I think I have a favorite Sportswriter

Finally, a sportswriter/columnistI look forward to reading. No wasted time on trying to break scoops or reporting 9th party rumors from friends of friends that they met in a bar. There is finally a column thatI look forward to reading because the author actually looks for new information about how the game of basketball is being played in the NBA.

Someone who actually takes the time to look for information that has impact and substance rather than writing the 15 mins to deadline column.

http://proxy.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?id=2003043

http://proxy.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=holling

IfI can rail on them, I have to praise the ONEI find to be my first read.

Congrats

52 thoughts on “I think I have a favorite Sportswriter

  1. great site with very good look and perfect information…i like it

    Comment by Litfaßsäule -

  2. Why can’t the NBA use some type of technology for instant reviews in a booth someplace. If it isn’t a blatantly obviously a bad call then the official in a booth someplace lets it stand? If it just a flat out bad call, it would only take a few seconds to review it and get on with it.

    Comment by runescape money -

  3. His thesis was that after years of tweaking with the defensive rules inside, to let more post play happen, the NBA finally listened to Cuban, who had been advocating officiating that would allow much less contact outside the paint and on the perimeter.

    Comment by wow powerleveling -

  4. good!

    Comment by 11nong -

  5. http://www.videsign.com.cn

    Comment by good -

  6. webber = triple double 4wd

    Comment by Ecin -

  7. man, i’ve been wondering when you’d give a shout out to hollinger. i knew you had to dig him. he’s about the only person in the media that gives the mavs proper credit. not to kiss ass, just what his numbers tell him. i find his books really interesting, even if you aren’t that into basketball.

    Comment by stets -

  8. Mark, I’m surprised you didn’t know about this guy’s work earlier. Hollinger is the Basketball equivalent to Baseball’s Bill James. Sabermetrics, Baby!

    Comment by Ghaz -

  9. Mark,

    John Hollinger is one of the most important basketball writers in years. If anyone else is interested in the “abermetric” movement in basketball, here are some more links:

    http://www.82games.com

    http://www.knickerblogger.net/stats/

    http://www.basketball-reference.com/

    Comment by Ryan -

  10. Sry mark, but seriously, Hollinger sucks. yah, he gots alot of stats and stuff, but serriously, he’s going to run out of new statistics. Its only a matter of time. Meanwhile, Bill simmons will never run out of funny crap to say. Even if he rips on you, you gotta love him. Anyway, thought i live in detroit, i gotta say that if the pistons wont win a championship, i would pick hte mavs. Michael Finley is awsome. You bettr not EVER trade him

    Comment by Ashwin G. -

  11. re: Flux
    once others pick up on his techniques the SABRmetric revolution in basketball writing will be huge.
    —–
    The statistical revolution will not be televised.
    http://sonicscentral.com/apbrmetrics/viewforum.php?f=1

    Comment by KnickerBlogger -

  12. Simmons have made many mistakes in analysing talents. See what he said about Yao Ming for example.
    But his analytical skills is not the reasons why many read his article.

    Comment by EJ -

  13. I love reading Hollinger. Quite the intuitive thinker. I loved it even more when he wrote for SI.com and I didn’t have to pay to read him. Now, I get to read the first two paragraphs of everything he reads. Thanks, Insider.

    Comment by Luke Middleton -

  14. Hollinger is excellent — his columns have real depth. Mark Stein is good also, but Hollinger’s approach is very data-driven, and he looks at things from new angles. Thanks, Mark.

    Comment by Scott B -

  15. I agree with Mark. I think John is new to espn.com and I really look forward to reading each of his articles. Really interesting stuff that actually ususes stats to back up what he is saying. Good times.

    Comment by Brian -

  16. I think I’m just gona stick with playing concrete football on the concrete, and street hockey in the street, until I get hit with a car again.

    I hope you all are having a nice weekend, and not doing what I wouldn’t do, whatever that means.

    Great Blog, Mark!

    Comment by Rockchild -

  17. Re. Mike Bennett’s post just above…
    Good God, you might be damn near the first person I’ve seen who has a head on his shoulders. The Mavericks tried to re-sign Nash with a high value deal, and he took significantly more money to go to Phoenix. The Mavericks could have matched, but it would not have been remotely prudent to do so. Nash is an excellent offensive point guard (which we obviously knew), but he’s not durable in the short or the long term. As Mike just said, Phoenix will eventually be criticized for his deal–just watch. Nash has already missed significant time this year due to minor/nagging injuries. It will only get worse with time.

    I love the guy as a player, but people need to wake up and understand that there’s more to consider than the immediate present. The Mavericks went in another direction with a solid plan to win now AND in the future.

    Comment by Matt -

  18. Re: Not resigning Nash. Though Hollinger may have pointed out that Mr. Cuban’s push for rule changes is what has allowed the Suns to flourish with Nash at the controls, he also backed the decision not to resign Nash. As good as Nash looks now, it’s highly likely that the Suns will not receive a good return on investment on the back end of the deal. I’m not sure if the Mavs will get to the conference final this year, but I do think the team is better tooled to contend for the next few years.

    Comment by Mike Bennett -

  19. Last night’s game against the Lakers was SO BOGUS. I know we had a lot more free throws than them, but those refs were horrible. I’ve never seen home court advantage like that ever before. Kobe was getting nicked and he would get calls, but whenever Dirk or Marquis or Stack took it in, they wouldn’t call it unless they were completely knocked off their shot in the 2nd half. What the hell were those refs thinking? Could it have been more obvious that they were favoring the Lakers? And could someone please shut Bill Walton up? I mean are you really supposed to blatantly favor one team on national telecast like he did?

    Comment by David -

  20. Question: March Madness is coming up SOON. I was wondering if there is an RSS feed that gives sports scores? I want to be able to look down and see the scores scroll by like an RSS feed. If a game looks interesting I can click on it and check it out. Unless I take the March Madness holiday off I will be at work for the first couple of rounds with no access to the games other than the net. Streaming video is blocked at my work site. What are my options?

    Comment by Aquariuz -

  21. of course this was the nicest thing I’ve heard about the mavs all year: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=neel/050302

    Comment by nathan holman -

  22. Now all we need is a football sport writer to jump on this ship. Mark can’t you buy a football team, I like your style but do not like basketball.

    Of course the team would have to be outside Dallas because we know Jerry Jones ain’t selling😉

    Derrick

    Comment by DerrickP -

  23. I don’t think Simmons’s comments on Billups are discredited by Billups’s MVP.

    Name anyone who played pointguard against the Lakers and didn’t look like a genius. Examples: Remember when Bibby was the next superstar, after his performance in the western finals? Did you see Parker in games 1 and 2 last year (before they switched Kobe to guarding him)? When Cassel was able to walk he was able to score at will.

    No knock against Billups, but the fact that he got MVP of the finals has everything to do with the fact that the Lakers’ point guards couldn’t guard anyone, and haven’t been able to for years.

    Comment by Noah -

  24. Hollinger also writes for http://www.nysun.com….
    he had a good article on the Mavs improved D a while back

    Comment by Jon -

  25. Bravo! Somebody has something nice to say about Mark…Even Galloway. Now when is this NBA championship suppose to happen?

    Comment by T.P. -

  26. Simmons isn’t that great. Here’s an excerpt from today’s posting about Jason Terry:

    “And Terry has always been one of those hybrid guards like Chauncey Billups, someone who was never totally invested in getting his teammates the ball. These are the guys you want running your offense in May and June? Really?”

    He’s questioning the ability of Chauncy Billups’ play in playoff situations…the same Chauncy Billups who is the reigning NBA Finals MVP.

    Comment by Justin -

  27. http://tinyurl.com/5uzn7

    Mark , comments on the mavs by Bill Simmons. I am guessing he is the most read sportswriter in the country. Do you have anything to say for/against what he’s saying here ??

    Comment by Shyam -

  28. I thought your favorite was going to be Junior Miller. Then again, after he schools you every time you are on his show, I can see where it would get old.

    Comment by dan dipras -

  29. Also, Cuban’s interest was no-doubt peaked by Hollinger’s recent column (not the one linked to from this post) in which Hollinger gave Cuban most of the credit for the increased scoring and tempo of the game today.

    His thesis was that after years of tweaking with the defensive rules inside, to let more post play happen, the NBA finally listened to Cuban, who had been advocating officiating that would allow much less contact outside the paint and on the perimeter. Now that the refs are whistling hand checking and such all over the place, fast players (like say Steve Nash) are able to drive and penetrate and create much more and much quicker offense.

    The irony, as Hollinger pointed out in his column, is that Cuban let go the best player in the league for that style of play, while adding an old fashioned center who is much less useful in the new, faster-paced game. And that the 2003 Mavericks were much better-suited for 2004-2005 than this year’s team.

    I’m sure Cuban would argue that point, but you know he loved to see himself praised in the column, and that surely got his attention about Hollinger’s writing.

    Comment by Flux -

  30. Also, Cuban’s interest was no-doubt peaked by Hollinger’s recent column (not the one linked to from this post) in which Hollinger gave Cuban most of the credit for the increased scoring and tempo of the game today.

    His thesis was that after years of tweaking with the defensive rules inside, to let more post play happen, the NBA finally listened to Cuban, who had been advocating officiating that would allow much less contact outside the paint and on the perimeter. Now that the refs are whistling hand checking and such all over the place, fast players (like say Steve Nash) are able to drive and penetrate and create much more and much quicker offense.

    The irony, as Hollinger pointed out in his column, is that Cuban let go the best player in the league for that style of play, while adding an old fashioned center who is much less useful in the new, faster-paced game. And that the 2003 Mavericks were much better-suited for 2004-2005 than this year’s team.

    I’m sure Cuban would argue that point, but you know he loved to see himself praised in the column, and that surely got his attention about Hollinger’s writing.

    Comment by Flux -

  31. Also, ESPN insider has a lot of really good stuff. I enjoy every Rob Neyer and John Hollinger column, and lots of the inside NFL and NBA info is great also. I wouldn’t go so far as to pay for it, but that’s what bugmenot.com and other such sites are for.

    Comment by Flux -

  32. John Hollinger has been my favorite basketball writer for years. He’s not new; just new to ESPN. You can see an archive of his articles. from earlier this season on the CNNSI site where he used to work.

    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/writers/john_hollinger/archive/index.html

    I wouldn’t call him the Bill James or even the Rob Neyer of basketball writing, but he does work in those statistically-inspired fields, and once others pick up on his techniques the SABRmetric revolution in basketball writing will be huge. basketball isn’t as perfect for individual stat analysis as baseball, but it’s much easier to pick individual player performances out of the team than it is in football. The vast majority of basketball writers are still toiling away in the dark ages of teamwork and effort and heart and PPG, rather than moving into the enlightenment of logical statistical analysis.

    Hollinger used to run his own site at http://www.alleyoop.com and had a lot of original writing and stats there as well, but it seems to be offline now.

    He used to also

    Comment by Flux -

  33. Saying Rosen is a good sportswriter was a joke, right?

    Comment by larryh -

  34. You can’t pull the wool over my eyes that easily Mark. You like this new reporter because he put that fab pic of you in the article. He talks more about shifting the refs around than the problem with crappy calls. Put them in the paint, wherever you place them, they’re still making bad call. Why can’t the NBA use some type of technology for instant reviews in a booth someplace. If it isn’t a blatantly obviously a bad call then the official in a booth someplace lets it stand? If it just a flat out bad call, it would only take a few seconds to review it and get on with it. Even catalogue the obviously bad calls and somehow punish the most egregious ref in some fashion. Maybe having a reward system at the end of the year for the lowest error rate. Make it like capitalism instead of a monarchy.

    Comment by Rob Thrasher -

  35. Hey Mark, I enjoyed that article but I get the impression you have an obsession with statistics. You are always comenting on referees and now you love an article that breaksdown shooting percentage. This is great but ultimately sports are about players. You could have the best statistical team on paper and not win (sort of like your mavs). I think you should stop worrying about stats and worry about putting together a team. You just traded for another overated player in van horn. Look at the spurs then look your team. You have an all star team , the spurs have a championship team. The Mavs will problably make a nice run but I think we will be reading an article in late May about how the officials did you wrong again. You are great owner I think you need to get a quality x and o coach in the offseason. Run and gun is not going to win you a championship. Shooters can go cold, defenses don’t.

    Problably got off the subject, sorry. Anyway best sportswriter is bill simmons “the sports guy”. He is funny yet very knowledgable.

    Comment by James -

  36. Several people have commented on this, but I also enjoy eric neel’s work. And simmons is both funny AND knowledgeable (a rare combo, like a 7-footer who shoots threes). This guy sounds like he has some interesting stuff, but add me to the list of people not paying to find out.

    Scott Wickett
    Fort Myers, FL

    Comment by Scott Wickett -

  37. C’mon guys… I’m willing to bet that Mark doesn’t HAVE to pay for ESPN Insider. ESPN gives those subscriptions away to sports “Insiders”. Free publicity, as just seen in Mark’s post.

    Comment by Brian -

  38. i agree with most i dont pay for articles online, with the number of online news sources, why pay? i also thought you were going to say Neel’s article, that was a good one, what do yo think of neel?

    Comment by Luis -

  39. I agree with Mark that Hollinger is great. However, how ironic that Mark is lauding a guy who said exactly what Chad Ford did a few weeks ago. Yes, Hollinger cites stats to back it up … but the conclusion is still the same: Cuban blew it when he balked at re-signing Steve Nash. I wonder if Mark read the whole article or just became enamoured by Hollinger’s opening lines about how Cuban helped create the scoring influx in the NBA. Here’s what Hollinger said:

    It’s ironic that Cuban helped create a monster in Phoenix that could be a roadblock to the Mavs’ title hopes. Of course, it was Cuban’s decision not to match Phoenix’s offer for free agent Steve Nash that made Nash a Sun. But additionally, it was the rule changes Cuban helped effect that opened the floodgates on Phoenix’s blistering offensive onslaught.
    Considering Phoenix is one of Dallas’ main competitors for the Western Conference crown, it seems like Cuban might get blindsided by an unintended consequence of the changes he urged.

    Maybe Ford isn’t as big of an idoit as Mark says.

    Comment by Langston -

  40. This guy on Fox Sports rocks— he tells it like it is:
    http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/3428860

    Comment by Big Perm -

  41. If you want sports columns/writers without the subscription crap, try this:

    http://www.sports-central.org

    Comment by MJ -

  42. You may be a bit too old, Cubes, but IMO Bill Simmons is the most entertaining sports writer I’ve ever read:
    http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/simmons/index

    Comment by Scott -

  43. Bill James of basketball actually.

    Comment by Scott Sewell -

  44. Mark,
    John Hollinger is great, if youve never checked out his yearly Basketball Prospectus its a must read. He invented the stat PER, and he’s pushing the field to try to come up with better defensive stats then blocks and steals, hes the Bill James of Baseball.

    Comment by Scott Sewell -

  45. Mark, if you want a good nba writer try Charley Rosen.
    Here is his archive:
    http://msn.foxsports.com/writer/archive?authorId=227

    Comment by Pete -

  46. also, you are indirectly paying chad ford’s salary……..and that is just sick.

    Comment by Jackson -

  47. oh no.

    mark cuban pays for insider.

    i am saddened by this.

    i thought you were better than that…..

    Comment by Jackson -

  48. I thought it was interesting that you didn’t mention Espn.com’s Eric Neel who wrote a very favorable article on the Mavericks today. He wants to know why nobody is paying any attention to them.

    Comment by Michael T. -

  49. Odd. I don’t like Hollinger because he avoids nuances and looks for big picture indicators, indicators that the more big picture they are the less accurate they are. His pace factor applied to defense is a really good example. It is admirable to look for a simple “one size fits all” description of a team’s defense efficiency, but it really isn’t going to illustrate the Mavericks’ spectacular perimiter defense or their ability to get in the defender’s face, forcing lower percentage shots.

    Comment by Jim Kerr -

  50. I thought you were gonna say eric neel. He just wrote an article pimping your boys in his basketball jones weekly contribution

    Comment by richard lynch -

  51. Hi Mark….My comment isn’t directly related to your blog entry, however….since Chris Webber is mentioned in one of your linked articles….I thought I would take this opportunity to ask your opinion regarding the recent C-Webb trade. As a Sacramento Kings fan, (no offense to you or the Mavs, but I live 1/2 hour from ARCO Arena/the Kings,) I was a bit disappointed with the trade. It wasn’t so much the loss of Webber, but it was disappointing to see who we (the Kings) received in the trade. I would have thought trading a talent like C-Webb would have brought Sacramento an All Star caliber player? It seems as if the Maloofs have given up on the team’s prospects. Does the breakup of the Kings core have more to do with the lack of support for a new downtown arena? Just my thoughts…..Take care, James Parham Jr. Yuba City, CA

    Comment by James Parham Jr. -

  52. No way am I joining that ESPN Insider bullsh*t. But looked good from what I saw.

    Comment by Sherwin -

Comments are closed.