad "we're not to that part yet"), but I'm not sure that putting Mallory Rubin or Shea Serrano in that third chair makes a significant difference in the long run. I mean, why should I care what Mallory thinks about it any more than I care about Bill's dad?

I listen or have listened to many podcasts that are/were retrospectives of TV shows and movies. Most of which are hosted and produced by people I've never heard of and have no particular ties to or expertise on the shows. They're just big fans. I put the Rewatchables into that category. I don't really care what the bona fides of the panelists are, as long as they have some chemistry with each other and produce interesting discussions.
 
I can understand not caring what his dad or son or cousin or whomever has to stay about the NBA or NFL or whatever. But for a podcast about movies, what's the difference? What sort of expert opinion does Bill or Chris Ryan bring to a discussion of Shawshank Redemption that Bill's dad doesn't? I'm not saying his presence elevated the episode or anything (though I was mildly amused by Bill having to repeatedly admonish his dad "we're not to that part yet"), but I'm not sure that putting Mallory Rubin or Shea Serrano in that third chair makes a significant difference in the long run. I mean, why should I care what Mallory thinks about it any more than I care about Bill's dad?
It's not about expert opinions, it's about how those opinions are delivered. The Rewatchables podcast stands and falls on how funny and/or clever its participants are. Is Bill's dad funny? Is he clever? Is he particularly well-spoken, for that matter? Bill and Chris and Mallory and Shea work for a media company and are paid to be funny and/or clever on podcasts. Mind you, so apparently does Nephew Kyle, and his only credentials for being a podcast producer are the genes he shares with Bill's wife. (The young Bill Simmons would have been furious with the old Bill Simmons' transparent nepotism, but whatever, I'm just a guy trying to break into the sports media business and my surname isn't Buck or Albert or Brennaman or McDonough or Caray or Kalas or....)
 

Spelunker

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
6,303
Bill's dad almost ruins it. I don't care that it's their family movie. He doesn't add anything, and it takes away from someone more interesting and insightful.
 

Joe Sixpack

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2002
4,210
Mansfield, MA
I've been the opposite.

Both of my kids like to play baseball, but one of them loves to watch it. He's 7, and comes home from school, does whatever shit he has to do, just so he can be in front of the TV at 6:05 when the Twins game starts. He gets bent out of shape if we make plans and he's not able to watch a game. As a result, I've become more invested in MLB over the past few years, because baseball is something my wife and I are totally fine with having on in the background while we do other things. It's been impossible not to become more aware of general baseball stuff, if only through osmosis.

I doubt most kids are as passionate as mine, but I do know that other parents who maybe stopped caring about baseball sometime in their 20s have started watching it again because their little league-playing son or daughter expresses an interest, so it's an opportunity to pick an old pass time back up in the name of having a common interest with your kid.
My kids are 6 and 4 and not much interest in watching sports yet, although the 6 year old is starting to get into basketball. A lot of Celtics games start at 7:30 or 8 when he's going to bed so we'll watch a few minutes or the 1st quarter together. That's as far as I've got though. It'd be great to get into it more with them in another couple years.
 

Dropkick Izzy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 28, 2003
5,523
Miltappan
The Walrus brought nothing to the table, and they could just as easily have had Wes Morris on instead. He shouldn’t have been there.

Now if Bill wants to effectively deploy his dad, he’d have him on for “Kramer vs Kramer”.
 

The Needler

lurker
Dec 7, 2016
1,774
How can you guys say Bill's dad brought nothing to the table. It was only through him that I learned Bill actually made that movie famous.
 

ElUno20

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,785
So Bill will be doing an updated Book of Basketball in podcast form with interviews, deep dives, etc.


I dont know why it sounds incredibly boring to me. Maybe 10 or 15 years ago but today does anyone really care if a guy is slotted 14th or 17th on a made up list? I guess depending on the guest it has potential to be interesting.
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
Apr 12, 2001
20,557
So Bill will be doing an updated Book of Basketball in podcast form with interviews, deep dives, etc.


I dont know why it sounds incredibly boring to me. Maybe 10 or 15 years ago but today does anyone really care if a guy is slotted 14th or 17th on a made up list? I guess depending on the guest it has potential to be interesting.
One of the things that made TBoB so fun to read, was that it was a good bathroom book or it was a good book to read a few chapters and put down for a few days. An updated podcast? Hard pass.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
11,259
I’m excited for it; anyone that thought Bill was going to write another 700 page book deserves to be disappointed. As someone that has read the book probably 5-6 times; I have a ton of questions about how the game has changed over the last decade and how guys are evaluated. For instance, he kind of buries Dirk in the book as a guy who was never good enough to win it all and choked away a championship. Obviously that opinion and ranking is going to half to change. His “What If?” Chapter also deserves plenty of updating, considering everything that has happened over the last ten years.
 

Spacemans Bong

chapeau rose
SoSH Member
One of the things that made TBoB so fun to read, was that it was a good bathroom book or it was a good book to read a few chapters and put down for a few days. An updated podcast? Hard pass.
I just re-read it in exactly that way -- on the can. It and the Bill James Historical Abstract (another book I'd love to see updated) are maybe the two greatest bathroom books in sports.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
11,259
The Bill James Abstract desperately needs to be updated again. The best part is when he launches into a long analytical essay about how Sammy Sosa can go from being a scrub to hitting 60 homers and never once mentions steroid use.
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
Apr 12, 2001
20,557
I’m excited for it; anyone that thought Bill was going to write another 700 page book deserves to be disappointed.
I didn't think that he'd write another 700-page book, mostly because Simmons isn't a writer any more. But it would have been nice if he did.

The Bill James Abstract desperately needs to be updated again.
Agreed. The last one came out in 2001, I believe. WTF has he been doing for 18 years?
 

Foxy42

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 1, 2002
3,115
nyc
I’d think if the BoB podcast as just being an nba nerd / deep dive podcast vs thinking of it as BoB volume 2. A chance to dive into recent nba history instead of just current events. The BoB label is just a way to market it / give it a title.

I’m looking forward to it and while I won’t prioritize listening as they come out, it will be good to have in reserve.
 

Vandalman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
676
SE Mass
I just heard Bill, Sean and Chris talk about The Shining on The Rewatchables and it was outstanding. There are so many theories about what Kubrick was trying to convey and they covered a lot of them. Plus, bad Nicholson impressions! I'm glad to see them continuing their run of 80s movies. Maybe they'll tackle Full Metal Jacket in the near future.
 

coremiller

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
4,375
On the Steph Curry pyramid pod, Bill noted that Steph led the league in true shooting % in 2015-16 but admitted he didn't know what TS% is. Seriously Bill? This is 2019, it's not that wild of a concept.
 

PC Drunken Friar

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 12, 2003
10,112
South Boston
I liked the Steve Kerr interview on the Book of Basketball 2.0. I was surprised at how candid he was regarding Kevin Durant. He basically admitted that KD was upset that he caught so much shit for going to GS and didn't get enough "credit" when they won. He sort of insinuated that KD torpedoed the whole team last year.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
11,259
I've really enjoyed the Book of Basketball podcasts so far. The prologue he did was really interesting, because it was clear he was just reading a long-form piece that he had already written. The Kerr podcast was also really interesting, because as PC pointed out above, he is really candid about Durant and this is far from a BB/Pop interview. I think that is an example of a strength that Simmons has where he has really solid relationships with a lot of people, so they are more willing to be open to discussing controversial topics on his podcast.

I just finished the one on Shaq he recorded with JA Adande and it is fantastic. Just a thorough deep dive into a modern star's career, with enough hindsight having set in that I think they build a fair assessment of his career. I agree that Shaq is probably a bit underrated today, which is hard to believe given how famous he was and still is. I'm really looking forward to the future pods, presumably on Duncan, LeBron, Kobe, Durant, etc.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
14,972
I've really enjoyed the Book of Basketball podcasts so far. The prologue he did was really interesting, because it was clear he was just reading a long-form piece that he had already written. The Kerr podcast was also really interesting, because as PC pointed out above, he is really candid about Durant and this is far from a BB/Pop interview. I think that is an example of a strength that Simmons has where he has really solid relationships with a lot of people, so they are more willing to be open to discussing controversial topics on his podcast.

I just finished the one on Shaq he recorded with JA Adande and it is fantastic. Just a thorough deep dive into a modern star's career, with enough hindsight having set in that I think they build a fair assessment of his career. I agree that Shaq is probably a bit underrated today, which is hard to believe given how famous he was and still is. I'm really looking forward to the future pods, presumably on Duncan, LeBron, Kobe, Durant, etc.
Adande is great and hope he is on more BS podcasts.
 

nattysez

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2010
4,097
Late to this, but their podcasts must be minting money for Bill to take this approach to updating the book, no? If website ads were more lucrative than podcast ads, I have to think he'd be publishing these on The Ringer in written form. Or does he just not like to write enough anymore to do that?
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
11,259
Late to this, but their podcasts must be minting money for Bill to take this approach to updating the book, no? If website ads were more lucrative than podcast ads, I have to think he'd be publishing these on The Ringer in written form. Or does he just not like to write enough anymore to do that?
I don't think that it is a secret that podcasts are the main source of revenue for The Ringer.

If I'm going to be honest, if you listen to the prologue it sounds like he had parts of the book already written and decided ultimately to scrap that idea and go with the podcast format. Whether that was to be in book form or a series of columns, who knows.

As a huge fan of the book; I obviously wanted another one. However, after listening to a few podcasts there are obvious strengths to doing it in podcast form; I don't think you get that kind of a good, 90 minute breakdown of Shaq's career between two thoughtful guys; one of whom is a life-long Laker fan who was at the LA Times during Shaq's peak. Adande and Bill are really good together, they agree and disagree a healthy amount and bring a lot of perspective to the topic they are discussing. If this is a 5,000 word Ringer piece or a chapter in a book where it is all just Bill's thoughts on Shaq, I don't think it would be nearly as interesting.
 

johnmd20

figuratively like ebola
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
42,121
New York City
Late to this, but their podcasts must be minting money for Bill to take this approach to updating the book, no? If website ads were more lucrative than podcast ads, I have to think he'd be publishing these on The Ringer in written form. Or does he just not like to write enough anymore to do that?
It's definitely a combination of factors. Simmons doesn't want to write AND Podcasts are a huge source of revenue. Combine those factors and it is a no brainer than Simmons would "write" the 2nd book via Podcast. It makes sense up and down the line.
 

HowBoutDemSox

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2009
4,804
When he had Gladwell on his pod recently promoting his new book, Bill was very interested in hearing from Gladwell about how audiobook sales were super high, and posited that a whole generation of Gladwell fans were more familiar with his podcasts than his earlier books at this point. I wonder if that was a turning point in Bill deciding to go with a podcast version instead of a printed book.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
11,259
Plus, he couldn't assist in Melatonin's music career if he wrote a book.
 

Pablo's TB Lover

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 10, 2017
769
If this is a 5,000 word Ringer piece or a chapter in a book where it is all just Bill's thoughts on Shaq, I don't think it would be nearly as interesting.
Bingo. That's really how Bill keeps his podcast going, is opening up the tent. His monologues mainly fall flat nowadays just due to not flexing his writing muscle as much or having bigger responsibilities than living & dying with day to day sports events like when starting out.
 

bbc23

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2009
872
When he had Gladwell on his pod recently promoting his new book, Bill was very interested in hearing from Gladwell about how audiobook sales were super high, and posited that a whole generation of Gladwell fans were more familiar with his podcasts than his earlier books at this point. I wonder if that was a turning point in Bill deciding to go with a podcast version instead of a printed book.
I don't think there's any way it wasn't significantly along by then. That pod was recorded mid-September, we know the Kerr podcast was recorded early October. Not sure how long it'd take with all the planning to get this going but it certainly was on the way by then.

Agreed that the Shaq pod was fantastic, and I hope Bill continues to bring on guests that have that kind of inside look at the players he has episodes on. He mentioned there being an episode on Chris Webber in the can or planned which should be pretty interesting.
 

ElUno20

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,785
I don't think there's any way it wasn't significantly along by then. That pod was recorded mid-September, we know the Kerr podcast was recorded early October. Not sure how long it'd take with all the planning to get this going but it certainly was on the way by then.

Agreed that the Shaq pod was fantastic, and I hope Bill continues to bring on guests that have that kind of inside look at the players he has episodes on. He mentioned there being an episode on Chris Webber in the can or planned which should be pretty interesting.
I was super skeptical but the pods have been good so far. Nice trips down *recent* memory lane
 

johnmd20

figuratively like ebola
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
42,121
New York City
I wonder how much money Bill loses on sports gambling every year. Is it four figures or more?
It truly depends on the size of his wagers but it really feels like Sal loses a LOT of money and Simmons loses, too, but probably 25% of what Sal loses.

But almost every gambler loses. 99% of them. Of that, there is no doubt. It just depends on the scale.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper x Mr. Rogers
Staff member
Dope
It truly depends on the size of his wagers but it really feels like Sal loses a LOT of money and Simmons loses, too, but probably 25% of what Sal loses.

But almost every gambler loses. 99% of them. Of that, there is no doubt. It just depends on the scale.
I agree.

Sal strikes me as a true gambler. Simmons gambles like I do — for bragging rights when he’s right, and as a way to create a rooting interest where he’d otherwise be indifferent.
 

johnmd20

figuratively like ebola
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
42,121
New York City
I agree.

Sal strikes me as a true gambler. Simmons gambles like I do — for bragging rights when he’s right, and as a way to create a rooting interest where he’d otherwise be indifferent.
You know Sal is always betting some random tennis tournament in Croatia. He's in deep. Hopefully he makes a lot of money. I would assume he does.
 
I'm enjoying Simmons' latest podcast with Klosterman, but if Chuck says "Bill-i-chek" again I may put my fist through a wall. (At first I thought he'd made a one-off mistake, but then he said it again, and again, and now I'm wondering if he's always mispronounced the name that way, or maybe even if it's a conscious affectation, combining first and last names together.)
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
14,972
I'm enjoying Simmons' latest podcast with Klosterman, but if Chuck says "Bill-i-chek" again I may put my fist through a wall. (At first I thought he'd made a one-off mistake, but then he said it again, and again, and now I'm wondering if he's always mispronounced the name that way, or maybe even if it's a conscious affectation, combining first and last names together.)
Ironic comment as our guy, Bill, gets more names wrong than he gets right.
 

Pablo's TB Lover

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 10, 2017
769
Podcast with Sandler and KG today: KG's best rant and what makes me want him in a Celtics jersey again right NOW is at about the 40 minute mark piggybacking the Embiid criticism from Shaq & Barkley.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
11,259
I guess KG talked a bunch of shit about LeBron, saying they chased him out of Cleveland. Twitter is tearing him a part and talking an awful lot of smack about the 2008 Celtics and how they talk a lot for being a team that "only" won one ring. Resisting the urge the fire back about how if KG and later Perk didn't get injured...
 

CantKeepmedown

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,845
Portland, ME
Oh yeah, said they chased Lebron out of Cleveland because he couldn't handle the pressure. Then, basically said the league conspired against them in 2012 ECF after the Celtics won game 5. Bill tried ask if they went to far shitting on Lebron after the game leading to his legendary game 6. KG wasn't having it. Said the Celtic's weren't a part of the NBA's plan. Alluded that there was still bad blood between that Celtics group and Heat guys. They'll play nice in public and respect each other, but seems to be some pretty deep dislike there.
 

Pablo's TB Lover

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 10, 2017
769
On the one hand I agree with KG that AT THE TIME LeBron was definitely shook. On the other, not acknowledging that "hey, he's showed us since he has what it takes" sounds petty. But KG, Paul and Rondo felt really betrayed by Ray Allen's move, which only adds to their hatred of the Heat apart from the on-court rivalry.
 

Mugsy's Jock

Eli apologist
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 28, 2000
11,211
Bi-Coastal, for the time being
Great podcast from Celtics POV, though I’ll guess the Uncut Gems publicist felt like they got the short end of the stick.

I’ll leave it to more knowledgeable Celtics fans to come upon and interpret the wealth of awesome KG anecdotes in there. Will endorse the description of Celts defense on Kobe in the final, when they knew he just wouldn’t share the ball so they relentlessly double teamed him into what Simmons said was a 3-for-20 night. Coming into a timeout before the last possession, KG said that Kobe remained resolute, until Phil thundered at him “pass the ball, or we LOSE!”

Soon enough, Kobe dishes to Artest for that horrible no-good very bad three-pointer.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
11,259
Oh yeah, said they chased Lebron out of Cleveland because he couldn't handle the pressure. Then, basically said the league conspired against them in 2012 ECF after the Celtics won game 5. Bill tried ask if they went to far shitting on Lebron after the game leading to his legendary game 6. KG wasn't having it. Said the Celtic's weren't a part of the NBA's plan. Alluded that there was still bad blood between that Celtics group and Heat guys. They'll play nice in public and respect each other, but seems to be some pretty deep dislike there.

That is fucking awesome.

KG has a very interesting legacy. He has a reputation for being a warrior, a super tough competitor who had an insatiable will to win. This is kind of a media narrative, but backed up by a lot of former players and teammates. At the same time, I always thought that as a player, he was kind of soft, especially by the time he came to Boston, where he was rebounding was really reduced and he seemed to rarely go into the post on offense, settling for 10,000 mid range jumpers. His supporting cast in Minnesota was really shitty but he only made it out of the first round once.

At the same time I love his passion and his refusal to admit that the Heat were a better team, even if he has delved into conspiracy theory territory. However..

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmGTDBR2ye4
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
11,259
Great podcast from Celtics POV, though I’ll guess the Uncut Gems publicist felt like they got the short end of the stick.

I’ll leave it to more knowledgeable Celtics fans to come upon and interpret the wealth of awesome KG anecdotes in there. Will endorse the description of Celts defense on Kobe in the final, when they knew he just wouldn’t share the ball so they relentlessly double teamed him into what Simmons said was a 3-for-20 night. Coming into a timeout before the last possession, KG said that Kobe remained resolute, until Phil thundered at him “pass the ball, or we LOSE!”

Soon enough, Kobe dishes to Artest for that horrible no-good very bad three-pointer.
Kobe went 6-24 that game. Celtics lost because they gave up 23 offensive rebounds, 9 of which were to Gasol alone (Thanks KG!). The Lakers shot 32 percent as a team and still won that game 83-79. If Perk didn't get hurt, the Celtics would have just had his 280lb ass to box out some guys and the Celtics win that game. Very, very unfortunate loss.
 

bbc23

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2009
872
I guess KG talked a bunch of shit about LeBron, saying they chased him out of Cleveland. Twitter is tearing him a part and talking an awful lot of smack about the 2008 Celtics and how they talk a lot for being a team that "only" won one ring. Resisting the urge the fire back about how if KG and later Perk didn't get injured...
True and they wouldn't have any if Bynum didn't get hurt, shit happens.