What Makes You A Basketball Expert

[Strenuus]

I'm with you, I think WATCHING the game instead of just reading about it is huge. I'm also of the mind that the eye test outweighs the stats frequently.

The eye test tells me that RW is one of the most gifted athletes we may ever see.

The eye test Also tells me he fucking sucks in big moments and shoots his team out of so many wins.

 

[H.C.]

I wanted to understand how people acquire knowledge of the game, and what makes somebody more knowledgeable than somebody else. Not sure why this would confuse you.

I'd believe you... If you didn't have this in your OP.

Got called out by some random guy on here in a thread earlier and it got me to thinking.
He claimed he was “Sure he knew more about the game than me."

As Charles Barkley says.
Only God is an expert.

fwiw I'd argue someone who says they know more about x than someone else. Is a tad bit insecure. But that's my opinion. Just like it was my opinion this thread was created to bait someone.
But as I said I have no idea whats going on, nor do I want to know.

 

[THE HCP]

This explains why you’re blind enough to be a Laker fan.

#BAM

 

[THE HCP]

I'd believe you... If you didn't have this in your OP.






As Charles Barkley says.
Only God is an expert.

fwiw I'd argue someone who says they know more about x than someone else. Is a tad bit insecure.
But as I said I have no idea whats going on, nor do I want to know.

Thanks for adding to the thread.

 

[Tince]

I do disagree. It takes consistently watching a team game in and game out to get a good feel of their sets, the results of specific sets, specific reasons why those sets work and fail, how their defensive rotations are in general and in specific situations, how certain details like this may affect a players overall confidence and performance, etc... That's just a few of many details that are hard to pick up on unless you constantly watch a team.

I think I must've done a poor job of explaing my point.

I agree with you that if you watch just one team at great detail you'll have a great understanding of their tendencies, characeristics, etc.

My point was that only watching one team would put you at a disadvantage comparing them to other teams. You would have seen the team you watch do millions of things right and wrong, so therefore you would be prone to think that your team does a lot of things way better than everyone else and a lot of things way worse (depending on your point of view).

It's why fans of a certain sports team are more likely to think their best player it the best player in the league, or that their college football team is the best in the country, their coach is the worst, or refs screw their team over more than anyone else.

 

[Tince]

Coach Nate had one of his college coaches on his staff for a couple seasons and Coach cheeks had a childhood friend. Man, they lucked into those jobs for sure.

This is a very common practice across many career fields and while it has negatives, there is a good reason for it. People like to surround themselves with people they feel they can trust. You're more likely to feel like you can trust someone you have past shared experiences with. Therefore, if the skillsets are close, you're going to pick you family, friend, or former co-worker when you're loooking to fill a poosition than some random person off the street. Again, I'm not saying there aren't negatives to this practice, but there are positives to it as well.

I would have a hard time comparing the IQ of someone on here vs someone in the NBA. We get to see the court from a much different perspective than the players, have no pressure to execute, and don't have to use physical skills to execute what we think is the right decision.

 

[Natebishop3]

Since I'm probably the only person on here who has been paid for their opinion on the Blazers, I'll say that's why

 

[THE HCP]

Since I'm probably the only person on here who has been paid for their opinion on the Blazers, I'll say that's why

And we have a winner.

 

[Natebishop3]

And we have a winner.

Honestly, I wouldn't even claim to be an expert. I wrote about hoops because I loved hoops. I loved the NBA. It was a passion. Unfortunately, writing about it really kinda killed my buzz. I tried to get out before I became another Jason Quick, but sadly I'm not as passionate about sports as I used to be.

 

[BonesJones]

Since I'm probably the only person on here who has been paid for their opinion on the Blazers, I'll say that's why

Except you're not the only one.

 

[KingSpeed]

I'm not an expert on the game or Xs and Os but I don't think there is anyone with more knowledge of the NBA from 1989 to present than myself. I've devoured it for 30 years. I don't pretend to know the NBA before that. That's why my Mt Rushmore will always be Jordan/Hakeem/Duncan/LeBron. Shaq is a runner up.

 

[kjironman1]

I think he needs to tell someone that they gotta quit having other stuff on the screen when the games going! Lots of missed plays this year has me really questioning their basketball knowledge!

Yeah those pop ups on the score during free throws. PowerBall be damned!

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I attended the Mark Twain school of NBA commentary, taught by professor Mr. Ed. I'd rather be silent and thought a fool than post my opinions and remove all doubt, so while people yakkity yak a streak and waste your time of day, I only post analysis when I have something to say.

Which is rarely.

 

[tlongII]

You’re cheap.

It's a friend's discount thing. I consider you guys my friends.

 

[kjironman1]

I feel only a true Basketball Expert would know Melo was coming to Portland!

 

[UncleCliffy'sDaddy]

It's a friend's discount thing. I consider you guys my friends.

You poor bastard..........

 

[Mediocre Man]

Listening to all the genius people here is all I know about the game.

Did this come off as sarcastic as I meant it to?

 

[mook]

Same reason I'm a sex expert. I've watched it a lot.

 

[Chris Craig]

Did this come off as sarcastic as I meant it to?

Not at all

 

[riverman]

Denny is the guy who's figured out how to make money from Blazer content and he's a Bull's fan!

 

[UKRAINEFAN]

@THE HCP
Im kind of curious, you run in basketball circles as a Job. You talk with players and coaches and scouts at least once in a while. BBIQ has to come up here and there how do they judge it?

Not exactly on topic, but for me, BBIQ is same as regular IQ, the ability to make the correct choice in the shortest amount of time.

 

[UKRAINEFAN]

I have very little pure basketball knowledge. Played very little and with absolutely no coaching. I like to see how things work though. It's how i would fix something mechanical, if it was new to me. I sit there and look at it (observe) and then think about what is going on. How does this part affect that part? What is the pattern here? Is there any geometry involved? And think what needs to be done next. Or how it could work better.

 

[riverman]

Not exactly on topic, but for me, BBIQ is same as regular IQ, the ability to make the correct choice in the shortest amount of time.

To me BBIQ is what you can do when there is no right choice...and a lot of basketball success is second nature...what gets some guys in trouble is overthinking the game. Several Blazer players said Meyers and Evan Turner had really high BBIQs...Meyers they say was an encyclopedia of players tendencies and stats...doesn't always translate. Jeremy Lin graduated from Harvard....he's playing in China. Dennis Rodman was a great defender...not sure he's that bright all around though. A guy like Grant Hill would fit your line of thinking..really bright guy.

 

[UKRAINEFAN]

Good point, is this the reason things get so heated on here you think? This is the battle ground where some choose to prove their knowledge? So much of the, "I'm right and you're wrong!"?

Yes. I do try to show I am right; but I try to do it very subtly so people won't notice what I am doing. (Unless they are really not paying attention; and I have to actually point out that I suggested a trade just two hours before Olshey actually made it. )

 

[UKRAINEFAN]

To me BBIQ is what you can do when their is no right choice...and a lot of basketball success is second nature...what gets some guys in trouble is overthinking the game. Several Blazer players said Meyers and Evan Turner had really high BBIQs...Meyers they say was an encyclopedia of players tendencies and stats...doesn't always translate. Jeremy Lin graduated from Harvard....he's playing in China. Dennis Rodman was a great defender...not sure he's that bright all around though. A guy like Grant Hill would fit your line of thinking..really bright guy.

I basically agree; the highest IQ people process a decision so fast that it might not be called thinking.

 

[UKRAINEFAN]

Coach Nate had one of his college coaches on his staff for a couple seasons and Coach cheeks had a childhood friend. Man, they lucked into those jobs for sure.

It takes us so long to get any real inside knowledge out of HCP!

 

[riverman]

It takes us so long to get any real inside knowledge out of HCP!

Well in fairness HCP has never been inside, it's not him we get the inside stuff from

 

[illmatic99]

uh cuz I've listened to or watched damn near every Blazer game and hundreds of playoff games for the past 25 yrs. And I played HS/rec ball/ pickup over the same period. And I have over 30k posts here just in the past 10, and have been talking ball for the past 15 yrs on some forum or the other. Think I've passed Gladwell's 10,000 hr rule.

Can only people who have played in the league be allowed to have expert opinions?

 

[Chris Craig]

Got called out by some random guy on here in a thread earlier and it got me to thinking.
He claimed he was “Sure he knew more about the game than me.”
So I was wondering how do you measure basketball IQ?
Does a kid who’s dad was a coach growing up know more than a talk show host? Does a beat reporter know more than somebody who grew up playing in the parks everyday and then went home and watched games recorded on the VCR? Does a PR guy who works for an NBA team know more than somebody who played in high school? With so many self appointed hoop experts on here, I’d love to see how guys in here acquired their knowledge.

I'd say there are many signifiers to measure basketball IQ, experience probably being the lion's share.

I guess it depends on the kid, whether he/she cares about basketball. A given kid could have a dad who is a coach and not know much about the game at all. If the kid likes basketball, and is willing to soak everything up their dad has to teach them, they are going to know a lot.

Who knows if a talk show host might know more. Maybe the kid whose dad was a coach learned alot, but became a talk show host. Maybe the reporter grew up playing basketball in the parks. Even if not, they can both have sufficent knowledge in the game. They just have different experiences.

As to how I acquired my knowledge...I have loved basketball since I can remember. I grew up playing basketball in the park. No blood no foul. The NBA raised me. I have seen history made. I played in high school before I hurt my knee. I immersed myself in the game as participant and viewer. I kept my eyes and ears opened, surrounded myself with people who knew the game more than I did, absorbed everything I could. I taught a class on the history of the game and learned nearly as much as instilled on my students. I write and talk about Basketball because I enjoy it and to an extent I know it.

I am no expert. I have vast knowledge on the game and have habit to drop it on occasion. I have insight. But, more importantly, even having been around the game for 2 decades, which really isn't that long, I am still learning.

I have learned a lot here. @dviss1 has taught me a lot about reffing. @hoopsjock about the CBA. Etc etc.

 

[wizenheimer]

I attended the Mark Twain school of NBA commentary, taught by professor Mr. Ed. I'd rather be silent and thought a fool than post my opinions and remove all doubt, so while people yakkity yak a streak and waste your time of day, I only post analysis when I have something to say.

Which is rarely.

of course, of course