NBA 2017: Fleecing the East

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

24 minutes ago, Relic said:

Errrrrr, homeboy is the head of a growing media platform, and kicking ass without ESPN. His interviews with Durant this year have been the best basketball player interviews maybe ever. No idea what your personal problem with Simmons is but one thing he ISNT doing is falling. 

I'll say that his podcast is really hit or miss. This last one with some guy named Chris Ryan was pretty terrible. He needs to find a comic foil co-host, methinks.

[sperry]

36 minutes ago, Relic said:

Errrrrr, homeboy is the head of a growing media platform, and kicking ass without ESPN. His interviews with Durant this year have been the best basketball player interviews maybe ever. No idea what your personal problem with Simmons is but one thing he ISNT doing is falling. 

 

His show crashed and burned. There's zero chance his contract is picked back up at HBO when it expires. The website is not doing well. His podcast is doing well (although I don't think the celebrity interview focus is a good model for him), the recently launched podcasts are doing great.

 

He's really misjudged his brand and audience. The writing on the website is terrible, and it is aimed at people who are not Bill Simmons people.

[Jaime L]

3 hours ago, Calibandar said:

Hard to believe this is the scenario. It's unfortunate for them that the Nets and Kings desperately wanted to sign Otto Porter to a max deal but if it means losing your only decent front court player I wouldn't do it.

It still blows my mind he's seen as a max player in the league. I get that wings are in high demand and he's the platonic ideal of a 3 and D guy but he's not a guy who creates offense for you. Imagine he'll continue refining his game but he's never averaged more than 13 PPG. Don't think he'll ever be the guy who creates off the dribble or ever becomes an elite passer. I guess the dream is he improves every year and eventually becomes what Gordon Hayward became but I don't see it. 

1 hour ago, sperry said:

 

His show crashed and burned. There's zero chance his contract is picked back up at HBO when it expires. The website is not doing well. His podcast is doing well (although I don't think the celebrity interview focus is a good model for him), the recently launched podcasts are doing great.

 

He's really misjudged his brand and audience. The writing on the website is terrible, and it is aimed at people who are not Bill Simmons people.

His biggest issue is first ESPN and then HBO offered him a ton of money to be on TV and he's just not good at it in any capacity. That's not his skillset. Assume after Any Given Wednesday failed, he's done pursuing that which is good. 

It's still objectively amazing what Simmons has built in his career. I don't think he's an overwhelmingly talented writer but he was great at connecting with his audience and executing an ambitious vision (i.e. Grantland, 30 for 30, The Ringer) so far beyond what we see from other humble sports columnists. Who else is even comparable? Dude turned an AOL Geocities website into a multimedia empire and an eight figure net worth.

Sure he's made mistakes along the way. The Ringer hasn't been implemented smoothly or at the level of quality people were used to from Grantland and it's still unclear exactly what caused the blow up at ESPN but it cost him the largest possible platform for his brand. That said with what is happening at ESPN in the last year in terms of cost-cutting and layoffs, not sure they would've continued funding Grantland even if he had been a boy scout while there.  

I'm sure he's still pulling in 7 figures easy and he still has all the A-list connections that he's able to leverage for podcast guests. He's not where he was at his peak but still in the grand scheme of things life is pretty great if you're Bill Simmons. 

[Michael Seswatha Jordan]

As far as Simmons, he needs to get back to writing articles more often. I don't see how his website is anything other than pure Simmons. Since his days as The Sports Guy, he's been a mixture of sports and pop-culture. So, I don't see that complaint. And, his podcasts, to me, have always been some of my favorite. Yea, he's not really fit for TV, tbh. But, maybe a change in the show to showcase what he's good at, could make it better. But, I feel in no way that he is crashing and burning and becoming irrelevant. 

[Fez]

Some of the writing at The Ringer is quite good, but overall its not at the same quality level that Grantland had. I think Chris Ryan and Andy Greenwald's podcast is still really good though.

One thing I'm totally unclear on is how The Ringer makes any money at all though. There's no subscription service and basically no ads anywhere. Podcast ads bring in some money; the estimate I saw in 2015 was that a weekly show with around 100,000 downloads/streams per show will bring between $250,000-$400,000 annual gross revenue (If a Midroll or a similar ad booking agency is used, they'll take 30% of that). I'm sure Simmons' podcast makes more than that, but how many of the others do? There can't be nearly enough money to cover all the staff writers from that. And if all the revenue is from podcasts, why have a website at all?

If HBO was featured more, I could maybe see the value of the site as an extension of the HBO brand; but its not. So I doubt its HBO just underwriting the site (and if it is, I can't see it lasting much longer).

[sperry]

34 minutes ago, Fez said:

Some of the writing at The Ringer is quite good, but overall its not at the same quality level that Grantland had. I think Chris Ryan and Andy Greenwald's podcast is still really good though.

One thing I'm totally unclear on is how The Ringer makes any money at all though. There's no subscription service and basically no ads anywhere. Podcast ads bring in some money; the estimate I saw in 2015 was that a weekly show with around 100,000 downloads/streams per show will bring between $250,000-$400,000 annual gross revenue (If a Midroll or a similar ad booking agency is used, they'll take 30% of that). I'm sure Simmons' podcast makes more than that, but how many of the others do? There can't be nearly enough money to cover all the staff writers from that. And if all the revenue is from podcasts, why have a website at all?

If HBO was featured more, I could maybe see the value of the site as an extension of the HBO brand; but its not. So I doubt its HBO just underwriting the site (and if it is, I can't see it lasting much longer).

 

Simmons claims the podcasts are paying for everything, which I can believe. His show gets 7 figure downloads, and he releases about 3 per week. I think the popular other ones get in the hundreds of thousands.

 

He's got big picture vision, but his strategy is terrible. The quality of the writing on the site is atrocious. The sports writing is generally solid, although it's a big step down from Grantland since they've lost so much talent, but the other stuff is awful. And I'm not sure what he's thinking with it. It's a bunch of idiot, uninformed kids writing about politics and technology, and random crap. I'm sure there is plenty of a market for that kind of stuff, but it's not Bill Simmon's audience. It cracks me up, because Simmons has remarked several times "we get a huge percentage of our traffic from desktops, we're really surprised." It's like no shit Bill, your audience is white guys age like 27-55. You built your brand as "The Sports Guy", the every man that you would want to drink a beer with and watch a football game.

 

I also think the celebrity stuff doesn't help him, for the most part. Some of it makes sense; the KD stuff is awesome (although he's become a complete sycophant because he's scared of losing access). The comedians tend to work well, as he's knowledgeable about comedy and they're good at working within the confines of a podcast. But when he gets big name stars on there, it's terrible, because he sucks up to them and he's uninformed on stuff. He's at his best when he's bullshitting about sports with people he's familiar with. Not when he's trying to talk to Nas or Judd Apatow or Kurt Russell about nonsense.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

16 minutes ago, sperry said:

I also think the celebrity stuff doesn't help him, for the most part. Some of it makes sense; the KD stuff is awesome (although he's become a complete sycophant because he's scared of losing access). The comedians tend to work well, as he's knowledgeable about comedy and they're good at working within the confines of a podcast. But when he gets big name stars on there, it's terrible, because he sucks up to them and he's uninformed on stuff. He's at his best when he's bullshitting about sports with people he's familiar with. Not when he's trying to talk to Nas or Judd Apatow or Kurt Russell about nonsense.

His Will Ferrell interview was really good. I always enjoy when he has Micheal Rappaport on, as they seem to have a good rapport.

 

/Interviews have as much to do with the guest as they do the interviewer, methinks. Judd Apatow for example is just not a good interview, for my money. He's good in panel, with funny people he's directed, but ask him to carry an interview and it's a yawn fest.

[Jaime L]

27 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

His Will Ferrell interview was really good. I always enjoy when he has Micheal Rappaport on, as they seem to have a good rapport.

Good Rappaport. C'mon Manhole! 

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

18 minutes ago, Jaime L said:

Good Rappaport. C'mon Manhole! 

I'd probably get a Wigger, please for that oversight.  

[briantw]

6 hours ago, Calibandar said:

That's true, they don't have the room. The Celtics were suggested as a possible destination but it's probably not happening. Maybe they could offload Horford, I'd much rather have Gasol.

Not sure who would actually agree to take on that Horford contract.  Dude's making damn near thirty million to be one of the worst big man rebounders in the league, and he has a 15% (!) trade kicker.  His contract is essentially untradeable.  Boston would probably have to throw in all of their high value assets to move that shit deal.

[sperry]

1 hour ago, briantw said:

Not sure who would actually agree to take on that Horford contract.  Dude's making damn near thirty million to be one of the worst big man rebounders in the league, and he has a 15% (!) trade kicker.  His contract is essentially untradeable.  Boston would probably have to throw in all of their high value assets to move that shit deal.

 

That contract is the albatross that could sink their ship. Their one hope would be packaging an asset with it to get rid of it.  If the Lakers pick doesn't vest this year, maybe you can get somebody to take Horford off your books for Kings 2019.

[Tywin et al.]

37 minutes ago, sperry said:

 

That contract is the albatross that could sink their ship. Their one hope would be packaging an asset with it to get rid of it.  If the Lakers pick doesn't vest this year, maybe you can get somebody to take Horford off your books for Kings 2019.

It already has. Just look at their roster now that Hayward is there. They are made up of a top of guards and small forwards. They're lack of being able to pay for some depth at the 4 and 5 will hurt them in the playoffs, and more so if Horford continues to look like he's getting closer and closer to being washed. 

[Tywin et al.]

This article does a great job of point out how stacked the West is right now:

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/19850146/western-conference-two-all-star-teams-better-eastern-conference-tom-haberstroh

TL;DR- He has the West's B All-Star team ranked slightly ahead of the East's A All-Star team. 

[Rhom]

45 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

This article does a great job of point out how stacked the West is right now:

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/19850146/western-conference-two-all-star-teams-better-eastern-conference-tom-haberstroh

TL;DR- He has the West's B All-Star team ranked slightly ahead of the East's A All-Star team. 

"One crazy thing? The talent divide is so wide that Towns is the worst player on the West team (14th overall by composite rank), but he's ranked higher than the third-best player in the East."

 

[Jaime L]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

This article does a great job of point out how stacked the West is right now:

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/19850146/western-conference-two-all-star-teams-better-eastern-conference-tom-haberstroh

TL;DR- He has the West's B All-Star team ranked slightly ahead of the East's A All-Star team. 

The larger point he's making is fair but some of those rankings in there are ridiculous. DeMarcus Cousins is the 10th best player in the NBA? Let me know when that translates to wins. Giannis is #17? Wall is #24? Isaiah Thomas is #39? Meanwhile good ol' Ricky Rubio is #32.

Whatever this ESPN composite ranking they're using looks like the new QBR. 

 

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

36 minutes ago, Jaime L said:

The larger point he's making is fair but some of those rankings in there are ridiculous. DeMarcus Cousins is the 10th best player in the NBA? Let me know when that translates to wins. Giannis is #17? Wall is #24? Isaiah Thomas is #39? Meanwhile good ol' Ricky Rubio is #32.

Whatever this ESPN composite ranking they're using looks like the new QBR. 

 

It seems like EVERYONE is overrating Giannis at this point. I haven't seen that much of him, so maybe I should shut up, but this is one year we're talking about. I don't see how you put him in the top 25 at this point. There's just not enough there, there. 

[Jaime L]

55 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

It seems like EVERYONE is overrating Giannis at this point. I haven't seen that much of him, so maybe I should shut up, but this is one year we're talking about. I don't see how you put him in the top 25 at this point. There's just not enough there, there. 

I mean he put up a 23/9/5/2/2 this past season as a 22 year old. 2nd team all defense. A 6-11 freak athlete. He can play all 5 positions. He's good at everything except 3's. If he ever learns to shoot the 3, it's game over for the league. He's still probably 5 years from his peak. What more are you looking for from him?

And yet that ESPN rating put DeAndre Jordan ahead of him. A guy you can't even play during crunch time. It's crazy to me. 

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

21 minutes ago, Jaime L said:

I mean he put up a 23/9/5/2/2 this past season as a 22 year old. 2nd team all defense. A 6-11 freak athlete. He can play all 5 positions. He's good at everything except 3's. If he ever learns to shoot the 3, it's game over for the league. He's still probably 5 years from his peak. What more are you looking for from him?

And yet that ESPN rating put DeAndre Jordan ahead of him. A guy you can't even play during crunch time. It's crazy to me. 

He did have a hell of a year, but top 20 after a rookie season seems a bit much. I mean you'd rank John Wall ahead of him, wouldn't you? Point taken on Jordan though.

[Jaime L]

17 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

He did have a hell of a year, but top 20 after a rookie season seems a bit much. I mean you'd rank John Wall ahead of him, wouldn't you? Point taken on Jordan though.

This was his 4th year. 

I think John Wall does more to help a team win right now. He's further along the leadership/maturation/making teammates better curve. In a year or two though, Giannis could well pass him. 

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

7 minutes ago, Jaime L said:

This was his 4th year. 

I think John Wall does more to help a team win right now. He's further along the leadership/maturation/making teammates better curve. In a year or two though, Giannis could well pass him. 

Oh shit, my bad. I had no idea. I thought this was his rookie season.