Mark Cuban pwns Skip Bayless and ESPN

[KGs Knee]

Saw the vid on Youtube, definitlely thought it was cool.

But really, I bet there are at least a couple dozen people on this blog alone that could own Skippy in a debate.

Cuban owning Skippy isn't super impressive.  ESPN is not in the business of employing intelligent "analysts" who have any interest in making legitmate analysis of sports.  It's all hype.

[InfiniteMH]

only analyst i like on ESPN are guys like tim leglar & magic johnson who actually break down basketball & strategies

I personally think Magic is terrible as an analyst.
Here's his answer to every game.
"The superstar needs to play like a superstar."
Every now and then he'll pepper it with
"The role players need to step up."
I don't think I've heard him say anything else.

Tim Leglar is pretty decent, though.

[indeedproceed]

For a guy who played the game like a maestro directing an orchestra, Magic analyzes the game like a fish trying to tell a horse to walk.

[ManUp]

That was child abuse.

Bayless just looked Stupid.

Steven A was smart enough to keep his mouth shut.

[Celts Fan 92]

lol I busted out laughin when Cuban told Skip "ur under da pressumption people care wat you say"

[st.jimmy222]

only analyst i like on ESPN are guys like tim leglar & magic johnson who actually break down basketball & strategies

I personally think Magic is terrible as an analyst.
Here's his answer to every game.
"The superstar needs to play like a superstar."
Every now and then he'll pepper it with
"The role players need to step up."
I don't think I've heard him say anything else.

Tim Leglar is pretty decent, though.

hahaha so true. shaq is less exciting to listen to but he usually brings up points that are actually related to real game play

[Eja117]

Cuban's main point - and he's talked about this in the past - is that the majority of sportswriters and color analysts are lazy when it comes to studying the sport that they cover for a living.  He's right.

Of course whether the majority of NBA fans want to learn the nuances of teams defensive schemes is another story...but it was great watching him make Bayless look foolish.

I did however like what he said about Pat Riley's schemes.  That's the type of inside dirt you rarely hear, though I think Cuban's purpose there was to show everyone how smart he is....good stuff though.

Bayless and Smith are reporters. They aren't analysts. That's why they do every sport. It seems unrealistic to me to expect a coach to go on next weeks show and say "Skip. Do you know why they run a zone blitz defense or a cover 2?" and expect Skip to nail it and then the next week a baseball coach to come in and be like "Skip. Do you know why we use the suicide squeeze?" and expect Skip to nail that too. Is he supposed to say absolutely nothing about the Olympics because he's not an expert in curling? And as for the analysts.  Magic, Wilborn, Jon Barry, and in game Van Gundy I think Van Gundy is the only one who ever explains anything at all, but even most of his analysis is based on saying things like "They better step up if they expect to win" and "You're never going to get that call. Never in a million years sonny!"  I have just never listened to Jon Barry and thought "Wow. He knows so much. He's so clear." Maybe he does, but I don't feel like he's showing it

[indeedproceed]

You say a lot here, I'm gonna try my best to break it down.

Bayless and Smith are reporters. They aren't analysts. That's why they do every sport.

They are not reporters, they're on-air personalities, a walking talking op-ed column. Reporters present facts, as they are, as objectively as possible.

It seems unrealistic to me to expect a coach to go on next weeks show and say "Skip. Do you know why they run a zone blitz defense or a cover 2?" and expect Skip to nail it and then the next week a baseball coach to come in and be like "Skip. Do you know why we use the suicide squeeze?" and expect Skip to nail that too.

I don't think that its unrealistic at all to expect a person who is paid to be knowledgeable about sports to be innately knowledgeable about sports, and to do his homework enough to have a good idea of all the facts before forming an opinion he shares with millions of people. I've heard before that all the SportsCenter anchors are like walking sports encyclopedias.

And as for the analysts.  Magic, Wilborn, Jon Barry, and in game Van Gundy I think Van Gundy is the only one who ever explains anything at all, but even most of his analysis is based on saying things like "They better step up if they expect to win" and "You're never going to get that call. Never in a million years sonny!"  I have just never listened to Jon Barry and thought "Wow. He knows so much. He's so clear." Maybe he does, but I don't feel like he's showing it

Magic is terrible. Wilpon is okay, as long as you're not leaning on him to be 'basketball guy' and instead ask him to be a little more like Ernie on TNT. Jon Barry is the most likely of those 4 to bring something useful to the table, I've heard him say a lot of things I thought insightful, and more than a few that were beyond my own understanding of basketball.

Chris Broussard should be catapulted beyond the city walls.

[Eja117]

What I think happened to Skip was the exact same thing that happened to Lebron last year. Thought it would be easier, was unprepared, and wilted.

These are the things I wish he'd said to expose Cuban.

Really? Lebron doesn't care what the media says or thinks? So were you in a cave during that whole "Decision" thing or do you think he was just having fun or something? How about that part where he predicted 7 championships? How about that Nike commercial where he looks straight at the camera and says "What should I do?" Really? He really doesn't care what we say?

Ok. So you're plan was to have him pass the ball to Steve Kerr. So you wanted wide open shots for the best three point shooter in NBA history? That was your plan?

You tell me that it's a team game and all you've done is talk about Lebron. Do you know who his other teammates are? Please tell me how you planned to make D Wade into Steve Kerr.

You made him a jump shooter? And just nobody else managed to do this and neither did you till the 4th quarter. Ok. How do you think that would have worked with Jordan? Do you think you could have turned Jordan into a jump shooter? Would Jordan have stayed on the perimeter?

Ok. You can't say who wanted it more. So you can't say Dirk wanted it more than Lebron. Is that what you are saying?

Do I really have to explain to you what "excruciating pressure" is?  Just another game or something?

Miami was just better prepared to play than OKC? For 4 games in a row they prepared better?

Ok. So you have access to OKCs playbook now? OKC just isn't smart enough to do what you did? They saw what worked and just decided not to use it? So you don't want to give credit to Lebron? It's all just a matter of defense? Which especially works in the 4th quarter.

[Eja117]

You say a lot here, I'm gonna try my best to break it down.

Bayless and Smith are reporters. They aren't analysts. That's why they do every sport.

They are not reporters, they're on-air personalities, a walking talking op-ed column. Reporters present facts, as they are, as objectively as possible.

It seems unrealistic to me to expect a coach to go on next weeks show and say "Skip. Do you know why they run a zone blitz defense or a cover 2?" and expect Skip to nail it and then the next week a baseball coach to come in and be like "Skip. Do you know why we use the suicide squeeze?" and expect Skip to nail that too.

I don't think that its unrealistic at all to expect a person who is paid to be knowledgeable about sports to be innately knowledgeable about sports, and to do his homework enough to have a good idea of all the facts before forming an opinion he shares with millions of people. I've heard before that all the SportsCenter anchors are like walking sports encyclopedias.

And as for the analysts.  Magic, Wilborn, Jon Barry, and in game Van Gundy I think Van Gundy is the only one who ever explains anything at all, but even most of his analysis is based on saying things like "They better step up if they expect to win" and "You're never going to get that call. Never in a million years sonny!"  I have just never listened to Jon Barry and thought "Wow. He knows so much. He's so clear." Maybe he does, but I don't feel like he's showing it

Magic is terrible. Wilpon is okay, as long as you're not leaning on him to be 'basketball guy' and instead ask him to be a little more like Ernie on TNT. Jon Barry is the most likely of those 4 to bring something useful to the table, I've heard him say a lot of things I thought insightful, and more than a few that were beyond my own understanding of basketball.

Chris Broussard should be catapulted beyond the city walls.

Sometimes I definitely wonder how they settle on those 4 guys.

Maybe they should try to bring in Marc Cuban. He apparently has a very strong analytical understanding of NBA basketball and explain to all of us how the other team is turning D Wade into Steve Kerr.

[Army_of_One_Nation]

Skip Clueless!

[jpd985]

They could play that clip in an anti-bullying ad. That is why I can't watch ESPN.

[greg_kite]

I loved it when he called him out for saying the Heat "wanted it more".  That is one of those stupid sports cliches that are used by guys trying to get a reaction out of people.  But if his job is to get a reaction maybe he is doing a good job.  We are talking about him now.  Maybe he's going for the heel role like a wrestler.  I don't know many people who actually LIKE Stephen A Smith, if there is anyone.  But he still has a job because people love to hate him.  Like Ric Flair, he's the best at being the worst.

[SHAQATTACK]

Steven... Is a least funny...he cracks me up with his WWF speachs and attitude. He is entertaining , and I don't get mad casue I can't really begin to take him seriously, toobusy laughing at him cracking on Baylock . I love hearing him badmouth Bayless and put him down.  What a riot.

Bayless  wants to be important or have people think what he thinks matters.  He is lame as it gets.  He isn't funny, he is isn't smart and he knows sqwat about  about basketball.

[coco]

Oh boy, that Skip Bayless is full of himself, isn't he? 

Out of the all the analysts I respect only a handful.  Top of my list: Peter Vecsey and Tim Legler.

Most might disagree with PVecsey cause he can rub you the wrong way, but the guy calls it like it is and most of the time he is right in my opinion. Too bad he lost his gig with NBA TV when they moved the HQ to Atlanta.  NBA TV analysis took a dive after loosing him IMHO.  As for Legler,  he probably is the best analyst outhere right now.