Yes I was replying to the hunted who reduced my argument down to make it seem like I believe there’s a conspiracy for internet points.
Well, we can easily find twenty posts where I argue against Giannis being MVP--Giannis should NOT be MVP--so I guess the Harden algorithms programmed my brain better than the Giannis algorithms. What is the result of the algorithms' work on your own mind?
The vast majority of people in the national media come from a very small part of the country where men who were athletic losers in their own rights got funneled into a journalism profession that indoctrinated them with this perspective about what good sportswriting was. You know, the good old days at Sports Illustrated and whatnot. To them they can recall what a family summer trip to the Poconos felt like. To them they remember the smell of salt on the beaches that resembled the place where Jaws was filmed. To them Kurt Vonnegut is a good writer. All that crap. The city of Houston lacks a prominent figure to stump for our people, our perspective. There’s literally zero people out there that go national who can fight back against that Northeast hegemony. ESPN has nobody that defends Houston when it comes to relevant sports issues involving our city. Their Texas representative is Tim MacMahon who is a Dallasite. That’s like hiring a Cardinals fan from Peoria to cover the Cubs. The Ringer has Shea Serrano who is an unabashed Spurs diehard that they bring on the air anytime they want a “Houston take”. He ***** on our teams and our city every chance he gets, and even then he’s still the most fair voice out there because at least he knows what it’s like to live here. It ain’t gonna change until we breed one of our own to fight back.
I feel like you don't get how algorithms work. If you don't use popular social media and don't know how algorithms work, I actually kind of envy you.
I would argue the idea of the media narrative and bias has changed dramatically in the "click economy" so comparisons to Houston's title years and now are simply not applicable. But what I'm really surprised by is that no one has mentioned the most obvious reason for this bias has less to do with the market and more to do with the star leading the team. Giannis, Steph, and Lebron are all much more marketable people than the Hardens and Westbrooks of the world. For all of Harden's strengths on the court, he is far too aloof, defiantly individual, and low key to be a spokesman for the league. He doesn't drive clicks in the same way. I would argue there are a number of reasons why including the thorny issue of race and culturally perceived "blackness" of a player but that's a discussion for another thread. Bottom line is regardless of the reason, he who gets more clicks wins in this day and age. It's why we have the president we do and it's why prime Steph was somehow bigger than prime Lebron despite being half the player.
Look. The Rockets aren't bad for business. They are a very necessary part of the business model. You can't have a hero without a villain. Harden and the Rockets have been cast as the villains. Deal with it. Accept it. Revel in it.
I do get how algorithms work: they target content to users according to users' browsing history, personal data, and so on. Sure, we are all in a huge algorithm matrix. But there are still Harden fans and Giannis fans. . . . If you want to say we are all essentially programmed by algorithms that determine our online experience and thus our beliefs, shall we all just shut up then, or keep talking, or what?
I don't think everyone is totally programmed by it. It's just a large factor and most people don't recognize in the moment that their youtube frontpage is not reflective of the big picture. Regardless of anything, we should always keep talking.
I think the only way to change it if the Rockets had the success GSW has had, a mini dynasty, but even then it wouldn't be guaranteed. You can't be as interesting to them as New York or LA, those are the hubs, and it would stay that way. Just not interesting for them enough.
Rockets are talked about countinously in NBA media circles. Look how many Max Kellerman videos are posted up on here.
and the Yankees and the Red Sox, talk about destroying historical franchises on the way to the top. How sweet that was.....those teams ARE baseball
I reject the "there aren't that many anti-Harden people because: algorithms" discussion in here for the simple fact that I've lived in various parts of the Denver/Phoenix/Salt Lake markets for the past 12 years and there is a more anti-Rockets talk and banter here than ever before. (Partially because the Rockets are more relevant again, yes, however people were somewhat indifferent to TMac and Yao. They didn't know or care about the Kevin Martin / dark ages after that.) Opinions on Harden and Paul are mixed, but the one common theme is that almost all casual fans (most fans here) hate James Harden. Sometimes they don't know why. "Flopping and defense". Wonder where that narrative comes from? Wait no, it's because of 1. Bleacher Report, and 2. ESPN. Bleacher Report articles and comment sections are cesspits of scum and villainy.
I bet if Harden won 4 rings they would say the Rockets play the right way! Sports has always been a might makes right sort of world. Winners are beautiful and losers are ugly.
Well that's pretty easy to do. Just, you know, don't log on. I've been doing this for the last 8 years (minus Clutchfans really).