Post by bob01 on Jul 19, 2019 0:22:57 GMT -5
Here, Tony. Phil Mushnick is talking to us.
nypost.com/2019/07/19/espn-gets-more-cringe-worthy-by-the-day/
ESPN gets more cringe-worthy by the day
“Here in the South,” writes reader Bill Hoyt, “they say, ‘I’ve been to two county fairs and a road pavin’ but I ain’t never seen nuthin’ like that!’ ”
Thus we’re blessed that ESPN, which wasn’t around in 1969, could not own exclusive TV rights to the Apollo 11 lunar landing, 50 years ago Saturday.
Alex Rodriguez would have talked over Neil Armstrong’s “one small step,” Jessica Mendoza would have appeared in a split screen to describe how to throw a fastball in near-zero gravity, and Matt Vasgersian would’ve “sent it down to Earth” for Buster Olney’s take.
Booger McFarland would appear from Bristol for a show-and-tell comparing the Lunar Landing Module to his “Monday Night Football” Rubber Booger Buggy.
It’s fascinating — as in dumfounding — that ESPN’s remains eager to display must-read stats free of thought and significant context. It spends a ton of time, money and energy — but no intelligent examination — to produce absolutely meaningless or confused stats or hide significant data within.
Sunday, the Rays lost a two-pitcher perfect game on a ninth-inning leadoff hit by the Orioles’ Hanser Alberto. Soon, with the help of Statcast, ESPN was reporting that Alberto’s single through the infield “had just a 16 percent probability of being a hit.”
How does Statcast and ESPN know this? They don’t. It’s more untreated rubbish presented as fact. Not only have there never been two circumstances in any game that have been exactly the same, there have never been two moments in time exactly the same since the Dead Sea was just sick.
But rather than reflect upon its statistical lunacy, ESPN doubles its servings.
Last week, as many-to-most tennis fans knew, one of the most statistically revealing duels was renewed at Wimbledon, Roger Federer versus Rafael Nadal. They were meeting for the 40th time, and ESPN dutifully posted the stat that Nadal leads, 24-15. End of ESPN’s statistical story.
But Wimbledon is played on grass surfaces, on which Federer is 3-1 vs. Nadal. The great 24-15 divide in their series comes on clay surfaces, where Nadal is 14-2. But that didn’t make ESPN’s cut.
“Or wouldn’t it have been more important to also note that Federer has defeated Nadal in five of their last six matches?” asks reader Ken Ferber.
Then again, ESPN has reported the Jets beat “the Indianapolis Colts in Super Bowl III” and Bobby Thomson’s Shot Heard ’Round the World was “a walk-off home run to win the 1951 NLCS for the Giants.”
As for the men’s and women’s finals, if you tuned to ESPN primarily to hear endless talk about the self-evident and view crowd shots after every point, you were thrilled — over the moon by at least by 16 percent.
nypost.com/2019/07/19/espn-gets-more-cringe-worthy-by-the-day/
ESPN gets more cringe-worthy by the day
“Here in the South,” writes reader Bill Hoyt, “they say, ‘I’ve been to two county fairs and a road pavin’ but I ain’t never seen nuthin’ like that!’ ”
Thus we’re blessed that ESPN, which wasn’t around in 1969, could not own exclusive TV rights to the Apollo 11 lunar landing, 50 years ago Saturday.
Alex Rodriguez would have talked over Neil Armstrong’s “one small step,” Jessica Mendoza would have appeared in a split screen to describe how to throw a fastball in near-zero gravity, and Matt Vasgersian would’ve “sent it down to Earth” for Buster Olney’s take.
Booger McFarland would appear from Bristol for a show-and-tell comparing the Lunar Landing Module to his “Monday Night Football” Rubber Booger Buggy.
It’s fascinating — as in dumfounding — that ESPN’s remains eager to display must-read stats free of thought and significant context. It spends a ton of time, money and energy — but no intelligent examination — to produce absolutely meaningless or confused stats or hide significant data within.
Sunday, the Rays lost a two-pitcher perfect game on a ninth-inning leadoff hit by the Orioles’ Hanser Alberto. Soon, with the help of Statcast, ESPN was reporting that Alberto’s single through the infield “had just a 16 percent probability of being a hit.”
How does Statcast and ESPN know this? They don’t. It’s more untreated rubbish presented as fact. Not only have there never been two circumstances in any game that have been exactly the same, there have never been two moments in time exactly the same since the Dead Sea was just sick.
But rather than reflect upon its statistical lunacy, ESPN doubles its servings.
Last week, as many-to-most tennis fans knew, one of the most statistically revealing duels was renewed at Wimbledon, Roger Federer versus Rafael Nadal. They were meeting for the 40th time, and ESPN dutifully posted the stat that Nadal leads, 24-15. End of ESPN’s statistical story.
But Wimbledon is played on grass surfaces, on which Federer is 3-1 vs. Nadal. The great 24-15 divide in their series comes on clay surfaces, where Nadal is 14-2. But that didn’t make ESPN’s cut.
“Or wouldn’t it have been more important to also note that Federer has defeated Nadal in five of their last six matches?” asks reader Ken Ferber.
Then again, ESPN has reported the Jets beat “the Indianapolis Colts in Super Bowl III” and Bobby Thomson’s Shot Heard ’Round the World was “a walk-off home run to win the 1951 NLCS for the Giants.”
As for the men’s and women’s finals, if you tuned to ESPN primarily to hear endless talk about the self-evident and view crowd shots after every point, you were thrilled — over the moon by at least by 16 percent.
