A great essay, Tom. I've been fascinated by Redick's ascent as a podcaster, broadcaster, and media personality since his retirement, because I think he's extremely gifted in all departments but has set himself on a bit of a collision course. We can marvel at the righteousness of him calling out Doc Rivers on "First Take"-- and doing it in prodigiously Stephen A.-inspired language, too-- but he's also taking over for Doc as part of the playoff A-team along with Mike Breen and Doris Burke. That's a little awkward, no? And then he does all these interviews with players for Old Man and the Three that are collegial and full of insight but his withering criticism of guys like Zion Williamson would seem like it could be limiting long-term. I would love to see Redick continue to wear all these hats and continue to shoot at the hip, even if he's off-base at times. (The rant about fan interest in tape breakdown versus his Doc screed didn't make a lot of sense to me.) But I also wonder how sustainable all these enterprises are long term. You're either outside the tent pissing in or inside the tent pissing out. You can't do both at the same time.
I love that Redick is calling out the common fan. Let's be honest the fans he's going after aren't the people reading this post and commenting on it. It's the hoppers vs ballers, the ones who think points are all that matters, that want 2k and Rucker park style of play. The people who quite frankly get their "education" from Kendrick Perkins, Stephen A and other blowhards.
As for the Redick/Doc comments I think an underrated angle is JJ Redick support of Ben Simmons. Listen or re-listen to Simmons on jj's old man and the three podcast. It's eye opening. It basically has an element of Redick apologizing for not being more supportive a better teammate etc to Simmons. That definitely factors into his feelings about Doc. Say what you want about Ben the way doc and Embiid treated him was reprehensible and an independent arbiter pretty much said the same when they settled in Simmons favor for the money the Sixers fined him for.
People I follow on Twitter have made this point more pithily than I can, but I’m just tired of everything that happens in the NBA leading to meta discourse on the state of the league/sport
As a super niche analytical content creator, I really appreciate this. It’s all about finding the appropriate audience and JJ has at least two distinct ones (he’s currently doing a good job of nurturing both).
That said, his question seems like a rhetorical one, right? Right?
Also for what it’s worth I’d argue his best years were actually in Philly.
JJ is a complicated guy - or plays one on TV and its alternatives. Or do we fans see him in a certain way based on our own subjective points of view? Is he the cerebral jock that thinks the game? The Duke aristocrat that sees all non- Blue Devils as townies? Or is he really the polished media insider with sparkling insights and access?
Not only is JJ all of the above, he is not the only media polymath on the NBA stage - and that's an awesome thing. Back when we first got the electricals and the on/off water run up to the sod house and Dr Julius made his house calls on ABC, basketball media was on paper, a two week preseason of Street and Smith magazine and Hollander's pocket guides, with a smattering of local coverage in NBA cities, plus a monthly long form article about the Lakers, Celtics, or Knicks in Sports Illustrated. Now we get the same players that the newspapers used to stereotype, using platforms in their own voices, to elevate the game, speak out on social issues, model really long sweaters, and spill more tea than Captain Picard during a Borg attack. We have options!
Like RJ has his clear role. Always the jokester. Big perk has his role and he plays it up.
JJ is actively switching roles depending on what the show or episode calls for. So I think that’s part of what is triggering for folks. But JJ just picks the right persona to take to express the point he wants to
Pretty disingenuous of Redick to come after his audience. Like you said, he knows how this works. I think one of his first popular takes on ESPN was targeting Zion (fellow Dukie) for not contacting CJ McCollum once McCollum was traded to the Pelicans. That turned me off from his media persona even though I recognize he's a thoughtful interviewer on his podcast
Zilla! No JJ doesn’t misunderstand J-school freshman principles. And I can see how folks felt like it was weird for him to call out the fans — I think he had a great meta idea just didn’t execute it perfectly. And that is he uses his airtime to do the fun normal thing but when the take show opportunity presents itself to go in on something he goes hard and it usually includes a subtweet style sneak diss to the producers.
And they love it! I’m sure! They don’t care what the content is once it’s wrapped in the emotional sweaty blowhard take format. That just gives them talking points that last longer.
Anyway I’m just blah blah in defense of JJ because I don’t believe he is actually complaining about what people click on or not. It’s just take theater vitamin gummi bears
A great essay, Tom. I've been fascinated by Redick's ascent as a podcaster, broadcaster, and media personality since his retirement, because I think he's extremely gifted in all departments but has set himself on a bit of a collision course. We can marvel at the righteousness of him calling out Doc Rivers on "First Take"-- and doing it in prodigiously Stephen A.-inspired language, too-- but he's also taking over for Doc as part of the playoff A-team along with Mike Breen and Doris Burke. That's a little awkward, no? And then he does all these interviews with players for Old Man and the Three that are collegial and full of insight but his withering criticism of guys like Zion Williamson would seem like it could be limiting long-term. I would love to see Redick continue to wear all these hats and continue to shoot at the hip, even if he's off-base at times. (The rant about fan interest in tape breakdown versus his Doc screed didn't make a lot of sense to me.) But I also wonder how sustainable all these enterprises are long term. You're either outside the tent pissing in or inside the tent pissing out. You can't do both at the same time.
I love that Redick is calling out the common fan. Let's be honest the fans he's going after aren't the people reading this post and commenting on it. It's the hoppers vs ballers, the ones who think points are all that matters, that want 2k and Rucker park style of play. The people who quite frankly get their "education" from Kendrick Perkins, Stephen A and other blowhards.
As for the Redick/Doc comments I think an underrated angle is JJ Redick support of Ben Simmons. Listen or re-listen to Simmons on jj's old man and the three podcast. It's eye opening. It basically has an element of Redick apologizing for not being more supportive a better teammate etc to Simmons. That definitely factors into his feelings about Doc. Say what you want about Ben the way doc and Embiid treated him was reprehensible and an independent arbiter pretty much said the same when they settled in Simmons favor for the money the Sixers fined him for.
People I follow on Twitter have made this point more pithily than I can, but I’m just tired of everything that happens in the NBA leading to meta discourse on the state of the league/sport
As a super niche analytical content creator, I really appreciate this. It’s all about finding the appropriate audience and JJ has at least two distinct ones (he’s currently doing a good job of nurturing both).
That said, his question seems like a rhetorical one, right? Right?
Also for what it’s worth I’d argue his best years were actually in Philly.
Agree
JJ is a complicated guy - or plays one on TV and its alternatives. Or do we fans see him in a certain way based on our own subjective points of view? Is he the cerebral jock that thinks the game? The Duke aristocrat that sees all non- Blue Devils as townies? Or is he really the polished media insider with sparkling insights and access?
Not only is JJ all of the above, he is not the only media polymath on the NBA stage - and that's an awesome thing. Back when we first got the electricals and the on/off water run up to the sod house and Dr Julius made his house calls on ABC, basketball media was on paper, a two week preseason of Street and Smith magazine and Hollander's pocket guides, with a smattering of local coverage in NBA cities, plus a monthly long form article about the Lakers, Celtics, or Knicks in Sports Illustrated. Now we get the same players that the newspapers used to stereotype, using platforms in their own voices, to elevate the game, speak out on social issues, model really long sweaters, and spill more tea than Captain Picard during a Borg attack. We have options!
That’s right. Most everyone finds their character archetype and just plays it. They really inhabit roles on these studio shows
Oops didn’t finish the thought.
Like RJ has his clear role. Always the jokester. Big perk has his role and he plays it up.
JJ is actively switching roles depending on what the show or episode calls for. So I think that’s part of what is triggering for folks. But JJ just picks the right persona to take to express the point he wants to
Pretty disingenuous of Redick to come after his audience. Like you said, he knows how this works. I think one of his first popular takes on ESPN was targeting Zion (fellow Dukie) for not contacting CJ McCollum once McCollum was traded to the Pelicans. That turned me off from his media persona even though I recognize he's a thoughtful interviewer on his podcast
Zilla! No JJ doesn’t misunderstand J-school freshman principles. And I can see how folks felt like it was weird for him to call out the fans — I think he had a great meta idea just didn’t execute it perfectly. And that is he uses his airtime to do the fun normal thing but when the take show opportunity presents itself to go in on something he goes hard and it usually includes a subtweet style sneak diss to the producers.
And they love it! I’m sure! They don’t care what the content is once it’s wrapped in the emotional sweaty blowhard take format. That just gives them talking points that last longer.
Anyway I’m just blah blah in defense of JJ because I don’t believe he is actually complaining about what people click on or not. It’s just take theater vitamin gummi bears
If the NBA could go to a standard 3 game schedule each week, everyone would be into analytics.
But their weekly fantasy set up is bad in comparison to the NFL, where we care about numbers to beat our friends.