yah its a tough comparison but i think if kobe goes on a run the next few years with a ring or two and consistent finals appearances before he starts to decline, we'll end up looking at the 08 lakers/celts series as the start of the post-timmy era...esp if TD doesn't get another ring before he retires. i tend to think that kobe's first three rings dont count quite as much *for him* in this kind of discussion because he wasn't the undisputed leader of those teams. even more so than points, stats, etc i think thats what simmons convinced me about-- even on the 99 team with robinson, it was absolutely td's team.
This is what is going to make the Western Conf. so interesting this year. They both have good teams and something to prove.
― Adventures of Dog Boy and Frank Sobotka (B.L.A.M.), Saturday, 31 October 2009 15:09 (ten years ago) link
I can't imagine "something to prove" matters as much to Tim as it does to Kobes. I'm not trying to argue Duncan isn't driven or whatever, I just don't think he cares as much about what people think about him. (Tbf, he also doesn't have as much negativity to cope with.)
― This part of the sentence is even dumber. (lukas), Saturday, 31 October 2009 15:15 (ten years ago) link
Yeah. That's probably a pretty fair assessment on both of them.
― Ultraviolet Thunder (B.L.A.M.), Saturday, 31 October 2009 21:49 (ten years ago) link
Have purchased. Have read the first 100 or so pages. Have learned a lot about Boston basketball. Woo, this guy is a HOMER.
― Ultraviolet Thunder (B.L.A.M.), Sunday, 1 November 2009 15:47 (ten years ago) link
What else would you expect from Bill Simmons? ESPN's "The Sports Guy" was in town on Monday promoting his lastest book, "The Book of Basketball," and told the Tribune's Luis Arroyave that it's no contest, the 1986 Celtics were better than the '96 Bulls.
"When Bill Wennington and Luc Longley are your two centers, you're instantly eliminated from being the best team ever," Simmons said.
No contest Robert Parish was a better center than Longley and Wennington. But using that logic, a Bulls fan could counter, no team with Danny Ainge as its shooting guard should ever be mentioned in the argument, since his Bulls counterpart was Michael Jordan.
Plus, Wennington was a backup. Does that mean Bulls fans can bring up Celtics backups Jerry Sichting and Greg Kite, whom the Boston Globe's Bob Ryan once called "the least talented player in the NBA."
Then again Jack Haley was on the '96 Bulls roster.
― hope this helps (Granny Dainger), Tuesday, 3 November 2009 21:16 (ten years ago) link
96 bulls greater than the sum of their parts imo. also 72 wins, gotdamn, ur move simmons.
― sexual alien v. sexual predator (m bison), Tuesday, 3 November 2009 21:19 (ten years ago) link
I'm still pissed they got double-digit losses.they lost against at least one garbage team right near the end.
― hope this helps (Granny Dainger), Tuesday, 3 November 2009 21:21 (ten years ago) link
mj made $290K more than kukoc that season 0_otheir last 2 losses were against raptors (21-61) and hornets (41-41)
― hope this helps (Granny Dainger), Tuesday, 3 November 2009 21:24 (ten years ago) link
yeah jordan was like paid peanuts save for those last 2 years which were like 30 mil a year or something, right?
― sexual alien v. sexual predator (m bison), Tuesday, 3 November 2009 21:34 (ten years ago) link
man do i wish he'd gone through with calling this book "tell me how my book tastes"
― i'll see you in jamie mccourt then (agent hibachi), Tuesday, 3 November 2009 22:52 (ten years ago) link
Either that title or "Black Men Can Jump." It would have been funny.
Now, look...I'm not a Boston fan. I wasn't when I didn't live in LA, and now I really hate them.
But Ainge back in the day? He was SO fast and really pesky as fuck on defense. I can't take away from him as a player. He wasn't MJ, of course, but the degrees of difference b/t him and MJ and Longley/Wennington v. Parish? No damn contest.
― Ultraviolet Thunder (B.L.A.M.), Wednesday, 4 November 2009 05:16 (ten years ago) link
― luol deng (am0n), Friday, 13 November 2009 18:28 (ten years ago) link
i like pierce but there's a lot of bullshit in that review
― omaha deserved 311 (call all destroyer), Friday, 13 November 2009 18:31 (ten years ago) link
he comes off with a serious case of U MAD? in that review imo
― house of flying jaggers (J0rdan S.), Friday, 13 November 2009 18:43 (ten years ago) link
i've been entangled in a long email back & forth with my friend about simmons as sparked by that piece
pretty much hate this guy but i would like him more if he cut the pop culture/bro shit b/c he can make some interesting points. and sometimes i feel like reading his pieces is like reading [nabisco] on sports.
― jØrdån (omar little), Friday, 13 November 2009 18:47 (ten years ago) link
obv it's a takedown of simmons in the guise of a book review, but he is pretty accurate. dude is so in love with his own hit-or-miss shtick that the worthwhile content sometimes gets buired (xpost: ie what omar said)
― aarrissi-a-roni, Friday, 13 November 2009 18:49 (ten years ago) link
altho i don't hate him, i kinda read around it
― aarrissi-a-roni, Friday, 13 November 2009 18:50 (ten years ago) link
years of training have left me v. adept at ignoring the pop culture/bro shit.
― omaha deserved 311 (call all destroyer), Friday, 13 November 2009 18:50 (ten years ago) link
it's pretty fucking funny for charles pierce to not recognize shtick as such since you know EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE GETTING when you read both him and simmons.
― omaha deserved 311 (call all destroyer), Friday, 13 November 2009 18:51 (ten years ago) link
^^those 2 posts are exactly my response too
― hope this helps (Granny Dainger), Friday, 13 November 2009 18:57 (ten years ago) link
yeah i mean, everyone holds up simmons & vegas as like What is Wrong With Simmons (pretty proud of myself here) but shit, if you open that column you know what you're getting. same thing for his fantasy draft columns.
& i don't see why he shouldn't be in love with his own schtick, seeing as it's made him pretty damn popular and has endeared him to a huge fucking audience. and like cad says, it's pretty easy to skip his 580th teen wolf tangent
― house of flying jaggers (J0rdan S.), Friday, 13 November 2009 19:02 (ten years ago) link
yeah i mean as a person who has no desire to go to vegas i actually find the vegas columns pretty entertaining as insight into something i will never do. a lot of the crit of simmons seems to be along the lines of "he only writes for people who are like him" which is only true if you just kind of reject a certain strain of dude lifestyle totally out of hand.
― omaha deserved 311 (call all destroyer), Friday, 13 November 2009 19:07 (ten years ago) link
basically i say that he's the apatow movies of sportswriting - yeah other writers may make you think more or may be more impressive, but when it comes to big budget bang for your buck entertainment, it's hard to beat simmons
― house of flying jaggers (J0rdan S.), Friday, 13 November 2009 19:15 (ten years ago) link
yeah i mean as a person who has no desire to go to vegas i actually find the vegas columns pretty entertaining as insight into something i will never do. a lot of the crit of simmons seems to be along the lines of "he only writes for people who are like him" which is only true if you just kind of reject a certain strain of dude lifestyle totally out of hand. --omaha deserved 311 (call all destroyer)
― itdn put butt in the display name (gbx), Friday, 13 November 2009 19:29 (ten years ago) link
sort of shocked that a book abt basketball could be a #1 best seller
― ice cr?m, Friday, 13 November 2009 19:35 (ten years ago) link
<3 that album
― windy = white, carl = black (polyphonic), Friday, 13 November 2009 20:37 (ten years ago) link
TBH, I kind of treat Simmons as a guilty pleasure, and get a little embarassed when he comes up in conversations. I guess its because the Bill we see, who I doubt is what the real Bill Simmons is like regardless of how much he talks about his wife or his family, is one that is cultivated to attract people to read his discussions about sports.
His knowledge of sports, and in particular pro basketball, is pretty impressive, and he makes some interesting arguments and analyses of certain sports topics, but its all delivered with the pop culture references and bro-down stories that his core readership thrives on.
These are, of course, the same people who recite movie lines as jokes, and expect to therefore be regarded as funny.
― Ultraviolet Thunder (B.L.A.M.), Friday, 13 November 2009 21:45 (ten years ago) link
― house of flying jaggers (J0rdan S.), Friday, November 13, 2009 1:43 PM (3 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
i liked when i got to the end and see his credits that basically say I AM A BITTER RAGEFUL SPORTSWRITER
― NEW YORK DESERVED 9-11 (cankles), Friday, 13 November 2009 23:38 (ten years ago) link
anyway re: this book - i love simmons when he talks basketball (and basically ignore him when he talks about anything else) so this seems like a great idea to me - i'll deffo read it someday - and honestly, i can probably count on one hand the number of sportswriters i consider better than him (nb. this is more an indictment of sportswriting than an endorsement of simmons)
― NEW YORK DESERVED 9-11 (cankles), Friday, 13 November 2009 23:39 (ten years ago) link
I ended up really liking this, and the race stuff I mentioned upthread got put into context almost immediately after I posted that, and it made way more sense by the time I finished. Overall the time he spent writing about race + discrimination issues wound up being one of the most thoughtful parts of the book.
For some reason I thought the pyramid would turn out to be a total Ronald Thomas Clontle routine, but Simmons spends a lot of time trying to articulate a bigger point: that basketball fans have short memories, sure, but also that a lot of the measures of greatness in this sport rely more on subjective analysis and intangibles - since not only is the sport constantly evolving and changing its own rules in a way that, say, baseball isn't, but that the markers of greatness often manifest themselves in things that aren't obvious if you only rely on box scores and highlights to analyze performance. (Cf. "The Secret," etc, but the stuff about the ABA's struggle to get TV coverage and its subsequent effect on how ABA players were perceived relative to their NBA peers is really fascinating.)
I realize that all sounds kinda corny, but Simmons is very good at writing this kind of sports pop science, and while this book definitely didn't need to be 700+ pages, it's surprising how much of what he threw out there sticks.
― Conservative HOT Mom! (govern yourself accordingly), Saturday, 14 November 2009 01:26 (ten years ago) link
Also it made me wish somebody with his exact level of access/obsession would write a similar book about NCAA basketball.
― Conservative HOT Mom! (govern yourself accordingly), Saturday, 14 November 2009 01:29 (ten years ago) link
wishing Michael Lewis would write a book about basketball
― 囧 (dyao), Monday, 16 November 2009 09:01 (ten years ago) link
His Battier piece was pretty good but I don't know if he could sustain an entire book without just rewriting Moneyball.
― windy = white, carl = black (polyphonic), Monday, 16 November 2009 17:44 (ten years ago) link
love the book, but ranking paul pierce and parish that high is some pretty serious homerism. and in the whole list of 96 there's no room for any of the '04 pistons? there's room for big shot rob but no finals mvp chauncey billups? they were only the best/most consisten team in the east this decade.
― Danny Duberstein (hmmmm), Tuesday, 17 November 2009 09:43 (ten years ago) link
the human beans story otoh makes me pretty happy
I am absolutely LOVING this book, and I'm not even much of a basketball fan! Simmons makes me laugh.
― Mr. Snrub, Wednesday, 18 November 2009 02:34 (ten years ago) link
It was hit or miss with me, until he started describing the hall of fame inductees. I stayed up WAY past my bed time last night reading it. Really good.
― Ultraviolet Thunder (B.L.A.M.), Friday, 20 November 2009 19:19 (ten years ago) link
Simmons was banned from twitter for two weeks by ESPN because he talked shit about some Boston radio station.
― windy = white, carl = black (polyphonic), Friday, 20 November 2009 23:45 (ten years ago) link
lol know what i might say to espn had i the #1 bestseller
― ice cr?m, Saturday, 21 November 2009 05:53 (ten years ago) link
First ESPN totally assrapes Simmons by not letting Obama onto his podcast, and now this. Assholes.
― CLEVELAND DOES NOT DESERVE MANGINI (Mr. Snrub), Monday, 23 November 2009 01:49 (nine years ago) link
I read this whole thing. I love how he rates The Answer.
― Mordy, Monday, 23 November 2009 01:57 (nine years ago) link
i read this over thanksgiving break. i don't know anything about basketball so i can't dispute his knowledge there. he's an entertaining writer and occasionally very funny (his section on great basketball players who made shitty announcers/commentators made me LOL). this may be an obvious thing to say about a 700-pg book but he needs better editing, it got really repetitive by the end (making the same points and jokes over and over) and was just too long in general. also a lot of his pop culture references are so dumb and/or wrong. i enjoyed the book though.
― congratulations (n/a), Monday, 30 November 2009 15:08 (nine years ago) link
^^kinda sums up how i feel about his writing, in general. i am not a sports guy (lol) and rarely ever know who he's talking about or why it ought to be funny, but sometimes a lot of his jokes work without that, which i think is a credit. or i'm just easy, and the kind of person who laughs if someone gets the delivery and misses the punchline
― crazy farting throwback jersey (gbx), Monday, 30 November 2009 15:12 (nine years ago) link
oddly his pop culture analogy that made me the most mad was comparing the development of basketball to the development of comedy, saying if you listen to woody allen and bob newhart routines they won't make you LOL because comedy wasn't as advanced as in the '80s. i was like "nah brah" but then again i am weird and old-fashioned about comedy i guess, i love old woody allen and newhart stuff :/
― congratulations (n/a), Monday, 30 November 2009 15:15 (nine years ago) link
if there is def one thing bill simmons is consistently wrong about, it's other people's comedy. in that, i think a lot of the comedic pop cultural stuff he mentions off-hand in his columns is sort of milquetoast or outright bad, though he himself can make a good joke
then again, i couldn't possibly think of a specific example of this, so i might be making it up.
― crazy farting throwback jersey (gbx), Monday, 30 November 2009 15:24 (nine years ago) link
i just picture him laughing his ass off at some current standup while i look disgusted
he probably rates dane cook as G.O.A.T.
― 囧 (dyao), Monday, 30 November 2009 15:41 (nine years ago) link
nah I wouldn't go that far. i'd put my money on will ferrell. def agree with gbx on this tho.
― hope this helps (Granny Dainger), Monday, 30 November 2009 15:46 (nine years ago) link
Simmons moves to Gab in 2020.
― EZ Snappin, Thursday, 24 January 2019 17:23 (nine months ago) link
now for you to understand this theory about kevin durant you will have to pretend that he is patrick ewing— Amazon Original Series Bosch (@Mobute) May 11, 2019
― mookieproof, Saturday, 11 May 2019 03:32 (six months ago) link
im bill simmons and my new book is a podcast
― kanye kendrick frank kendrick frank kanye (voodoo chili), Tuesday, 5 November 2019 15:30 (two weeks ago) link
so... many... podcasts
― Mr. Snrub, Tuesday, 5 November 2019 16:04 (two weeks ago) link