Is he serious? Jalen Rose predicts Michael Jordan will play in a NBA game this year

Usually I don’t put up these kind of videos, but I can’t resist this one.

Jalen Rose in a Grantland video says Michael Jordan will play one game for the Charlotte Bobcats this year. And he’s serious.

The comment initially makes Bill Simmons speechless, no easy feat.

Jordan now is 50 and has packed on a few pounds since his playing days. Hard to think he’s going to pull a Minnie Minoso, the former Sox player who had two at bats in 1980 at the age of 54.

Rose, though, appears to be serious. At the very least, his remark will generate page views for Grantland. Hopefully, a few for me too.

 

NBA Countdown: Doug Collins could be in line to join panel: Wilbon to have reduced role

Jason McIntyre of Big Lead has the latest on ESPN’s NBA studio show:

Michael Wilbon’s role on ESPN’s NBA Countdown will be diminished next season, and taking his spot on the set will most likely be former 76ers coach Doug Collins, multiple sources told The Big Lead.

The move is primarily so that Wilbon can return to focusing on the show that made him a star, Pardon the Interruption. In recent years, Wilbon has increasingly appeared on PTI via remote – from Chicago, Miami, Los Angeles, Arizona, etc – diluting some of the outstanding chemistry he’s built up with longtime friend Tony Kornheiser.

Wilbon’s frequent travel has also led to PTI replacing him with Bob Ryan or J.A. Adande, and the end result of both of those factors is that ratings for the show have sagged in the last two years, sources say.

 

ESPN response to declining spring ratings: Blame San Antonio Spurs

It’s been a relatively slow week on the sports media front. So news that ESPN’s spring ratings suffered a sharp decline prompted a mid-level feeding frenzy.

According to Sports Business Daily, ESPN had a 32 percent dip in primetime ratings during the spring, its worst performance in a single quarter since at least 2006. The network’s total-day viewership fell 20 percent, the lowest since 2007.

DOOM AND GLOOM IN BRISTOL!!

The reason, though, seemed fairly obvious. ESPN got dealt a sucky hand for the NBA playoffs. It was capped off by a West Final featuring two small market teams that don’t move the needle. Then to make matters worse, San Antonio finished off Memphis in four games.

Meanwhile, TNT cashed in with ratings-monster Miami winning in 7 over Indiana.

ESPN PR guru Mike Soltys didn’t single out the Spurs in a post on ESPN’s Front Row, addressing the ratings decline. Also, he didn’t use the word sucky. But both were implied:

The reason for the drop? It is largely attributable to the end of 2012’s NBA lock-out shortened schedule being particularly strong.

You might recall the end of the season last year was back-loaded with a big increase in highly rated games (23 over a month in 2012 versus eight in 2013). This was combined with fewer Conference Finals contests (seven from the Eastern Conference in 2012 compared to three in the 2013 Western Conference). The lack of major market teams’ appearances on ESPN — in 2012 the Lakers and Heat combined for 11 ESPN appearances but just two in 2013 — also factors in.

Boston was featured in 10 2012 playoffs games but only two in 2013, resulting in fewer marquee players in marquee cities to drive viewership. In all, ESPN had 31 fewer NBA games, which not only affected game ratings but also hurt studio shows that routinely get a post-game lift.

Additionally in 2012, ESPN benefitted from 21 Euro Championship matches. This year, ESPN had the Confederations Cup, but it was only about half as many matches with lesser national interest.

“Last quarter was a rare aberration and we expect our demographic delivery to return to normal levels in the second half of 2013,” said ESPN Senior VP of Research and Analytics, Artie Bulgrin.

It is interesting ESPN felt the need to explain the ratings situation on Front Row. Perhaps with Fox Sports 1 starting next month, the network doesn’t want to show any signs of being vulnerable.

While nobody likes lower ratings, I don’t think there’s too much concern in Bristol. Football is coming soon, and all will be right in ESPN’s world.

 

 

 

LeBron is another Michael: At least when it comes to ratings

Say what you want about LeBron James, people tune in to watch him to do his thing the same way they did for Michael Jordan.

Jordan’s numbers during the Finals actually are higher, but that is due in part to the TV landscape being much different in the 90s. Fewer choices back then. Also, Michael was Michael.

But you can be sure ABC and NBA is very happy to have LeBron playing 7-game series in 2013. The guy puts on quite a show.

Also in the comparison department, James at 28 now has the same amount of NBA titles Jordan had at 28. He has a long way to go before his final legacy is written.

Here are the overnight ratings from last night:

********

NBA Finals Game 7 on ABC – the Miami Heat defeated the San Antonio Spurs in a thriller to repeat as NBA Champions – delivered a 17.7 overnight rating, according to Nielsen. This is the second highest-rated NBA game in ABC history. The telecast peaked at a 22.6 from 11:30 p.m. – 11:45 p.m. ET.

Game 7 is also expected to mark the 37th consecutive time an NBA Finals telecast has won the night for all of television and is the 25th straight time it has delivered double-digit overnight ratings.

The game generated a 44.2 metered market rating in Miami, making it the highest-rated NBA game ever in the market. Additionally, Game 7 scored big in San Antonio with a 46.4.

The 2013 NBA Finals averaged a 12.4 metered market rating, up five percent from an 11.8 for the 2012 NBA Finals.

In addition, the Kia NBA Countdown pre-game show scored a strong 5.4 overnight rating.

 

Posted in NBA

Jackpot: ABC gets big rating for Game 6; Should be much bigger for Game 7

So who was cheering more when Ray Allen hit that big three to send last night’s game into overtime? LeBron James and Heat fans (at least those who stayed) or ABC/ESPN executives?

I’m fairly sure ESPN president John Skipper broke his own standing jump record.

Thanks to Allen and James finally being James, ABC will hit the jackpot with a Game 7 Thursday. Game 6 did a huge rating, and the grand finale should be even bigger.

Here are the details from ESPN:

NBA Finals Game 6 on ABC – the Miami Heat defeated the San Antonio Spurs to even the series in an overtime thriller – scored a 14.7 overnight rating, according to Nielsen. This is the second highest-rated NBA Finals Game 6 ever on ABC and the fourth highest rated game ever on the network.

Game 6 is also expected to mark the 36th consecutive time an NBA Finals telecast has won the night for all of television and is the 24th straight time it has delivered double-digit overnight ratings. The game peaked at a 19.8 rating from 11:45 p.m. – 12 a.m. ET.

Last night’s game trails only Boston Celtics-Los Angeles Lakers Game 7 in 2010 (18.2), Los Angeles Lakers-Detroit Pistons Game 5 in 2004 (15.5) and Miami Heat-Dallas Mavericks Game 6 in 2011 (15.0).

NBA Finals Game 6 scored strong local ratings with a 47.6 metered market rating in San Antonio and a 35.4 in Miami.  In addition, ABC’s Kia NBA Countdown pre-game show delivered a strong 4.4 overnight rating, up 16 percent from the pre-game show prior to 2011 NBA Finals Game 6 (3.8).

You WILL want to watch Dr. J documentary tonight

It’s Dr. J. Nothing more needs to be said.

The Doctor premieres Monday at 9 p.m. ET on NBA TV.

Last week, Julius Erving said on a conference call: “I was completely thrilled when the team at NBA TV originals approached me about this film…and I know the excellent work they do. They’ve delivered in past with projects like ‘The Dream Team,’ ‘Mr. Russell’s House,’ ‘Wilt 100,’ ‘Last Night at the ABA,’ other series like ‘Open Court’ and ‘The Association.’ The film enabled me to revisit some people, place and moments in my life. And, I hope after people finish watching ‘The Doctor’ on NBA TV on Monday, they’ll have a better understanding of the journey I’ve been on.”

Here’s the trailer:

Posted in NBA

Will Van Gundy return to coaching next year? ‘I don’t look too far ahead’

Jeff Van Gundy may be one of the best analysts in the business, but he still thinks of himself as a coach. It wouldn’t be a surprise if the NBA Finals are his last games behind a microphone for a while if the right opportunity arises.

Van Gundy sounded a bit itchy during a conference call earlier this week.

Q.  How would you evaluate where you are regarding a possible return to coaching against staying in broadcasting?

VAN GUNDY:  Well, you know, I think when you’re talking about broadcasting, I’ll never feel as comfortable broadcasting as I do in coaching because I’m just not ‑‑ I’m still a novice at it.  Thankfully I work with the Tim Duncan of broadcasting in Mike Breen; his understated greatness really helps out a novice like myself.

You know, as far as coaching, in particular, listen, if anything ever makes sense for a team and for myself where there is a fit of vision and values, I’d obviously consider it.  And ESPN has been, you know, so generous in allowing me to do that.

But I also realize just how good I have it with the job I have right now.  I don’t take that for granted.  I enjoy working with the people I work with.  I enjoy being around the game.  I’ve just been a big beneficiary of Mike and Tim, the producer, to help me try to get a little bit better every year.

Q.  If you had to sort of go with your gut today, do you imagine you’ll be back in broadcasting next year?

VAN GUNDY:  Well, you know, that’s the job I have right now, so I would think so.

One thing I’ve learned is I don’t look too far ahead.  I don’t try to plan my life out.  I have enough trouble getting ready to go to the airport today.  So for me to plan too far ahead, I don’t do that.  I just enjoy what I’m doing.

My dad gave me good, sound, solid advice when I was coming out of college, and he always told me, “Don’t worry about your next job.  Just do the job you have as well as you can.”  That served me pretty well and I’m trying to stick with that.

Q.  The fact that you have gotten enjoyment in broadcasting and stayed close to the staple, has it made it easier for you to stay out of coaching?

VAN GUNDY:  Well, the thing about broadcasting is the lifestyle of broadcasting is great.  Like you said, you get to stay around the game.  Now, it’s not as rewarding to me as coaching, but it’s also not as disheartening at times, either.  So you have a more even‑keel lifestyle I think.  That’s been great.

Like I said, I’m more than fortunate, more than fortunate with the job I have.  I love to watch NBA basketball.  I love to talk NBA basketball.  And to the irritation of others, I like to talk about how I think NBA basketball can improve its game, too.  Like I said, I’m very, very fortunate.

Q.  There was a report yesterday that talks with the Clippers had become, quote, I think dormant, was the word.  I wonder if you can touch on your interest in that job and also what about that job is so interesting

VAN GUNDY:  Well, I made it my personal and ever‑changing philosophy to really stay away from specific questions about jobs.  I think if individual teams want to talk about their job searches, that’s great.

But for me, I don’t think it does myself or any teams any good by me being out there and talking about interest level or their interest level or anything like that.

But the Clipper job in general is a great job.  I think you have seen with their acquisition of players, they have done a good job building their roster.  Obviously it’s imperative that they re‑sign Chris Paul, and it seems like that will happen.  They have great practice facility, great arena, a fan base that has really grown and swelled.

And so to me, they are coming off a record‑breaking year win‑wise, road win‑wise, won their division, and just met a very, very good Memphis team in the first round.  And Blake Griffin gets a little banged up, and it doesn’t take much to swing the tide in these playoff series that are so tight and so close.

Posted in NBA

Frank talk from Doris Burke on stereotypes for women in sports TV; ‘Better have thick skin’

Part 2:

I tell Doris Burke how much I admire her work.

She responds, “I appreciate you saying that. It isn’t unanimous.”

Indeed, it hasn’t been easy being a trailblazer in TV sports. As an analyst on NBA and men’s college basketball games, she has heard it all from various segments who object to a woman in that role.

Burke (link to her bio) also has faced questions from colleagues about whether she is hindering her analyst career by also being a sideline reporter, a job typically done by women.

In part two of my Q/A, Burke talked frankly about all of those subjects on the eve of serving as the sideline reporter for ABC’s coverage of the NBA Finals. In part one, she discussed the challenge of trying to do an in-game interview with Gregg Popovich.

How do you answer questions about  sideline reporters and the perceptions that those jobs go mainly to young, attractive women?

I was in a college classroom. We did a Q/A at the end of the session, and a couple of women said, “It’s ridiculous that (looks) are the only criteria they use to fill those jobs.”

My response is always the same. If you enter television, and you allow yourself to be bothered by the reasons you believe someone was hired, then you’re wasting energy. I tell young women who want to be in the business–in fact, I implore them–to be as professional as possible.

This is a visual medium. Are women evaluated differently than men? Is an attractive woman likely to get the job ahead of someone who is perceived as less attractive? Well, the answer is probably yes.

My whole thing in 23 years of being in this business is that I try to be prepared and professional as possible. I can’t worry about why this woman may have gotten the job and I didn’t. You just keep plugging. The reality is, if you don’t have a thick skin, this is going to be a tough business for you.

How do you respond to criticisms about your work?

I so appreciate you saying you think well of my work. It’s not unanimous. Opinions about announcers are very subjective. I get blown up on social media all the time. “She’s ugly.” What’s a woman doing the NBA?” “She has no credibility.”

It’s the nature of it. People will like you or hate you. If you allow that to bother, boy…

My kids get more upset about it than I do.

Really, you’re telling me the criticism and cheap shots don’t bother you?

I’m not going to sit here and tell you it doesn’t hurt. We all want to be well liked. We all want to be thought of as exceptional on the job.

Does it hurt? Of course it does. But it can’t have an impact when you go to do a job.

How do you like being an analyst compared to a sideline reporter?

Yeah, it’s an entirely different job. I have come over the course of time to appreciate the value of the sideline role. I grew up in the business as an analyst. Obviously on much lesser games, but that was my background. I was not a communications major. My strength always was breaking down the game. So I had to learn a few things when I was asked to do sideline work.

The first person I called was Al Trautwig. He gave me the best piece of advice. I have to remember it sometimes. He said, ‘There are going to be days when you get off the air as a sideline reporter, and you’re going to feel like you were an integral part of that telecast. In fact, you helped raise its level.’ He said, ‘There are going to be far many more nights when you get off the air and you say, ‘They just paid me do to that?'”

You have to be willing to sit there and know you researched and worked as hard as the play-by-play and color man, and you’re not going to get 90 percent of your content in. You have to be OK with it.

My preference is to be the analyst. You have far more input. You’re so much more engaged.

But the day I worked the Celtics game as a sideline reporter and Rajon Rondo tore his ACL, I had all this information and I was on all the time. That’s the nature of this assignment.

Given your work as analyst, do you come in with a level of credibility that might be higher than other sideline reporters?

I don’t know about that. I have had colleagues who have asked whether I should keep being a sideline reporter. They have questioned whether that hurts my credibility. I recently asked Jeff Van Gundy about this. I said, “I don’t think it does, but do you think it does?” He said, “Absolutely not. No way.”

Do your colleagues think you’re getting pigeon-holed as a sideline reporter?

Perhaps. I think that’s their suggestion.

Both jobs require some level of relationship of the people you’re covering. So the more Tony Parker sees me on NBA coverage in either role, he’s more familiar with the job that I do. As long as I am completely professional in both jobs, I think it helps me in the long run.

And finally, Burke talked about her roots in the business.

I’ll be honest, I was a good player at Providence College. I was an All-Big East player at a time (when the conference) wasn’t as powerful as it is today. I think it would be a lot more difficult for me to get in the business now. I was not an All-American. I was not the face of my sport, so to speak. I think those that are better known have a better chance of getting these jobs today.

I entered the business at a time (1991) when women’s basketball coverage was exploding. I had patient people who helped me overcome my mistakes and teach me along the way. I always will be indebted to Madison Square Garden. They taught me TV.

My timing was great. I feel fortunate for the opportunities I’ve gotten.

 

 

 

 

 

Van Gundy on in-game interviews: No coach looks forward to it; amused by Popovich

Doris Burke might be interested in this.

With Gregg Popovich and San Antonio in the NBA Finals, Jeff Van Gundy was asked on a conference call about the value of the in-game interviews with coaches?

He said:

“Well, I think there’s no coach that looks forward to it.  I think some hide it better than others.  I don’t consider it a gimmick.

“But I also don’t ‑‑ because they are distracted and they are trying to, you know, get to their time‑out huddle to do what their job is ‑‑ I used to like it when they had the boom mics in the huddle because you didn’t have to do anything different.  I mean, the mic was different in there but you as a coach didn’t have to do anything different.  And because they are distracted, I don’t think those are particularly revealing.

“I think what would be as good is interviewing the head official; what does he see what’s happening in the first quarter.  You know, what are they looking for; what is the scouting report on these two teams.

“And you know, like when my brother did it, and sometimes with Pop does it, I think it would be just as interesting interviewing a random fan, because they are just not into it.  It’s almost become funny how short Gregg is.  I think he thinks he’s [not] getting paid by the word, because really, some of his stuff is very, very funny; short, and to the point.”

 

 

Posted in NBA