The article critiques the current state of NBA broadcasts on TNT and ABC during the postseason, focusing particularly on Reggie Millerâs performance as an analyst. While acknowledging the exciting gameplay, the writer notes a missing caliber in commentary quality. Millerâs excessive and sometimes uninformative chatter draws particular ire, contrasting him with Kevin Harlan's enthusiastic yet seemingly neutral commentary. The author expresses a preference for Stan Van Gundy's analysis style, highlighting how Miller's perceived bias may be inflating fans' critiques of the commentators.
Miller, who was paired as usual with the always superb Kevin Harlan for Games 1 and 2 of the Celtics-Knicks series, is perplexing. He's an A+ talk show guest, especially during his regular appearances on 'The Dan Patrick Show,' but as an analyst, he talks incessantly without a whole lot to say.
But Miller? Well, let's put it this way: Sometimes he does sound more like a guy that played for the Knicks than one who was their primary nemesis for a few years in the '90s.
I'd much rather hear Stan Van Gundy as the analyst on this series, even though he has his annoying quirks. He's handling color on the Warriors-Timberwolves.
A few thoughts on the state of national NBA broadcasts while waiting for Reggie Miller to tell us another dozen times that Jalen Brunson won the Clutch Player of the Year award...
Collection
[
|
...
]