The Press Box - Covering the NBA Finals With Kevin O’Connor

Episode Date: May 31, 2022

Bryan and David are joined by KOC to discuss covering the NBA, his Boston Celtics fandom, favorite analysts, and the two Finals contenders (11:06). Later, they discuss Chris Russo's statements on the recent mass shootings in the U.S. (35:41). Hosts: Bryan Curtis and David Shoemaker Guest: Kevin O'Connor Associate Producer: Erika Cervantes Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This is Chris Vernon, and me and my buddy Kevin O'Connor, aka Kevin O Everything, host an NBA podcast called The Mismatch. They call it The Mismatch because I'm awesome and Kevin is a gigantic nerd. No, no, that's not why at all, Chris. They call it the Mishmatch because I have a brain and you're a loudmouth bozo. Good grief. Anyway, listen to our amazing NBA podcast, The Mismatch. Or don't.

We really don't care. We're probably going to win a million awards either way. Chris, we do care. So don't say that. Please subscribe and listen to the mismatch only on Spotify. Did you really call me a bozo? David, I have a few notes for you about a very exciting game seven of the Eastern Conference Finals. Ooh.

Now, this is Sunday night, Celtics versus Heat for those who are not basketball inclined. The big story was that play-by-play announcer Mike Brue. Green missed the game with COVID. Breen from the story sounds like he is going to be back for game one. Mm-hmm. But there is a pretty tiny list, at least pre-COVID, of announcers missing really huge games. Mm-hmm. Because they were sick.

Yeah. And just couldn't go. Before COVID, my list includes Vince Scully missing a game of the 1989 National League Championship series with laryngitis. Wow. Doesn't laryngitis feel like such a relic? Like, Laryngitis is such a fear of our childhood like, like Quicksand was.

But like, does anybody get laryngitis anymore? Yeah, it does feel like an old disease, doesn't it? It feels like the lobster thermidor of diseases. Yeah, did it get renamed or subsumed under the flu umbrella or something? That it's just like part, it just doesn't seem. Maybe the, maybe the treatments have gotten so good. I don't know that. At the press box pot, if you have more information about laryngitis in 2022. It did seem like laryngitis was lurking around every corner when I was growing.

I do have this for you, though. Dan Shulman also suffered from laryngitis and missed a World Series game in 2018. Wow. So at least as recently as 2018, laryngitis was the thing. Bob Costas at the 2014 Moscow Olympics with the pink eye. Yeah. or whatever that was, he did return before the end of the Olympics. And the only other one I got...

And like drag him off the set for that. I mean, he wasn't... He didn't call in sick. He was removed. He's a pro. Joe Buck lost his voice before the 2004 NFC championship game. But he wound up calling the game.

So that's another interesting one. Is that... That's not laryngitis. Is there a category for non-larangitis voice loss? Is that... Well, he later revealed, if you remember this, that that was caused by the hair implants. Yeah. So it's not conventional laryngitis as we understand it, perhaps.

Is it just because there were so many sitcoms and cartoons that used laryngitis as a plot point that like I can't, Brian is pointing out himself and making mouth movements, we can't talk. That must be it, right? Yeah. Because, you know, because there were three episodes about from perfect strangers about laryngitis. I just think I thought it was a bigger deal than it was. I lost my voice in a comic way, and we're going to have a plot point in a sitcom about that. Mark Jones filled in on play-by-play Sunday night. He was talking about game seven at the beginning of the broadcast, and he called game

seven the most powerful and profound words in the athletic jargon and lexicon. Yes. Okay, so we have not just powerful, but profound. And not just the athletic jargon, but the athletic Lexicon as well. Didn't know those were two wholly separate things, but I thought that was underlining the occasion in quite an interesting way. In the third quarter, you remember this play, David.

Kyle Lowry makes a basket for the heat, and then he has this incredible flop to draw the and one. It looked like one of those giant hands in the jackass movie had just knocked him down. Yes. And Mark Jones says, never underestimate the heart of a champion.

After that play, I'm not quite sure it was the heart of a champion. But yes, that was kind of funny too. Good stuff. Do we need a clock on the number of times or some kind of automated counter on the number of times? Mark Jackson is going to say, what can Brown do for you after a play by the Celtics Jalen Brown in the finals? Yeah, you just have like a ticker at the bottom or like a like a neon shot glass that lights up every time? Like that green thing that lights up when they're when they're reviewing the point.

player when they challenged the officials call? Yeah, exactly. Yeah. I think we need one of those. ESPN. Feel free to steal the idea. This came from listener Joel Landau. So Jimmy Butler missed a three-pointer at the end of Sunday nights game seven that could have put the heat ahead. Clutch points, the website said Jimmy Butler breaks silence on game seven miss.

But they just linked to the press conference that Jimmy Butler gave after the game. Right. He talked about it at the very first possible opportunity. Right. It's not typical that when you miss a shot and there's time still on the clock, that you wander over to the broadcast booth and talk to Mark Jones and Van Gundy and Mark Jackson about why you missed the shot right then. You usually break your silence after the game. You know how they have like the coaches, when you object or whatever, when you call for a replay, the coaches can do that because you can obviously call timeout

but they have like the official timeouts you know at like certain periods throughout the game do you think the game would be improved if we could have like a journalism timeout like if there's like a like there's something so big happens that just like one designated journalist can call a timeout stop the game and then walk over to Jimmy Butler

with a microphone just be like what are you thinking right now for all of human history let's record it let's go to Lisa Salters with Jimmy Butler right after I would absolutely be favor that. They do that in the spring football leagues. Quartheback throws an interception. Let's go interview them on the sidelines. Well, that sucked. What do you have to say for yourself? I know I've bored you with this before, but I am eternally fascinated by the way that the word

storyline wormed its way into sports writing. Yes. We say, okay, the NBA finals are about to start. Here are the storylines. Jason Tainham finally got into the NBA final. that is one of the storylines. And I'm always weirded out by that because I'm like, we're the writers and journalists here. We are the proverbial storytellers. We don't need to say,

here's the storyline. We can just say the thing. Jason Tatum finally gets the Celtics into the NBA finals. We don't have to do the stage direction. So I thought it's almost, it's like a meta article, right? When they're brought together,

it's just like all of the stories that I'm not going to write, but I could just, you know, that I could have pitched. Is that what it is? You're just taking it off the board? Here's the storyline. I don't have to write the actual piece.

And, you know, be redundant because someone else is definitely doing it. But yeah, I think at some point you just, you're aware at how overwhelming it is. Yeah. How obvious it is. So here is the storyline. Mm-hmm. Anyway, I'm obsessed with this. So I'm reading an article about one of the officiating calls.

And Eric Spolster was talking about Jimmy Butler missing that three-pointer at the end of game seven. And he says, I thought it would have been an incredible storyline for Jimmy to pull up and hit that three. Now, wait a second. Eric Spolster, you're the coach of the Miami Heat. Wouldn't it just have been incredible full stop for Jimmy Butler to hit a three-pointer that put your team ahead, potentially got your team to the finals?

Mm-hmm. Why did it have to be an incredible storyline? You're the coach. just basketball thing that happens, that's what you're after. You're not writing this. Storylines. I absolutely love it.

Finally, David, an important update about ESPN's bumper music. By the way, thanks to everyone who tweets at me every time ESPN plays a weird song now. I don't have to watch the game. First quarter from Game 7 of the Eastern Conference Finals, we got once again,

The Boys are Back in Town by Thin Lizzie. ESPN has decided this is our song. As we went to halftime, we got Even Flow by Pearl Jam. Okay. Third quarter, another ESPN favorite, Mr. Big Stuff, by the great Gene Knight. And then I think we got Lil Wayne in the fourth quarter.

So my new theory is, is that every single piece of ESPN bumper music is sponsored by a different Sirius XM channel, we're just turning the dial. Oh, now we got the 70s on 7 and they're playing the boys are back in town. Okay, here we go. I like the idea. And if they're not,

why aren't they sponsored by various serious X-Im channels? Are we just, I mean, is it the serious idea of getting customers hooked? Like, we're going to build the biggest tent humanly possible here. There is no kind of music or talk or comedy or whatever. I always love that Sirius has a.

Canadian comedy channel called Just for Last Canada, just in case you like comedy and you also like comedy that is Canadian in character. But is that what ESPN's doing? Like any taste you might have, any music that might be on whatever device you listen to music on, we want to make sure that that is played during important NBA game. I love it.

I love it. I just want, I mean, yeah. My favorite part of this whole week has been watching your reply to tweets during the games. And just like being at this point, it's just like an obligation to point to continue to point out that the bumper music is so bizarre. When you pick the dumb obsession, you have to follow up on it. You can't leave the people hanging now. No. Coming up on today's show, the ringers, Kevin O'Connor is going to stop by to talk about

covering the NBA finals. David and I have a few thoughts about the shooting in Yuvalde, Texas. plus a very strange thing has happened to celebrity profile headlines on the internet. All that more on the press box, a part of the Ringer podcast network. Hello, media consumers, Brian Curtis, David Shoemaker, and producer Erica Servantes here. Up first, David, we are joined by a Ringer NBA writer, a Ringer NBA podcaster. And since we have him on our little media podcast, a man known as Kevin O'Criticism. he is Kevin O'Connor here to talk about covering the NBA finals Kevin welcome to the press box hey guys thank you so much for having me on anytime my friend okay Boston Celtics are in the

finals again have you been thinking about your dad this week a lot yeah I uh I cried at game three honestly just thinking about them which was very unexpected just sitting there in the TD garden crowd it was just so loud and I was just thinking about the memory I had there with him. And it just felt good to be to be home. And I was just thinking about, you know, it was a great day. I hung out with Bill Simmons and his dad and Jackie Mack before the game and just saw so many old friends, met some new friends. It was just, I don't know, I got emotional in the moment. I don't know if anybody saw me crying. It's not like full-blown, you know, tears, but tears are coming down my face just thinking about him. And I don't know. Like it was,

like, I've talked about my Celtics fandom, like kind of declining or dying on. the past like with the mismatch with chris fernan and like i see like my old facebook post where it was like f lebron and all capital letters like go southics like i like that was the hardcore celtics fan who was bothering all his friends and family with you know crazy unhinged celtics takes on facebook i'm not a southex fan anymore but in that moment like it felt it felt it felt really great to feel something connected to the team um and like i was rooting for the celtics to win the series i want to go home and see my mom. I want to go home and see friends and also be in that TD Garden crowd, which feels like home and it made me feel, you know, connected to my dad. And that's a, that was a

really great feeling to experience that game three and hopefully get more of that in the NBA finals. I was going to ask you about your declining Celtics fandom. I have heard you discuss it a lot on the mismatch. You know, you can describe sort of the process, but there's certainly an element of it that's your exposure to more teams. You don't have time to be a fan anymore. And there's also, I think, we talk a lot on this show about the sort of expectations of professionalism that come with the job and impartiality and how that's sort of a bygone thing in this day and age that every major sports writer is on Twitter saying,

fuck LeBron, you know, if they're playing his family, if he's playing your team. how do you feel about that sort of lack that shift we're not impartial anymore um i mean i think like i think it's great that's in sports media like reporters can be fans like i think like meena kimes is a seahawks fan is a great example like that's really cool to me and obviously like with bill simmons being a big celtics fan kind of you know making that okay i thought i thought it's really cool for reporters to be able to have that fandom and when i was first hired by the ringer in 2016, I guess part of me at the time was worried that people would think of me as a Celtics fan, even though by that point I knew I wasn't the same Celtics fan that I was before.

I still cared about the team, but it was so much different that it felt, I don't know, it just felt like a slap in the face to my younger self to even say that I was a Celtics fan because I was nowhere close to what I was, even just three, four years prior. So I think for me, like personally, I miss it. I miss feeling that connection to one team. I miss like the excitement of like a morning of a big game. I miss post game watching like the entire press conferences, the whole post game show.

I miss that a lot. But I guess it really did start shifting even before the ringer where it was just like, I went from watching every single game with my dad to watching most games with my dad, away games. But I was covering games in Boston and at TD Garden because I was writing for SB Nation at the time in Celtics blog and I felt it shifting. I felt it shifting as I was watching instead of post game. Oh, like Celtics post game.

I was watching, you know, league pass or going to ESPN for the night game. So it was like I felt myself a little bit more detached and I don't know. Like I think each year at the ringer it declined more and more and more, especially after moving to L.A. And then especially after my dad passing away where it kind of like was, you know, I felt joy when the Celtics won because it made him happy. But then like when. he passed away, it was like, oh, you know, that's kind of gone from my life now.

But so I think I miss that in the sense that it's not just about the love for the team, but also just the relationship that I had with the team with my dad that I miss most. But now it's like my love for basketball is just expanded to the whole league is whole. Not just the Celtics. It's about the NBA. It's about loving all 30 teams instead of just one. But I do miss just having one. You covered your first finals, Kevin, in 2017.

Back when you were a young man and the ringer was a young website. Now you're a grizzled veteran. What have you learned about covering the finals in that span? You got to be aggressive. You got to be a go-getter. Like I think about whether it's asking questions post-game, you get to fire that hand out quick or you might not get your chance. If you have a story idea, you get to chase it down.

I remember I think it was the Raptors Warriors finals. Raptors Warriors, I had this kind of like nugget of information about this player, Jordan Lloyd, who was imitating Steph Curry and Raptors practices. And I was like, I got to find this guy. I'm like Googling his photo. I have no idea what he looks like. And I see him kind of like in front of me going towards the Raptors bus. And I sprinted down the hallway to go get him. And he was so happy to talk to me for five, 10 minutes. It gave me a perfect intro to the article. And I was so happy with how it came up. And I was like, boy, I feel like a real journalist. In that moment, it just felt really good and really rewarding. So I think,

more than anything else, like being at the finals, it's just about like you've got to, you got to do it. Like you can't waste your time. Things move so fast. Players are in and out. You got to ask your questions. You got to be on top of it. But yeah, that's the main thing I've learned.

It's just about being aggressive as a writer slash journalists. What do you look for going in? Do you feel like you're doing more? I feel like I have such a cheat sheet from listening to your podcast. but do you feel like you spend more time with a looking at the statistic, more of a statistical analysis or more time trying to get your hands around like the big picture

storylines? That's a good question. I think the statistics side of things for this series in particular, almost not at all, to be honest with you, in terms of what happened between Celtics Warriors during the season. Those are different teams. It's really not that relevant at this point. But I think in terms of the trends and the themes,

it's like, So instead of looking at how the Celtics score against, you know, Jordan Poole and Pick and Roll coverage, it's more the question of how much are the Celtics going to attack Jordan Poole and Steph Curry and some of the weaker links on the Golden State defense in their pick and roll coverage. Like it's, well, how is Golden State going to respond? How is Golden State going to match up? And so it's more like a list of thoughts or themes to watch for starting in game one. And then like you kind of might have from there, you might have some story ideas or, you know, staff. ideas to then look up after the series actually begin. So I think I think in that sense, maybe 2017, 2018 files, maybe I did too much statistical research instead of investing that time into thinking about trends. So that's another thing I learned too. Related question of what David asked.

David and I are normie NBA fans or maybe slightly above normie NBA fans where we're really locking in during the playoffs and probably watching these teams a lot more closely than we did during the regular season. What has someone like you who watches basketball all the time learned about the Warriors and Celtics during the playoffs? Just how tough the Celtics are. I mean, we kind of knew that starting in late February or so, but just seeing them continue to kind of almost play with their food in some ways,

losing Pivotal Game 5s, Pivotal Game 6s, and then still winning in 7 in Miami and playing a really strong game and yet still almost blowing the lead at the end. They're just a weird up and down team. But their ability to fight through adversity is definitely admirable and is an important championship quality. And then with the Warriors, honestly, not as much in terms of that team. Like, we've known them for so long since their dynasty began, you know, in 2014, 2015 season. I think for them, though, what we did learn is it confirmed that they made the right choice to not sell all of their young players, you know, in a deal.

for an older guy. I think Jordan Poole, whether it's Kavana Looney, who's a little bit older now, but Kavanaughan Luni investing in their youth, it shows the importance, even if they don't win it, even if they don't win the finals, the Celtics and Warriors,

two homegrown teams, the importance of investing in your youth and development, and the importance of continuity as well. So I think for the warriors, they've kind of confirmed that they made the right choice, and for both of these teams, it's kind of cool, yeah. I mean, like at the age of so many super teams

to see these two homegrown squads, like the NBA finals. That's pretty dope. Obviously, injuries and other extenuating circumstances played a big role in this year. And that seems to have been talking about big picture storylines. I mean, I think since the bubble, I mean, since the beginning of the pandemic,

just in terms of like the logistics of the season has become sort of the ghost in the machine of like every season. And maybe more interestingly, the way that people, like you covered the season, right? I mean, every conversation is about the schedule or, you know, the number of games, these players are putting themselves through.

Do you feel like that's new? Am I right in saying that that's like a pandemic? It's like the bubble sort of turned up the volume on those conversations. And is it, do you think those kind of conversations are, you know, a necessary part of the way we talk about sports now? Yeah, I mean, I think whether it's, you know, schedule related or schedule force injuries and obviously, you know, cause and effect, we don't know. Sometimes things just happen, even if you're on four days of rest.

But I think the fact that's magnified, I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing. I don't think the NBA should sweep under the rug any of these, you know, concerns fans have, whether it's officiating or whether it's schedule. I think the NBA needs to be proactive. Like, just because you have this multi-billion dollar industry, highly successful league around the world, doesn't mean that you should stop trying to make it better. And so I think in that sense, that's where I give Adam Silver in the league office some credit.

I think they're doing a good job trying things out, whether it's the target score in the All-Star game. They use the G-League to experiment with so many different rules every single year. And then oftentimes those rules make it to the NBA. So I think for the league, they're doing a good job of that. They should listen to those fan concerns and what people are complaining about because those are the people that are supporting your game anyway. That's why you have a league.

It's because of the fans. I think it's important for them to listen. I'm glad you said the word officiating. Yes. Because David and I have been having this conversation mainly and how it affects the viewing experience of the NBA playoffs. But then on Sunday, the NBA replay center in Zuccas, New Jersey,

whatever that is, took a Max Struz three-pointer off the board a number of minutes after Struz made the shot. Turns out to be a huge call because the game got unexpectedly close at the end. So where do you fall on the review system as it's now constructed? I mean, generally, I'm a big fan of like some of these remote reviews. I think there's value in like in terms of the viewer experience. If you're able to quickly assess something back at Saccoccus,

where they have their replay center in New Jersey and figure out if this is this the right call or the wrong call, can we easily reverse that. However, in the case of that one, where it's not even definitive that his foot was on the line, it might have just been hovering above it. I just wonder, like, what are they looking at to do that? Can you trust them to make the right decisions there? I mean, I've heard stories about the replay center telling the officials on the floor to reverse a call and that the referees would say, no, we're going to stick with the call on the floor. Or, yes, we're going to reverse it, even though you guys say we shouldn't. I've heard stories. about disagreements there because it ultimately is for the officials on the floor to make the call on the decision. So I wonder if even the refs on the floor don't have full trust in Saccacus because now fans know, can we have full trust in the replay center to get it right when that's true's play?

There's no way they should have reversed that right. There's no way. Eric Spolster said something after the game that this is going to maybe be a test case for the system going forward because maybe there's another angle out there that look definitive. but the one that ESPN put on television was not a take three points off the board during a game seven kind of definitive angle. Not at all.

I don't know. And the fact that you would do it several minutes behind, which again, I don't want to make this about David and I watching television, but that's freaking weird. Yeah. And it makes you think like, what have I been watching if points can suddenly come off the board

several minutes later? You almost have to say, hey, we blew it, oh, well, play on. rather than do that. I mean, it's, it's, it's a type of thing

where I logically understand because the play didn't necessarily affect the flow of action. But it could change the way teams are going to play. And I think that's where, you know, people say,

well, if you had three to Miami, it changes the end of the game. Everything's different. I mean, like it's butterfly effect. Everything's different. If the three counts or doesn't count,

everything changes the way at the end of that game is being played. So we don't know. Maybe Miami ends up winning it. Maybe they end up losing by nine instead of four. If that, if that had counted. We just don't know. But like the call itself, like you said, Brian, the fact that it can be reversed minutes later and there wasn't definitive proof at least that we saw from the broadcast point of view.

And like to my understanding is that I don't think they had any additional views. I think that was the view that they used, the one we saw from the baseline with Struces' foot over the line. They get to figure out a way to have like the tracking data to be able to know if the foot actually touched or not. I mean, they got to have some way of figuring that out in the next 10 years or so. And maybe that's the solution. But even then, you're introducing another variable that could slow the game down, lead to more reviews, lead to more decisions like that. Unless it's instantaneous, maybe it could be instantaneous. And you know within, you know, milliseconds or even just within three, four, or five seconds, whatever it might be.

Yeah, it does seem like, I mean, this is going to be the problem with instituting these common sense changes is that the actual institution of them just feels like we're getting scornment. screwed in an even more, in just a different way than we were before. Part of the deal is that, I mean, is the way that it's explained to us in real time, right? Or in the delay whenever it's really happening. And a lot of that falls to the announced team. So, you know, separate from this issue, though, do you have a favorite NBA booth? Do you have a favorite play-by-play announcer or a favorite color commentator? Or, I mean, I don't want to give you the option to plead the fifth, but I guess if you must, you must.

No, I mean, it's JJ Redick, because I learned something. every time he's on the broadcast. I think I think JJ is, I mean, so talented. Like he's, he's such a versatile, you know,

person in the, in the media space of this podcast, old man in the three, um, broadcast, whether it's doing first take with Stephen A going, you know, toe to toe with him.

Like he's, he's really good. And on the broadcast, he sounds like a natural. Um, like I, I think JJ is definitely my favorite color commentator. And that booth is great,

um, as a whole. I mean, we'll see what, we'll see what happens. his development over the years, but I hope he continued, I hope, whether it's ESPN or if Turner or to like say, hey, we want you to be our guy. I hope JJ doesn't change because sometimes you see announcers come in with like a ton of insight. I remember when Brian Scalabrini was first,

you know, hired by the Celtics as a color commentator behind Tommy Hineson. His approach was a little different than what it is today. He's still really good with what he does next to Mike Gorman. but like he was he was so much more like uh tactical in the early days and that's changed i hope for j j it doesn't change um i'd like to continue seeing that on the national scale why wouldn't they like that's what people love about so many NFL broadcasts whether it's you know NFL halftime shows post game shows it's about breaking down plays and figuring out what happened in the game with the NBA ESPN i hope they lean more into that because that's what's what fans want they want to learn What kinds of things do you learn from analysts during a game?

I mean, I think listening to games is sometimes or just watching games as a whole and listening to the broadcast. Sometimes there's an advantage to doing that than being in the arena. Like that's another thing that's kind of on my mind for the finals here. It's like I'm not listening to the announcers. I'm not seeing the broadcast angle. I'm not seeing every single replay. There's pros and cons to that. So like for learning from announcers, I don't know.

I mean, sometimes not a lot. Sometimes it's more like just a voice that's kind of like narrating the game, which is very valuable. I enjoy that. I enjoy listening to the broadcast, especially in a close game down the stretch. But in terms of learning something, I think it's all about the individual. Like JJ, I'm always learning something from listening to somebody like him. So when you go to the finals, you know, he talked about being there last. time and hanging out with, you know, various luminaries of the sports journalism world.

In terms of what can you learn from your peers there? Like when you see other writers, when you see other podcasters, when you see other, you know, big names, do you immediately start asking them for, you know, quiet intel about what they've, you know, about things that they've heard that maybe you haven't heard? Are you working? Or is it, or what kind of, what kind of things do you learn from them? I mean, it's, it's always different. I mean, I think sometimes I wonder if I don't ask enough questions or pester enough people, you know, looking for advice and stuff like that. I mean, I always try to.

But I guess there's always more when you see the veterans out there. But I think for the most part at the finals, like it seems like people are like they're moving. Like they're just keeping it moving. I think I think everybody's in that finals mode I talked about earlier where you got to be on it. So yeah, I think there's a lot of that probably talking on. rides, you know, from the media hotel to the finals, you'll get conversation there. But at the game itself, I think most people seem to stick with their group. Like, you'll see the ESPN people together. They're coordinating what their post game's going to be. You have to ringer people

together, athletic and all that. So, you know, hopefully we can get some cool ringer stories together coordinating with our team at the finals. Does it break down more along it? So it breaks down along the lines, the place of business, right? In my head, I was hoping that there was, like, the podcaster sat on one side of the cafeteria and the print, the print writer sit on the other side. I haven't noticed that. Now I'm going to be looking for it. Now I'm going to be looking this year at the media dining area to see who's, who's sit and where, if they've got podcasters together, because everybody, it's everybody from around the world. That's the cool part about the finals as you see, you know, media that you normally wouldn't see at games.

I'm just imagining KSC bringing his lunch tray over to table and bond tempts a win horse going, ah, sorry, ESPN people only, bud, you're out of here. Go over to the ringer, ringer tables on the other side of the cafeteria. If that happens to me, they're going to know that that means they listen to this podcast. I wouldn't put it past bond tips. Let me tell you. Tim's funny. Last one for you, KOC. Give us a sense of what your work schedule. is like during the finals, both game day and non-game day? What are you doing? It's a lot of basketball. I'm kind of working double right now because doing like draft

guide stuff as well. Oh, yeah. Which is, which is definitely very tough to do. I don't feel like I'm stretched thin, but like my schedule is definitely packed. I was able to see Top Gun on Monday night. Nice. And I watched the first Top Gun on Sunday. So I had back to back days seeing movies, which is out of the ordinary for me. I haven't seen movies on a lot of. long time. So I took advantage of those off days. I don't know. I try to take a little time, you know, every day to either do something, whether it's hanging out with a friend or whether it's, you know, mostly just staying at home and, you know, playing Call the Duty War Zone for an hour or two. But right now, it's just a lot of basketball all day long. And it's, it's about figuring out

time to prep for podcasts, time to do research for articles, time to do just general research for the series or rewatching certain portions of games. So I think I've got. I've done a pretty good job about like setting my schedule and sticking generally to that schedule as like a guideline for what a day is going to look like. But that means this time of year, some other stuff takes a backseat. Like I'm not finding time to work out, which is a problem. I need to get back on track there after the finals. But I don't know. It's tough, but I love it and I enjoy it. And when people ask me like, how are you doing it? It's like, I'm busy, but I'm happy to be busy. I love being busy. And I love what I do. And I'm excited to be on the road.

for quite a while during the finals, hopefully, and get an amazing series. Be busy. Well, I just want to say, as someone who's got, you know, one foot on the inside of the ringer production channels and, you know, one foot on the outside, it never,

and not obviously a basketball involved in the basketball process is a much more of a fanboy when it comes to that. But every time I'm listening to you on the air and I see a Kevin O'Connor article go to the desk on Trello or whatever, I'm just so amazed, you know? I know. And having back in the office days, I know what the draft guide does to you too.

So the work ethic is legit. It's really, really impressive. And I'm just, it's funny you're talking about when we started the ringer. I remember the first time I met you. I remember saying, where did you come from before? And you said Celtics blog. And I was like, oh, you must be really excited then, you know? I was just like, this is going to be great.

But, man, you've come a long way. I mean, you're the guy now. So thank you so much for doing this, man. And you're so good at what you do. All right, David, let's do the overworked Twitter joke of the week where we celebrate a gag that was so obvious that all of media Twitter made it at exactly the same time. Send your nominees to at the press box pod

where they are always gratefully received. Kind of a funny one this week, David. It comes from our good friend Travis Barnett. Tim Barnes, who is a TV writer, tweeted this. Ironically, COVID, would be a better name for Zoom. Get it? COVID would be a better name for Zoom.

Oh, no. No. Now, oh no. But it turns out that this joke has been made with amazing regularity on Twitter. So much so that there is a, there is an example of it dating back to March 17th, 2020. The NBA shut down on March 11, 2020. So six days after that, we were already into, we need a rename Zoom to COVID.

Oh my gosh. We're still doing it, folks. If you had the same deep thought that everyone's been having since March 2020, congrats. You made the overwork Twitter joke of the week. In the notebook dump, David, I consider myself a fairly unflinching news consumer. There's a story out there that's gut-wrenching or, awful. I'm going to read it and I'm going to try to reckon with it, even privately,

whether or not we talk about it on the podcast. But the shooting at Rob Elementary School in Yuvalde, Texas, in which 19 students and two teachers were murdered, just about exhausted my ability to do that. I found myself for one of the few times, like, I can't, I cannot fully engage with the story, with the details of the story. how did you process it i mean the same way i was i was following i was following the story with just a sort of i mean with i mean i was following it really closely right i mean just every twist and term part of it was because of the the unreliability of the various narrators involved and just this you know just trying to suss out the timeline and the 48 hours that followed it

um that was its own sort of mystery but just in terms of like the the sort of basic tragedy of the thing, it made it, it was, it was really hard to engage with. I mean, I, I, I've not, I mean, I sent you, I sent you like a text about something else. I think the day or the day after, I just immediately felt terrible for having sent a text that, you know, the only communication we have is not about that, but there's just not, there's not really a text to send, right? And, and, I definitely, I mean, it definitely crossed my mind that I was glad that I didn't have to a podcast about it last week. You know, I mean, that it's tough. It's, it's, I probably shared this

before, but I used to write about, I swear, dead wrestlers all the time, right? And it was sort of my, it was my thing. And, uh, but the first time I had to, I was writing about guys that had died five, 10 years before, even further back than that, the first time I had to write a next day obituary, I, I could, I could barely function, you know? I mean, it was just like the level of sadness that was, like, part of that process was just really hard to deal with. And that's such a minor, minor thing compared to this, right? And yeah, it's just really tough. One story I really, really enjoyed reading was, and I tweeted this from the press box

account, Rachel Monroe and the New Yorker wrote about the local paper there, the Evalde Leader News, the daughter of one of their reporters, Kimberly Rubio, was killed in the attack, and owner-publisher Craig Garnett, and here I'm reading from Monroe's story, said that Rubio had texted earlier that day to ask if she could write her daughter's obituary for the paper. Quote, she said, can I have two pictures? And I said, you can have a full page. I encourage everybody to read that story. That's on the press box Twitter account.

Again, a very minor part of the story, David, but I'm always interested when there is a big news event or horrific news event like this. And you get some of the stations like ESPN that we talk about on a weekly base. basis. And over there, it feels like, boy, we have to, we should address this in some way. This should be on our air. We can't, again, just keep talking about the NFL and the NBA finals and not have mentioned this at all. But there's always the question of who is going to say it. And what are they going to say? And is it going to be something, you know, that's just a mere acknowledgement of it? Is it going to be something here is how it ties into sports in some way. If an NBA team took a moment of silence, if Steve Kerr said something as he did in his press

conference, is that a hug and bear way into it? Or are we really just going to talk about it and kind of the raw way people are talking about this story and the various stories that have come out of it, both about changing gun laws or the way you mentioned that the police acted in the minutes after the shooting? Well, it, Phil, perhaps surprisingly, to Chris Russo on first take, here is a little bit of what he said about Yuvaldi. They all voted no on gun control deals in March. They voted no on it.

And then Adam yesterday gives me this big deal about how we're heartbroken. We had a chance to do something about it. You did nothing. And where are they going on Friday, half of them? To an NAR convention in Houston, Texas for crying out loud. Houston, Texas. It's absolutely absurd. America, shape up, wake up, and do something.

I thought that was so interesting because it was the style of sports radio with this incredibly awful and horrific political issue. And you see him again, not just talking about the shooting itself, but the NRA convention, almost an NRA convention about the politicians involved.

Before that clip played, he had this big thing about I vote for Democrats and for Republicans. So I'm not just this kind of guy politically. It was really interesting. To me, it almost felt like, you know,

so many of these things, you know, we can predict, right? Like Jake Tapper, what is Jake Tapper going to say? What is Chris Hayes going to say about something like this? And then you have,

it in the mouth of Chris Russo. And you're like, I just have no idea what's going to come out here. I don't know what form it's going to take. And that's the form it took. Yeah, I mean, it's not every day you hear something like that that is both simultaneously so profound and so certain to be converted into some sort of meme form within the next year. You know, I mean, it was just like, it was so weird to hear and to sort of process. process, but you're right about the sports radio style of it, right?

I mean, I think that we've gotten to a point where one, with all these shootings, that level of outrage is not uncommon and fully justified. And I think, more importantly, though, I think that we have a really hard time. We don't really have a vocabulary to talk about it, at least not anymore, you know, for those of us that, for whom thoughts and prayers aren't to be all end all or aren't sufficient, then you sort of in a tough spot. I mean, I was around family this weekend that are avid gun support, gun rights supporters and, and I don't mind getting into them about politics. This is a touchy subject, obviously for a lot of reasons and a lot, I mean, largely because

the way I felt about it personally. But, but, but it's, just hard to have a conversation. You know, I mean, it's that you don't really know what to say. It's funny, though, without, you know, in the absence of a vocabulary to have it, it weirdly feels right to fall back on this vocabulary of sports radio, right? I mean, at least that's a way that the community, that it can, that these things can be said. And maybe shifted into that sort of other vernacular, maybe it makes, makes more of a difference, you know, than what, you know, Steve Kerr or whoever said, although I think what he does is incredibly important. One more thing for you, Dave, before we go, back in February, the New Yorker did a digital interview issue.

And I was paging through the website and something struck me about the format of the headlines they used. I'll give you a few of them. Dean Bacay never wanted to be an editor. Bill de Blasio still loves New York. Patty Harrison means it, except when she doesn't. Patricia Lockwood has always sounded this way. Is this like a new line of children's books at one of our kids is reading? Kind of sounds like it, doesn't it? Yeah. Somehow by doing the SEO-friendly thing of putting the famous person's name at the beginning of the headline.

But then you have to do something else. And you have to kind of, it's not just Bill de Blasio talks about being the mayor, what he's doing next, comma, comma, comma, listing a bunch of things. you're actually trying to hedge between an SEO-friendly headline and an old school magazine headline. Frank Sinatra has a cold? Yeah, exactly. It sounds a little profound.

It sounds a little unresolved. Maybe I'm going to keep reading this or listening to it in this case to find out. And I thought, man, we should do a bit on the podcast about the new way of writing celebrity profile headlines in the age of social media. But then something wonderful happened, David. someone else did the bit. Oh, great. And that someone is our old friend and party-going companion, Max Reed, who did it on his substack. Yes.

And the reason this is great is because now we can just read the bit. We don't even have to do the bit. Max wrote of these headlines that they have taken on an exquisitely vacant neutrality, an oddly fascinating almost mannerist blankness. Mannerist is an excellent word there. He goes on, while the style no data has its uses in the age of, SEO celebrity social media accounts and Stan armies, it does present certain problems. It can be difficult to remember, for example, which celebrity is ready to play by her own rules and which

is ready for a new life. So he does a fun matching game. We have to match the celebrity with the headline, but let me just give you some of the headlines he came up with here. Owen Wilson is doing great, thanks. Kristen Chenoweth is done being quiet. That was a great one. Spencer Pratt has always understood the assignment. Parker Posey is dead serious. That's the New Yorker again.

And John Sina doesn't care if you can't see him. That's my personal favorite because it's a riff on the old celebrity standby. So-and-so doesn't care what you think. Celebrities never care what we think, but they're giving a long interview to a magazine or website in which they're explaining themselves. That's their way of showing that they don't care what we think. Maybe the funniest part of this is the New Yorker to be. Because the New Yorker changing headlines for the internet has always been funny.

You'll read this long profile. It's really, really good. And at the bottom, you say, like, this story appeared in the New Yorker as this headline. Yeah. It's a very New Yorker print headline. But then the headline on the story you read online is something very SEO friendly. So the New Yorker is now, you know, Eustace Tilley has one leg in the past and one leg in the future. And it's manifested by the headlines on their celebrity profiles.

Oh, my God. It's so fantastic. I just think it's, it's, it's just a bizarre manifestation. You're right. And I love, I mean, it does make you want to go in. feel like they all boil down to Brian Curtis doesn't care what you think or Brian Curtis doesn't

want you to read this article. There's a little bit of that even when they're not saying it outright, right? Like turn the page to find out more. Because it's always, you know, most of them are, you know, Brian Curtis believe something slightly surprising even if you know Brian Curtis. I guess

that's more of the implication in all of them. Total. But it does. It hooks you in. And you know, not for nothing. These periodicals that write lovely long profiles or do lovely long interviews are probably battling for brain space

with people that don't think they have a lot of time to offer up, right? So if it's just, if you present yourself as a question in search of an answer, this is a two bullet point article, then maybe you get a whole different crowd in there looking for the solution. John Sina doesn't care if you can't see him

is actually kind of genius. Yeah, yeah. John Sina, if you're listening, I'll write that piece. Tom Skokka used to make fun of the one where they put the picture of the celebrity and say, why is this man smiling? Yes. Because it just got so overused. It's so old that it's in all the president's men the movie.

Why is this man smiling? Oh, I don't know. I'll turn to page 56 and find out. Speaking of headlines, it's time for David Shoemaker. Guess is the strained pun headline. Yeah. Monday's headline about a North Carolina Congressman's loss in the GOP primary

was the burn bridges of Madison Cawthorn. It's summer movie season, David, so I got a summer movie tofer for you this week. Today, it's from Matthew Odom of the Austin American statesman and Austin 360.com. He directs us to his colleague, Eric Webb's review of the new Top Gun movie.

It's a positive review. I think you call it even a very positive review, but notes that the movie resembles the old movie. So I want you to think of the signature song of the original Top Gun. What was the Austin American Statesman's Strain Pun headline? What was the old Top Gun? Was it Take My Breath Away? There was that, but also...

Oh, my Unchained Melody? Oh, Danger Zone. Highway to the Danger Zone? Okay, so let's play with that. Now, that's a very complimentary review. So it's high. High praise to the... High praise to the...

But you said it's derivative? That's the... So let's keep danger in there. To the danger... It's a lot like the first movie. In fact, it's almost exactly like the first... Clown. Clown.

High praise to the danger clone. That's amazing. High praise to the danger clone. He is David Chewaker. I'm Brian Curtis. Production Magic by Erica Servantes. We will have more lukewarm takes about the media. See you then, David.

See you later, Brian.