PDA

View Full Version : Why Do People Put Stock Into Retired Players' Opinions?



Wade n Fade
12-24-2015, 08:50 PM
For instance, people put tons of stock into what Charles Barkley says. He is very outspoken, but I feel like he can be a gas bag. A lot of players are unqualified authorities, but people take them as the gospel at times.

Quinnsanity
12-25-2015, 12:04 AM
It's especially egregious with Barkley because it's his job to say ridiculous things. That's his value to Turner Sports. He gives no *****, and at a certain point he became self aware about that fact and now almost everything he says has to be ridiculous. It's his brand.

There are certain retired players with certain valid opinions, you just have to know who you trust. Magic refuses to say anything negative about anyone, so he's useless. Then there are players who will come out only to snipe the current generation because they're old and desperate for attention.

But there are some former players who really have interesting things to say. I just don't tend to care about their star power in making that judgment. Like why is Barkley more knowledgable about the game than, say, Shane Battier? He's not. But because Barkley was a star we listen when he says things. It creates content for other media outlets and reinforces his personal brand, so people pretend like it matters. Meanwhile Battier says something sensible and nobody cares. It's not good content.

Wade n Fade
12-25-2015, 02:38 AM
It's especially egregious with Barkley because it's his job to say ridiculous things. That's his value to Turner Sports. He gives no *****, and at a certain point he became self aware about that fact and now almost everything he says has to be ridiculous. It's his brand.

There are certain retired players with certain valid opinions, you just have to know who you trust. Magic refuses to say anything negative about anyone, so he's useless. Then there are players who will come out only to snipe the current generation because they're old and desperate for attention.

But there are some former players who really have interesting things to say. I just don't tend to care about their star power in making that judgment. Like why is Barkley more knowledgable about the game than, say, Shane Battier? He's not. But because Barkley was a star we listen when he says things. It creates content for other media outlets and reinforces his personal brand, so people pretend like it matters. Meanwhile Battier says something sensible and nobody cares. It's not good content.

I prefer Shane Battier as an analyst. Espn has too many pundits anyways. TNT is just comedy relative to what I wish NBA coverage ought to be.

MasterWok
12-25-2015, 02:48 AM
If I knew a retired lawyer id ask him for adice if need be.

Its the same with every job. When you reach the level of being top however many guys make the nba there's a level of expertise normal people cant offer.

setman2000
12-25-2015, 02:58 AM
Why do people put stock into people who post on internet forums?

Shkelqim
12-25-2015, 03:25 AM
Why do people put stock into people who post on internet forums?

Those people make money for their words. Behind the scenes i am pretty sure Shane Battier probably answers more legit text messages than Barkley. These guys are for show. A forum is pure fun and speculation from a fab standpoint to give their take and share ideas with people who are similar. If we got paid don't you think we'd post the **** that get us the most hits. Johny Manziel,Chip Kelly,LeSean Mccoy. Etc...

Hawkeye15
12-25-2015, 04:18 AM
Depends on who the person is, but I also don't read into much of what ex-athletes say, especially in basketball. The sheer number who are later given responsibilities outside of playing and completely suck at their job says enough.

I mean, the GOAT was a complete and utter idiot when it came to evaluating talent.

tsubibo
12-25-2015, 06:16 AM
I kinda like some retired players analysis of plays and coaches decisions. Specially those former good point guards. Charles and Shaq are sometimes there just for show.

Gander13SM
12-25-2015, 08:57 AM
Because they played. So its assumed they understand the game.

People, collectively, are stupid.

Just because you've played doesn't mean you know anything about the game or can evaluate talent. The amount of failed players turned coaches should prove that. Or even Jordan, he proved he can't evaluate talent for spit. He's terrible at it.

There's a reason the most successful players turned coaches were non-supertars when they were players.

There are some who clearly know what they're talking about. But a lot of them are just terrible as "analysts".

Casual fans don't get it though. Because their basketball I.Q is below that of these "analysts".