I’m going to let you in on a little secret as someone who has access to website traffic: People like different things when it comes to NBA content. There are, of course, plenty of basketball fans who want to listen to really in-depth, rich, and incisive commentary from folks who can explain the nitty gritty of professional basketball, the ones who read every single word from the best minds in the game in an effort to become the smartest possible fan. But sometimes, it’s 1:29 a.
m. EST and you just want to hear . It works like anything else, where going too far in one direction or the other can be a problem — there are certainly nights when Chuck or Shaq’s approach can rub people the wrong way, for example.
The secret is to try and find the right combination for your network/outlet/audience and do that to the best of your ability. And yet, ESPN’s never seemed to figure out what, exactly, is the best approach for its basketball coverage, as its hoops programming for years has never been quite right. You’re almost certainly aware of what the arguments against it are: Too star-focused at the expense of smaller markets/lesser heralded players.
Too motivated by breaking down what Giannis Antetokounmpo sneezing on the bench means for his future in Milwaukee. Too much time spent on how Stephen A. Smith is a Knicks fan and how that has caused eternal suffering for him.
Too much time spent on how Stephen A. Smith, despite the aforementioned eternal suffering, believes that S.
