June 13, 2025 • 43 mins
On a Friday edition of the Best Of The Doug Gottlieb Show: Doug and the crew talk about game four of the Stanley Cup Finals, and how it showed us what the worst part is about hockey.
Doug and the crew react to Adam Silver's explanation for the NBA ratings being down.
Doug and Dan Beyer talks about the course at Oakmont for the US Open. Former NBA Champion Eddie House joins Doug to talk about the NBA Finals.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Thanks for listening to the best of The Doug Gottlieb
Show podcast. Be sure to catch us live every weekday
three to five Eastern twelve two Pacific on Box Sports Radio.
Find your local station for The Doug Gottlieb Show at
boxsports Radio dot com, or stream us live every day
on the iHeartRadio app by searching FSR Boom, What Up America,
Doug Gottlieb Show, Fuck Sports Radio. We're trendsetting here in
(00:31):
the DG Show. We're doing stuff differently. We're trying things
that others won't try and others won't do. Welcome in.
You know, there's some text change. You get on and
you're like, I just can't like, somebody find a way
to meet this check chain. There's some text change. You're like,
this is awesome. I'm looking at my text chain last
(00:55):
night and it suddenly became a hockey night in America,
in America. That was good. So yeah, we're going to
start the show talking about the hockey a A welcome in.
Don't worry. Don't worry. We got some Joe Flacco talking
about TikTok dancing. Eddie House is going to join us,
(01:15):
of course, he's the two thousand and eight NBA Championship team.
He was on that Boston team, he played with Lebron.
He's got a couple of sons that are really really
talented players. Plus I just love and value his basketball opinion.
He'll join us at twenty five after the hour, we
got some Jalen Brunston and Josh Hart to talk about.
(01:35):
Mark Stein will join us next hour, so we've got
plenty of hoops. I know Game four US tonight, it
is a pivotal game, and we'll talk about it. But
I I actually like hockey, but I hate this one
big part about hockey. And look, obviously the pieces are
(01:58):
kind of similar to I know the sport is different,
but there's some similarities there to soccer, and I think
some of the similarities to soccer not as much so
are in this one thing. First again, welcome in. The
US Open is ongoing, and we'll we'll we'll talk about Oakmont.
(02:23):
I also want to kind of quiz Dan Byron, like
I saw these pictures of the ninety four Open, and
there's now they've made it into this linksy track and
now it's like old golf links golf whatever, whereas before
Oakmont was almost felt like classic American style country club golf,
and I don't know, do we like this better? It's
(02:45):
this a better way of you took the same course,
but it's completely different now. But last time, I'm watching
the Stanley Cup finals and it sort of dawned on
me as I'm looking at my text thread and watching
(03:06):
the game take place, that I knew how it was
going to end, and it was going to be a
I don't know it was a self fulfilling prophecy, or
there would just be there would just be a lot
of confirmation bias in it. Did anyone think that the
best team won last night? That's I guess my question.
(03:28):
Do you think the best team won? And my answer
would be, well, no, that actually didn't happen. Edmonton's taken
on Florida. I thought Florida was the better team. I
thought Florida was the team that was dominant in overtime,
and yet they lose five to four. Edmonton ties the
series of two a piece, and the last three games
(03:51):
have all gone to overtime. But my point is more, geez,
I thought, you know, and I don't profess to know
much anything about hockey, and like I'm the classic American
sports fan, ninety five percent of us didn't play hockey
growing up, never played hockey on skates like it like.
(04:14):
The extent of my hockey years were the mid nineties
ninety three and ninety four. Specifically, that's when Wayne Gretzky
took the Kings to the Stanley Cup finals, and that's
when NHL ninety four was out and there was also
Blades of Steel. Those are that's the extent of my
the deep hockey years for me and Buyer, I'm sure
(04:41):
you know more about hockey than I do. Sam. I
read your texts and I agree with you. My issue
with hockey is the randomness at times of how goals
are scored in many ways takes away from who's actually
(05:02):
the better team. And I get the larger sample size
of a season is different, and ultimately the good teams
the good teams. But when you're in a playoff hockey
and everyone who's a hockey fan loves to have the
same narrative, nothing better than overtime hockey. But I would
say there's lots of things better than overtime hockey because
(05:27):
in other sports again, and look this happens in football,
where a team will dominate, but they got a turnover
here or there, or a couple of crazy plays can
happen some in basketball, where you know a team could
play very well and you catch a heater end of
the game. He hit a bunch of threes. It happened
with the Pacers going back to the next series, Game one.
(05:50):
But by and large, if a team is dominant is
better for ninety five percent of overtime, by and large,
are gonna win, and they'll be so much it won't matter.
Not the case with hockey. I think the two things
I dislike about hockey is one hockey fan is the
(06:11):
male version of the WNBA fan. Hey, you haven't paid
attentions for twenty five years, and then when you do
pay attention to us, you don't know what you're talking about.
That's annoying. And then the annoying game action thing is
I just have a tough time saying that Edmonton was
in any way better than Florida last night, specifically in overtime,
(06:32):
because I thought Florida out played him and then Edmonton
ends up with a goal.
Speaker 2 (06:35):
I thought that Edmonton.
Speaker 3 (06:39):
Played I mean, they were down three to nothing, so
they obviously played well enough in the second period to
even it up at three, and then they get the
goal to go ahead. I think Florida played better at
the end and then into overtime that I felt that
they had all of the momentum. But I think that
is part of it as well is as someone who
isn't a huge hockey and also can get annoyed by
(07:03):
hockey fan what I loved about this overtime and other overtimes.
Not only do ioas Sam and I now have a
vested interest in Edmonton winning, but there's also this balance.
There's this balance of do you play it safe, do
you go for it?
Speaker 2 (07:20):
What do you do?
Speaker 3 (07:20):
And if you go for it, does that leave you
week on the on the back end if there's something
that leaks out And that's what you got last night.
Florida actually had had a great chance in overtime to
win it and was unable to cash in. I felt
that they put more pressure on Edmonton. Edmonton really didn't
have any good chances and ultimately their goal comes on
(07:41):
a bit of a fluke play. But it's also no difference.
And this may not change your opinion, Doug, but we've
had hot goalies in the past, right where teams are
just they've got the guy in that and there's nothing
that you can do about it. And I think that
when you have just the the balance, specifically in all
over time of sudden does a winner take all were
(08:03):
every single possession, every almost pass of the puck could
alter the game? I find that very exciting.
Speaker 1 (08:11):
Uh, Sam, where are you on? Going off of your
comments that you agree with me? But again Dan made
bigger comments, some having to do with what I'm talking about,
but obviously more thorough in terms of his analysis.
Speaker 2 (08:26):
What's your what's your question?
Speaker 1 (08:27):
Just like, well, again, when you walk away from last night,
I do you think the better team won? Do you
think that I? And is and is it that? Was
it exciting to the point where it's bringing.
Speaker 2 (08:39):
You back, bringing me back to watch the next game?
Speaker 1 (08:44):
Yeah?
Speaker 4 (08:45):
Absolutely, I think this has been I don't know how
to size up these teams. Like I know, Florida is
technically better because they bested the Oilers last year and
they were the favorite coming into this Stanley Cup. All
I know is that, like you know, three of the
four games have been over time, have been pretty excited.
You know, you've got teams winning on the roads. This
is a good product. I'm not a hockey guy. I
(09:06):
don't I don't know how to size these teams up,
but I know that the Oilers have a couple of
huge stars in dry Cydle and McDavid and the.
Speaker 2 (09:15):
Last night Why did you like last night's game?
Speaker 1 (09:17):
That's a great question.
Speaker 2 (09:18):
I feel like the I.
Speaker 4 (09:19):
Feel like the Edmonton Oilers kind of have this like
Pacers kind of energy, like I'm gonna I'm just pulling
for him, and I know that they're not They're not
the better team than than Oklahoma City, but they find
ways to at least tie up the series or take
a lead like the Pacers did in this in the series.
And that's just got me, got me hooked. I yeah,
it's a it's been a good fine, a good product.
Speaker 1 (09:41):
All right, Jay Stu. Now again, I'm gonna Jay Stu,
I don't know where you come in on hockey. I
mean we you and I have talked about it some,
but for for people don't know, Jay Stu was a
huge part of the Jim Rome Show for a long time.
How many years you with Rome?
Speaker 5 (09:58):
Uh? Fourteen years?
Speaker 1 (10:00):
Fourteen it's actually the number I thought, but I said it,
and I was like, is that.
Speaker 5 (10:04):
The right number, Andy Reid, Andy. Just for listeners who
want to want a reference, my time with Jim Rome
mirrored Andy Reid's time with the Eagles.
Speaker 1 (10:15):
Wow.
Speaker 5 (10:16):
Okay, So and you tell me you want to think about, man,
how long will Jess do with Jim Rome? Think Andy
Reid with the Eagles.
Speaker 2 (10:23):
That's actually very helpful.
Speaker 1 (10:25):
I bring it up because and I don't know if
Rome's affinity for hockey was real or just radio creation,
but I will say that you guys talk more hockey
than anybody. I mean, I honestly, my thought, well our
thought always when I was at ESPN Radio was Rome's
talking hockey. Everybody else wins because the second you talk
about hockey, people go, Nick, don't care, right, And you
(10:46):
guys talk hockey some like regular season, early playoffs, not
just Stanley Cup finals. Were you Have you been as
engaged and locked in on hockey even during those fourteen years.
Speaker 5 (10:58):
No. Never. It's a sport that has never once resonated
with me. I have good friends that are hockey fans,
good friends that are Kings fans, and they've always said, man,
you got to go. Once you go, you'll be hooked.
I've gone like.
Speaker 1 (11:13):
NASCAR Guy said the same thing. By the way, NASCAR
guy always goes, you gotta go.
Speaker 5 (11:18):
Go, and neither sport got me when I went in
the the premise of your question, did the better team win?
That assumes two things. That assumes I watched, and that
assumes that even if I did watch, I would have
the sophistication to know which team is better. To your point,
(11:39):
one of the things that turns me off about the
sport is how random it is. Especially this is the
part that really gets me. When there's that the puck
is in front of the goalie and the goalie hasn't
secured it, and everyone is just chopping the hell out
of the ice to hit the puck and then it
goes off the goalie's leg and into the into the goal.
(11:59):
I see Zero's skill in that. So it's hard for
me to get with stuff.
Speaker 1 (12:04):
Like that that I completely agree with you on that,
and I normally agree with you on the level of sophistication.
Like it's like when I watch soccer highlights or I
watch halftime of soccer, the analysis is so weird because
they talk about spirit and energy, Like just tell me
who's playing better and why tried to explain me why
something's playing better. I don't know. Last time I was
(12:25):
watching and I did really agree with Sam. I just
remember looking down at my phone and Sam had just
texted us saying like they're dominating in overtime, and I
was like, yeah, I mean they're not dominating in the score, obviously,
but it does feel like Edmonton is just staving off
(12:45):
losing this thing play after play, just surviving. So I
lack the sophistication as well. Jay s Douo, and I'm
with you, it's never really resonated. I always thought it
was cool. I'm like, yeah, it's cool sport, it's really hard.
It's just I don't know anything about it.
Speaker 3 (13:02):
You know, there there is something, and it's a reason
why we say there's nothing better than playoff hockey, because
you don't get this sense of urgency in the regular season.
And for as much as we may love the five
minutes that they play three on three, still a team
you know, ends up ends up winning and maybe they don't,
and then you just move on to the next game.
(13:23):
Maybe it's exciting for those five minutes, but there is
something about this urgency, of the sudden death nature of
it where even the goal last night ended up being,
you know, a situation where it was two passes earlier
that probably set up the goal. And I know that's
(13:43):
not for everybody, but that's to my point of why
every possession or what you do with the puck is
another opportunity to win or lose the game. You may
look at it from a perspective of, well, there are
no goals, just like Game two when they didn't score
any goals in the first overtime, But for twenty minutes
you have a back and forth of this game could
(14:06):
be decided on this sort of play. Honestly, as somebody
who was cheering for Edmonton last night, the first five
minutes of overtime felt like twenty minutes of game time
because it didn't seem like they were in control, and
you're just like, my goodness, when is this going to
When are you going to be able to do something here?
It felt like Florida had all the chances and all
the momentum, and I remember looking up at the clock
and I'm like, wow, there's only like five point twenty
(14:28):
that's gone by in this overtime session. Ultimately, from what
you guys are saying, how the game ends is an
indicative of how the end of the game was played,
and that's what's frustrating to you. But I just look
at it as like, if you have a dog in
the fight, every single possession, every single pass that you
have could set up that goal. And that's what that's
(14:50):
what makes it interesting. It's meant it interesting to me
with a dog in this fight.
Speaker 1 (14:56):
It's a fair way to look at it's a fair prejective.
But yes, that's ultimately I do sometimes become a result
orienton like I don't I don't understand, and it hurts
my desire to view the sport because I just don't understand,
or maybe I do, or say maybe that's that's that's hockey.
It's like we talk about that space.
Speaker 3 (15:15):
Yeah, here's the funny thing as well. Just quickly, like
as we're having this conversation, we're talking and I'm not
pigging on Sam. I think that this is a this
is a legitimate thing that goes on. We're looking at
Florida as being the halves and Edmonton being the have
nots for what's not happened in hockey. Yeah, Edmonton is
home ice. They both were three seeds in their conferences.
(15:38):
Edmonton actually finished with more points this season. They have
the best player in all of hockey. So there are
all these seemingly inherent advantages towards Edmonton that we really
don't pay attention to because we look at the Panthers
as the defending Stanley Cup champs, and we look at
Edmonton as trying to break through with Canada and again
Canadian streak. Yeah, and I think that's awesome. I actually
think it's awesome that it's it's a bit of the opposite.
(16:00):
So like we try to compare it to the NBA,
that's not necessarily the case. And I'm talking as a
guy that didn't care about last year's Stanley Cup, even
with Edmonton in it. There is something about this year's
that just brought me in and I have no idea
what it was. And I don't know if it's the
NBA and having the playoffs be how they played out.
But my buddy back in Wisconsin that I visited a
(16:22):
couple of weeks ago, who I never thought would ever
watch a hockey game. We're sitting at Buffalo Wild Wings
eating and goes. It's been really good because I've watched
it more than the NBA, and I found that very interesting.
Speaker 1 (16:34):
It was a Buffalo Wings order.
Speaker 3 (16:36):
I did a boneless with some honey barbecue garlic palm,
and I think I did a medium with it.
Speaker 1 (16:44):
They have a new they have like a new honey
barbecue ranch or something like all combining ones. Yummy. Yeah,
it's really good.
Speaker 6 (16:55):
This is the best of the Done Dot Leap Show
on Fox Sports Radio.
Speaker 1 (17:03):
Hey, what up, Doug Gottlieb Show, Fox Sports Radio. iHeartRadio
app Welcome, Welcome, welcome in m m mmmm mmmmmm. So,
I there's been a lot of discussion about the NBA
Finals and NBA ratings in general, and I don't know.
(17:32):
I actually think when I've listened to our Fox Sports
Radio and Fox Sports One shows, there's been a wide
variance of it in terms of how it's been portrayed.
But I again, I actually think Adam Silver says a
(17:54):
lot of interesting stuff. I don't know if that stuff
is incentive in terms of the state of the NBA.
Even if a lot of his stuff does, like multiple
things can be true. So I'm going to play for
you what Adam Silver said, and then we're going to
discuss it as we get ready for Game four. NBA
Finals tonight in Indianapolis, Pacers up two games to one.
(18:17):
Here was Adam Silver in an interview with ESPN. He's
asked about the NBA Finals ratings.
Speaker 7 (18:23):
So we have two markets we've all been around for
the last week in Oklahoma City Indianapolis, that are completely
captured by the finals. I mean, every store you go to,
the signage, everyone look at this concourse here, everybody on
the streets is wearing the team colors. I mean, and
I think I've been doing this for a long time.
I don't remember being in two markets where it feels
(18:44):
like so dominant to have these games. Then on, as
a media matter, it's interesting people compare us to twenty
years ago. But for these games one and two so
far are the highest rated programs in May and June
so far on television, and if something beats us, it'll
be another sports. Back twenty years ago, we often didn't
win the night when the finals were on.
Speaker 1 (19:07):
Okay, So the argument is, basically, hey, here's the deal.
You guys are looking at today's ratings through a lens
of yesterday. And the point he's making is it's not
necessarily about what the number is, It's about winning the
(19:30):
night because fewer and fewer people watch traditional TV, so
the ratings, especially in midweek, are gonna reflect as much.
Now again, does he does? He make a case that
I would agree with in terms of if you've been
to Oklahoma, and obviously most of you guys know, I
spent a ton of time in Oklahoma. Yeah, the entire
(19:50):
state is completely all windows, doors, street lights, whatever. Everything
is Oklahoma City thunder. And the same is in Indiana.
But you get that because you're in smaller markets, right,
So the idea that, Okay, maybe it's better because they
actually carry here. Look if you had in New York,
it wouldn't be the same, but there'd be way more
(20:12):
people that care to wait a lot more same thing
in Boston, bigger markets. The argument he's making about about
ratings is an interesting one. He also talked about how
it's been kind of politicized in terms of ratings, and
I don't know if that's why people watch Jay Stu.
(20:32):
What are your thoughts on Silver's comments on the ratings?
Speaker 5 (20:37):
All Right, so I'm gonna throw this out here to
the three of you or maybe listeners. I want to
I want to know if streaming numbers are factored into
these little ratings. I have a feeling they are. If
they're not by now, that's pretty nonsensical, So I want
to know that. And then as we effort that, I
think that him saying that the concourse here in Indianapolis
(21:00):
is full, so it definitely speaks to how excited people
are that that was a complete nothing burn. Yeah, him
saying that it's tough to compare the ratings to twenty
years ago because we would go nights where we wouldn't
even win nights twenty years ago and we're winning nights
(21:21):
this time around. Okay, that's cool. That sounds like a
lot of word salad, and it sounds like and we
just had an election season, so I'm just gonna make
this as a reference. This isn't a political stance. During
the election season, one side of the political aisle wanted
us to believe the crime was down and that prices
(21:42):
were down our day to day the eye test told
us different. So don't lie to us, Adam Silver. I
wake up every morning and go through NBA content, and
I see how other shows stack their shows and how
they treat NBA Finals content. There just hasn't been a
whole lot of buzz. I don't think any of the
(22:03):
four of us could disagree with that. So it's like
you're telling me something that the ratings are actually good
and that your your sport is being watched and as popular,
but the eye test tells us differently.
Speaker 1 (22:21):
I agree with a lot of that. I agree with
a lot of that. I would say, if we're going
to go politics, there were lies coming from both sides
which were blatantly and patently falls And it's like you said, like, well,
let's follow up. Did anybody follow up to see did
they actually not win nights when they were in the
NBA finals. I'm guessing he's talking about post Michael Jordan,
(22:43):
not during the Michael Jordan era.
Speaker 3 (22:46):
I do think go ahead, and to answer Jason's question
from the information that I've gathered, yes, streaming numbers are included.
Speaker 1 (22:55):
Yeah, in those numbers, why do you guys think less
a smaller percentage of people watch the NBA than used
to watch the NBA as there's no there's no right
or wrong answer, Buyer, what do you think.
Speaker 2 (23:18):
The NBA as a whole? Are we talking about the playoffs?
Speaker 3 (23:20):
Because part of my reason why I think like regular
season ratings are down is because we make the playoffs
and the finals everything.
Speaker 1 (23:27):
Yeah, a lot, but the finals numbers are playoff numbers
are not what they used to be there.
Speaker 3 (23:31):
And I think that your point about the markets like
just of like, obviously, if the Lakers made it or
the Knicks made it, you're you're just you're going to
have a bigger number.
Speaker 2 (23:42):
That is. That is obvious.
Speaker 1 (23:44):
And if the Lakers were in the NBA Finals, it
would be a gigantic thing in the city of Los Angeles, right, Yes,
maybe not as all encompassing as in Oklahoma City, but
the Lakers are kind of big in LA kind of
sort of so that that argument he makes, the concourse
argument the city arguments is now it's not worlds where
it's solid. It's like, yeah, okay, it's a red herring.
(24:07):
It aren't existed, correct.
Speaker 2 (24:11):
Yeah. I just think the product as a whole.
Speaker 3 (24:13):
I just don't think that that people are buying in.
I think it's the season is extremely long. I've told
you that. I think that the NBA is tiresome, it's draining,
and it's funny. I had seen a clip on TikTok
and I forgot who it was, but in just in
(24:34):
how we're like digesting this this finals and digesting these games.
Not everything is an indictment on legacy. And I've felt
that same point as well, like if you just take
the game for what it is and what it is,
but it's either a legacy play or it's a no play,
and I don't think I feel that's good for the game.
(24:55):
But ultimately, I just think that following the NBA is exhausting.
Speaker 1 (25:02):
Sam, why do you think less people watch the NBA?
Speaker 4 (25:05):
Thinking of four kind of reasons, And it's taught me
if any of them kind of don't make sense you.
But I do think that post mj that's the reason.
And that's like twenty five years of posts Michael Jordan.
The continuing rise of the NFL, even though it was huge.
Obviously it was huge back thirty years ago, but it's
(25:27):
it's even bigger now. Somehow, maybe rule changes making it
so that offenses just have more freedom and you can't,
you know, mug guys like you used to, and uh yeah,
maybe in politics maybe plays a role.
Speaker 2 (25:42):
I don't.
Speaker 4 (25:42):
I don't really sense the political vibe this year so much,
or guys making you know, political statements or stands or
gestures and there's a lot going on in the world.
But those are the four reasons NFL steal some attention
post MJ. Maybe some rule change, maybe some politics.
Speaker 1 (26:02):
Okay, I I think the politics thing is just confirmation bias.
I think if you didn't like the NBA, you don't
like those guys. I do think that there is an element.
I actually really agree with Dan on two different fronts. One,
we do make it all about the postseason. And then
(26:22):
I think you combined with the fact that more regular
season games are on national TV now that have ever
been on before, and it's too much. The games don't matter,
Nobody focuses on them, and there's more there's more of
them on than ever and it's just it just tiresome.
I do think that the inside the NBA and the
(26:44):
old head holds, that heads that cover it, that talking
about how they don't like the new NBA or how
it's played, I don't think that helps. That's just that's
not You don't have to dot your eyes with hearts,
but there just isn't.
Speaker 8 (26:59):
Uh.
Speaker 1 (27:01):
That just isn't a good way to sell the fringe on.
You should watch Hey, you should watch this thing, even
though it used to be way better. They shoot too
many threes, they take games off, right, like they just
pointing out the bad parts is not a good thing.
It's not a good thing. And then you know, I
just think they leave themselves up for criticism with so
(27:24):
much of the drama and the trade demands and too
many podcasts. Just like too much drama. It's like, it's
one thing if you have a season that last what
is it, like nine months?
Speaker 2 (27:39):
It plots?
Speaker 1 (27:42):
Okay, it's one, let's say nine. It's one thing. If
you have a season that last nine months. It's the
other thing. If you have a season that last nine
months where guys are making gargantuan contracts and nobody appears
to be happy. Right, So so many of the current
players don't appear to be happy, the foreign player, the
past players aren't happy with the new players being unhappy
(28:03):
or how they play, And so fans are like, like,
so I'm supposed to buy into this stuff. Yet yet
kids love it. There's still a huge number of basketball
fans internationally. Of our exports sports, I would say it's
the most popular. I don't think it's particularly close. And
yet it's kind of stalled out here and we're creeping
(28:25):
up on the post Lebron Steph Era and the league
is going to really really struggle to find that next star,
super super super superstar. Just just we had to wait
how long after Jordan retired before we got Lebron. And look,
Kobe was great, but Kobe wasn't beloved. He just wasn't.
(28:48):
He was really hard to deal with for a really
long time. He didn't like his own teammates, his own coaches.
Even when he won. He was hard for people love.
And he's more beloved now because the last two titles,
but also look because he kind of evolved as a
human and then he died way too early. But there
was a massive gap, a huge fall off when Jordan
(29:09):
left the game, and I think we're getting ready for
one of those. And then you factor in that the
NBA has just lost a PR battle. I don't think
it's a you know, I and I've kind of won
Jay Stu over with this thing. I'd like it to baseball.
It's way better than anybody's perception of it is. The
(29:30):
NBA is way better than even the NFL playoffs and
the NFL as Jay, I don't think it's as bad
as Jay Stu makes it. But the product oftentimes is
not great, and yet people watch. Why it's easy to
gamble on why because it's only on three days a week,
whereas the NBA is on all the time. People are
(29:50):
always talking about it. It's kind of heavy. No one
ever appears to be happy. People who played in it,
cover it, coached it. Everybody bitches all all the time,
and at some point you're just like, yeah, I'm kind
of good and I as despite the fact this is
a super competitive series, it has zero buzz none.
Speaker 3 (30:11):
In a way, it's counterproductive because the people that aren't
going to watch aren't gonna watch even if there are
more games, and then the people who are going to
watch aren't going to watch as much because there are
more games.
Speaker 4 (30:22):
Can I also say that do we consider the play
in game? The playing game is the start of the
playoffs like the playing games. The NBA doesn't, but I do, Okay,
So they started the playing games was April fifteenth. I
know we love the NBA playoffs and we kind of
put the spotlight on it more than the regular season,
but the playoffs are really long. Yeah, two months to
(30:43):
get halfway through the finals.
Speaker 2 (30:45):
Sam, I've done the math on this. I said this
on the network.
Speaker 3 (30:47):
If this was an NFL schedule, the NBA Playoffs would
last from Week one to the beginning of week eleven.
In the NFL, it's more than half of the regular season.
If you were to like to spread it out and
be like, Okay, this was week one of the season,
Week two, Week three, that's great, and the NBA Draft
two night a fair now starting in less than two
weeks the twenty fifth. Then you have free agency in
(31:08):
Summer League after that. So you're in mid July still
kind of talking about the NBA in training camps start
in September. Now that mid October is the start of
the season. So Doug, when you say nine months, August
is the only month that there isn't something NBA related
going on. I mean NBA Media Days happen on like
September twentieth. It's like week two of the NFL season.
Speaker 1 (31:31):
It's long, it's crazy, And you know, then summer basketball
is a thing. Last year was the Olympics as well. Yeah,
it's a lot. And then the off season, whatever the
off season is, there's so many trades and so much
player movement that I think it does feed into the
(31:51):
narrative of unhappiness and it just constantly, constantly being a
part of the of what's going on in sports, and people.
Speaker 2 (32:01):
Tire of it.
Speaker 6 (32:01):
Fox Sports Radio had the best sports talk lineup in
the nation. Catch all of our shows at Fox sports
Radio dot com and within the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 1 (32:11):
The Doug Gottlieb Show, it's Fox Sports Radio. It's the
Doug Gotlieb Show, Fox Sports Radio. Any house in a moment.
But if you're wondering what's going on in Oakmont, Doug
Gottlieb Show here on Fox Sports Radio. Okay, so buyer,
(32:33):
I was watching I think it was on social media
show the ninety four Open at Oakmont, and it's like
a completely different course, right, It's like someone's like photoshopped,
Like if you cut out all the trees, what do
you think of transformation of this course?
Speaker 3 (32:48):
Yeah, And it's funny because I was thinking about this
driving in because they were talking about it as I
was listening to the broadcast. And this has been like
that for the last couple of opens. But it's always
remains a story and it's crazy because it's Oakmont. You
would think there'd be just tons of oak trees. No,
not the case, but Wow, yeah, I don't necessarily.
Speaker 2 (33:06):
Can you call it Oakmon if there's no oaks? Right?
Something we can get into later.
Speaker 1 (33:11):
Now we get into now, I mean, oh.
Speaker 2 (33:13):
Okay, all right, I'm sorry, house on hold them so.
Speaker 1 (33:15):
No, no, he's we'll get him a second. So what was
the impetus behind the course change? So because it is
a dramatic change, yes, like it's literally from country club
golf to Lynskulf.
Speaker 3 (33:29):
So prior to the two thousand and seven US Open,
they wanted to restore Oakmont to what its original layout was,
and that was basically no trees. And the stories they
told telling up to that point is they would sometimes
go out at night to cut the trees down so
membership wouldn't necessarily know that they were cutting trees down.
(33:51):
And after a while, all of a sudden, all these
trees were cut down and wait, like wait a second, hey,
that's missing. But it was to reflect and restore to
what the course was from the beginning. From Henry Phones
then Doug, there's also been this move away from more
link style. Trees don't help grass grow. You're seeing a
(34:15):
lot more courses remove trees. It's better for the grass,
it's better for the turf, but this was more to
be true to what Oakmont originally was and it went
under a recent restoration, which has been the main story
heading into this open where gil Hans took it over
and they've taken parts of the design that the different
(34:35):
designs that have occurred early on in Oakmont days and
tried to blend them into what is this current course.
But it did not have trees in its early going,
and the trees just ended up growing and growing throughout
the years. But that was the initial reason why they
decided to take them down prior to the seven Open.
Speaker 1 (34:52):
It is interesting, as you point out, you god so
many different course designers coming in, it becomes you know,
I had no idea, that's what was I just didn't.
But on some levels, when you have multiple course designers,
it's like when you have a really cool house, It's
like did you have different contractors here? Like no, this,
they redid this in OA, and they redid this, and
(35:12):
you know in fifteen and we just redid this or whatever,
and sometimes you get different tastes. But it is definitely
a linksy style now. It definitely looks like the original
game of golf, if you will, and it looks crazy, crazy, difficult.
Speaker 3 (35:29):
And there are some that don't like that it doesn't
have trees. And there's even some conversation of this week
that you know, is it too far one way as
opposed to the other, because when you and I play golfer,
others play golf, trees do make a difference.
Speaker 2 (35:44):
They absolutely do.
Speaker 3 (35:46):
But I don't I don't know if it's necessarily needed
at Oakmont just because of the defense is how fast
their greens are. When the US Open puts the rough
like this, you're getting scores like this.
Speaker 1 (35:57):
All right, let's turn from the US Open to the
NBA Finals. Eddie House went in an NBA championship in
two thousand and eight. Uh, dude is awesome at breaking
it down TV radio joins us now on the Doug
Gottlieb Show on Fox Sports Radio. Eddie, what's what's your
what's your EVL of what's going? What went wrong for
(36:20):
the thunder in the fourth quarter in Game three?
Speaker 8 (36:24):
I think, Uh, just Rick Carlisle his the way he
uh changes defenders on Shay so Say has to face.
You know, Say is so talented. You know, obviously the
league MVP. But I think what happened was picking him
up ninety four feet, wearing him down. And I think
(36:46):
what okay C needs to do is make an adjustment.
And that's what I'm looking for tonight, to see what
kind of adjustment uh Daggonov is gonna make as far
as because what I would do, I would take Shaye
off the ball. I would not allow him until the
fourth quarter. I wouldn't have him bring the ball up,
(37:07):
you know. I would have him get the ball with
a live dribble as opposed to having to bring the
ball up and have to fight ninety four feet to
get to his spot and then everybody else just standing around. No,
I will run my offense through somebody else. Jalen Williams
has to step up, and then from there in the
(37:28):
fourth quarter they could go to work. You just want
to try to conserve is as much energy for him
as you can.
Speaker 1 (37:35):
Yeah. Do you think they're tired? Do you think that's
one of the things hurting the thunder?
Speaker 7 (37:41):
No?
Speaker 8 (37:41):
Man? Yeah, A young, young many not tired. Man. You
remember how you was when you was twenty six twenty seven,
or you was twenty three twenty four. You wasn't You
didn't get tired, and you wanted to play. I don't
think that they're tired. I think that you can wear
on somebody, you know what I mean, and you can
make it where you're uncomfortable, And I don't think more
(38:03):
so than being tired. I think Shay just was uncomfortable
the whole time because he's usually able to just get
to a spot moved easily, but they made him have
to work for everything. So I won't buy the tiredness
because you know, anybody that won a championship, anybody that
played in the playoffs, anybody has that long run. You
(38:27):
all go through it. But especially if when you in
the finals. Man, there's no uh, you can't use that
as a crush or excuse.
Speaker 1 (38:36):
Hey, help me out, Eddie. Can you figure out Tyre's Haliburton.
There's some games that he plays where he just kind
of plays and floats and doesn't have a huge impact,
and then there are other games in which he feels
way more aggressive and he does have a huge impact.
I know, it's just kind of unique. What are your
thoughts on Halliburton and why some games he's just not
(39:01):
he's just not dominating in any way.
Speaker 8 (39:04):
Well, he does in different ways. Right as far as
assistance right. He always his assist numbers are always pretty
much up. I think the fact of the matter is
that he has to be aggressive offensively. And sometimes it's
a traditional point guard. You're a traditional point guard. You
played that position. So sometimes you're not going to have
(39:27):
a high you're not going to have a lot of
points in certain games. But then you got to understand
that that happy medium, you know what I mean, where
you're like, Okay, I have to be more aggressive and
this series, and that's the thing about it. Every series
is different, every game is every quarter is different, every
half is different, every game is different. And I believe
(39:50):
that he understands that he has to put his foot
on the gas for them to be for them to win.
And it's and being a great you know, people mix
it up when when when we say be aggressive, that
doesn't necessarily mean that you have to shoot the ball
all the time. That means just put pressure and be
(40:10):
aggressive and you can make the right play, whether it
be a play for yourself or a play for others.
That's what I I when I say aggressive, you know,
and a lot of people think about aggressiveness is oh,
you just got to go score, you got to get
up thirty shots and now sometimes you don't have to
do that. Sometimes you don't.
Speaker 1 (40:31):
Eddie House, our guest here at the Doug Gottlieb Show
on Fox Sports Radio. All right, let's uh, well, let's
get around the NBA just a little bit. Kevin Durant.
Everybody thinks he's going to be traded. Where's the best
spot for him? Oh?
Speaker 8 (40:44):
Man, you know it's it's a lot of good destinations
for him. If I was okay, see, even though they're
in this thing right now, they got a ton of
assets as far as draft picks and things like that,
and if you trade a guy like KD then you're
looking to basically rebuild, you know, if you're Phoenix, So
(41:06):
I will look, okay, see, would be somebody that I
would be interested in. I'm not sure what everything that
the Rockets have over there, what they can make happen,
but they're they're ready made right now to keep trying
to push. I think maybe Jalen Green And do you
want to get off a youngster that that fast? I
(41:27):
don't know, you know what I mean for somebody that's old,
improving older, I should say improving. Uh So I would
say it would be I think it would be a
happy marriage between okay see and uh for him to
go back to ok se.
Speaker 1 (41:46):
Uh, I do too. I just again, we're it feels
like if he's going to be traded now or if
the discuss her now, I don't know if. And again
I don't know if OKC is in that mode. But yeah,
they do need they need a guy who win the
houses upires like I got it. I'll get us a bucket.
We're good. They just don't don't have that. If if
(42:07):
you're the Celtics.
Speaker 8 (42:09):
What do you do, Well, you got to look at uh,
you know, a Drew Holliday contract. You got to look
at a Christaps Porzingis. Who has you know, shown that
he's been you know, injury prone. Uh you know, I
don't know what was going on last I mean this
past season. They still hasn't been disclosed what kind of
(42:32):
illness that he had. But the fact of the matter
that he wasn't there. But he's the people Christoph kp
is the people's champ. Everybody loves him, not only in
when you go into the garden, but when you on
the road and when he comes out, the people go
crazy for him. Right, So I think that you are,
(42:56):
you know, Sam Houser, though, I think those are the
the contracts that you could look at and you know,
you could try to put something together and see if
you know, if Kadie come up, You're still didn't win
mold right now, Jalen Brown, I don't think that you.
I don't think that you get rid of Jalen Brown.
(43:16):
To me, the reason why I wouldn't trade Jalen Brown
because Jason Tatum's not there and you have to have
that star power there, and you have to have two
star powers, you know, And I think that I think
that that would be like kind of the way to go,
So you have to unload some of these other other contracts.
(43:38):
I wouldn't get rid of Derek White. I wouldn't get
rid of Derek White at all. He does so much.
Speaker 1 (43:45):
Eddie House. Of course, Eddie we truly appreciates joining us.
He's an analyst for NBC Sports Boston. We'll see what
the Celtics do. We'll watch tonight's NBA Finals game, and
we'll talk with him again. Any of the best. Man,
really appreciate you spend some time.
Speaker 8 (43:57):
Oh problem man, thanks for having me
Thanks for listening to the best of The Doug Gottlieb
Show podcast. Be sure to catch us live every weekday
three to five Eastern twelve two Pacific on Box Sports Radio.
Find your local station for The Doug Gottlieb Show at
boxsports Radio dot com, or stream us live every day
on the iHeartRadio app by searching FSR Boom, What Up America,
Doug Gottlieb Show, Fuck Sports Radio. We're trendsetting here in
(00:31):
the DG Show. We're doing stuff differently. We're trying things
that others won't try and others won't do. Welcome in.
You know, there's some text change. You get on and
you're like, I just can't like, somebody find a way
to meet this check chain. There's some text change. You're like,
this is awesome. I'm looking at my text chain last
(00:55):
night and it suddenly became a hockey night in America,
in America. That was good. So yeah, we're going to
start the show talking about the hockey a A welcome in.
Don't worry. Don't worry. We got some Joe Flacco talking
about TikTok dancing. Eddie House is going to join us,
(01:15):
of course, he's the two thousand and eight NBA Championship team.
He was on that Boston team, he played with Lebron.
He's got a couple of sons that are really really
talented players. Plus I just love and value his basketball opinion.
He'll join us at twenty five after the hour, we
got some Jalen Brunston and Josh Hart to talk about.
(01:35):
Mark Stein will join us next hour, so we've got
plenty of hoops. I know Game four US tonight, it
is a pivotal game, and we'll talk about it. But
I I actually like hockey, but I hate this one
big part about hockey. And look, obviously the pieces are
(01:58):
kind of similar to I know the sport is different,
but there's some similarities there to soccer, and I think
some of the similarities to soccer not as much so
are in this one thing. First again, welcome in. The
US Open is ongoing, and we'll we'll we'll talk about Oakmont.
(02:23):
I also want to kind of quiz Dan Byron, like
I saw these pictures of the ninety four Open, and
there's now they've made it into this linksy track and
now it's like old golf links golf whatever, whereas before
Oakmont was almost felt like classic American style country club golf,
and I don't know, do we like this better? It's
(02:45):
this a better way of you took the same course,
but it's completely different now. But last time, I'm watching
the Stanley Cup finals and it sort of dawned on
me as I'm looking at my text thread and watching
(03:06):
the game take place, that I knew how it was
going to end, and it was going to be a
I don't know it was a self fulfilling prophecy, or
there would just be there would just be a lot
of confirmation bias in it. Did anyone think that the
best team won last night? That's I guess my question.
(03:28):
Do you think the best team won? And my answer
would be, well, no, that actually didn't happen. Edmonton's taken
on Florida. I thought Florida was the better team. I
thought Florida was the team that was dominant in overtime,
and yet they lose five to four. Edmonton ties the
series of two a piece, and the last three games
(03:51):
have all gone to overtime. But my point is more, geez,
I thought, you know, and I don't profess to know
much anything about hockey, and like I'm the classic American
sports fan, ninety five percent of us didn't play hockey
growing up, never played hockey on skates like it like.
(04:14):
The extent of my hockey years were the mid nineties
ninety three and ninety four. Specifically, that's when Wayne Gretzky
took the Kings to the Stanley Cup finals, and that's
when NHL ninety four was out and there was also
Blades of Steel. Those are that's the extent of my
the deep hockey years for me and Buyer, I'm sure
(04:41):
you know more about hockey than I do. Sam. I
read your texts and I agree with you. My issue
with hockey is the randomness at times of how goals
are scored in many ways takes away from who's actually
(05:02):
the better team. And I get the larger sample size
of a season is different, and ultimately the good teams
the good teams. But when you're in a playoff hockey
and everyone who's a hockey fan loves to have the
same narrative, nothing better than overtime hockey. But I would
say there's lots of things better than overtime hockey because
(05:27):
in other sports again, and look this happens in football,
where a team will dominate, but they got a turnover
here or there, or a couple of crazy plays can
happen some in basketball, where you know a team could
play very well and you catch a heater end of
the game. He hit a bunch of threes. It happened
with the Pacers going back to the next series, Game one.
(05:50):
But by and large, if a team is dominant is
better for ninety five percent of overtime, by and large,
are gonna win, and they'll be so much it won't matter.
Not the case with hockey. I think the two things
I dislike about hockey is one hockey fan is the
(06:11):
male version of the WNBA fan. Hey, you haven't paid
attentions for twenty five years, and then when you do
pay attention to us, you don't know what you're talking about.
That's annoying. And then the annoying game action thing is
I just have a tough time saying that Edmonton was
in any way better than Florida last night, specifically in overtime,
(06:32):
because I thought Florida out played him and then Edmonton
ends up with a goal.
Speaker 2 (06:35):
I thought that Edmonton.
Speaker 3 (06:39):
Played I mean, they were down three to nothing, so
they obviously played well enough in the second period to
even it up at three, and then they get the
goal to go ahead. I think Florida played better at
the end and then into overtime that I felt that
they had all of the momentum. But I think that
is part of it as well is as someone who
isn't a huge hockey and also can get annoyed by
(07:03):
hockey fan what I loved about this overtime and other overtimes.
Not only do ioas Sam and I now have a
vested interest in Edmonton winning, but there's also this balance.
There's this balance of do you play it safe, do
you go for it?
Speaker 2 (07:20):
What do you do?
Speaker 3 (07:20):
And if you go for it, does that leave you
week on the on the back end if there's something
that leaks out And that's what you got last night.
Florida actually had had a great chance in overtime to
win it and was unable to cash in. I felt
that they put more pressure on Edmonton. Edmonton really didn't
have any good chances and ultimately their goal comes on
(07:41):
a bit of a fluke play. But it's also no difference.
And this may not change your opinion, Doug, but we've
had hot goalies in the past, right where teams are
just they've got the guy in that and there's nothing
that you can do about it. And I think that
when you have just the the balance, specifically in all
over time of sudden does a winner take all were
(08:03):
every single possession, every almost pass of the puck could
alter the game? I find that very exciting.
Speaker 1 (08:11):
Uh, Sam, where are you on? Going off of your
comments that you agree with me? But again Dan made
bigger comments, some having to do with what I'm talking about,
but obviously more thorough in terms of his analysis.
Speaker 2 (08:26):
What's your what's your question?
Speaker 1 (08:27):
Just like, well, again, when you walk away from last night,
I do you think the better team won? Do you
think that I? And is and is it that? Was
it exciting to the point where it's bringing.
Speaker 2 (08:39):
You back, bringing me back to watch the next game?
Speaker 1 (08:44):
Yeah?
Speaker 4 (08:45):
Absolutely, I think this has been I don't know how
to size up these teams. Like I know, Florida is
technically better because they bested the Oilers last year and
they were the favorite coming into this Stanley Cup. All
I know is that, like you know, three of the
four games have been over time, have been pretty excited.
You know, you've got teams winning on the roads. This
is a good product. I'm not a hockey guy. I
(09:06):
don't I don't know how to size these teams up,
but I know that the Oilers have a couple of
huge stars in dry Cydle and McDavid and the.
Speaker 2 (09:15):
Last night Why did you like last night's game?
Speaker 1 (09:17):
That's a great question.
Speaker 2 (09:18):
I feel like the I.
Speaker 4 (09:19):
Feel like the Edmonton Oilers kind of have this like
Pacers kind of energy, like I'm gonna I'm just pulling
for him, and I know that they're not They're not
the better team than than Oklahoma City, but they find
ways to at least tie up the series or take
a lead like the Pacers did in this in the series.
And that's just got me, got me hooked. I yeah,
it's a it's been a good fine, a good product.
Speaker 1 (09:41):
All right, Jay Stu. Now again, I'm gonna Jay Stu,
I don't know where you come in on hockey. I
mean we you and I have talked about it some,
but for for people don't know, Jay Stu was a
huge part of the Jim Rome Show for a long time.
How many years you with Rome?
Speaker 5 (09:58):
Uh? Fourteen years?
Speaker 1 (10:00):
Fourteen it's actually the number I thought, but I said it,
and I was like, is that.
Speaker 5 (10:04):
The right number, Andy Reid, Andy. Just for listeners who
want to want a reference, my time with Jim Rome
mirrored Andy Reid's time with the Eagles.
Speaker 1 (10:15):
Wow.
Speaker 5 (10:16):
Okay, So and you tell me you want to think about, man,
how long will Jess do with Jim Rome? Think Andy
Reid with the Eagles.
Speaker 2 (10:23):
That's actually very helpful.
Speaker 1 (10:25):
I bring it up because and I don't know if
Rome's affinity for hockey was real or just radio creation,
but I will say that you guys talk more hockey
than anybody. I mean, I honestly, my thought, well our
thought always when I was at ESPN Radio was Rome's
talking hockey. Everybody else wins because the second you talk
about hockey, people go, Nick, don't care, right, And you
(10:46):
guys talk hockey some like regular season, early playoffs, not
just Stanley Cup finals. Were you Have you been as
engaged and locked in on hockey even during those fourteen years.
Speaker 5 (10:58):
No. Never. It's a sport that has never once resonated
with me. I have good friends that are hockey fans,
good friends that are Kings fans, and they've always said, man,
you got to go. Once you go, you'll be hooked.
I've gone like.
Speaker 1 (11:13):
NASCAR Guy said the same thing. By the way, NASCAR
guy always goes, you gotta go.
Speaker 5 (11:18):
Go, and neither sport got me when I went in
the the premise of your question, did the better team win?
That assumes two things. That assumes I watched, and that
assumes that even if I did watch, I would have
the sophistication to know which team is better. To your point,
(11:39):
one of the things that turns me off about the
sport is how random it is. Especially this is the
part that really gets me. When there's that the puck
is in front of the goalie and the goalie hasn't
secured it, and everyone is just chopping the hell out
of the ice to hit the puck and then it
goes off the goalie's leg and into the into the goal.
(11:59):
I see Zero's skill in that. So it's hard for
me to get with stuff.
Speaker 1 (12:04):
Like that that I completely agree with you on that,
and I normally agree with you on the level of sophistication.
Like it's like when I watch soccer highlights or I
watch halftime of soccer, the analysis is so weird because
they talk about spirit and energy, Like just tell me
who's playing better and why tried to explain me why
something's playing better. I don't know. Last time I was
(12:25):
watching and I did really agree with Sam. I just
remember looking down at my phone and Sam had just
texted us saying like they're dominating in overtime, and I
was like, yeah, I mean they're not dominating in the score, obviously,
but it does feel like Edmonton is just staving off
(12:45):
losing this thing play after play, just surviving. So I
lack the sophistication as well. Jay s Douo, and I'm
with you, it's never really resonated. I always thought it
was cool. I'm like, yeah, it's cool sport, it's really hard.
It's just I don't know anything about it.
Speaker 3 (13:02):
You know, there there is something, and it's a reason
why we say there's nothing better than playoff hockey, because
you don't get this sense of urgency in the regular season.
And for as much as we may love the five
minutes that they play three on three, still a team
you know, ends up ends up winning and maybe they don't,
and then you just move on to the next game.
(13:23):
Maybe it's exciting for those five minutes, but there is
something about this urgency, of the sudden death nature of
it where even the goal last night ended up being,
you know, a situation where it was two passes earlier
that probably set up the goal. And I know that's
(13:43):
not for everybody, but that's to my point of why
every possession or what you do with the puck is
another opportunity to win or lose the game. You may
look at it from a perspective of, well, there are
no goals, just like Game two when they didn't score
any goals in the first overtime, But for twenty minutes
you have a back and forth of this game could
(14:06):
be decided on this sort of play. Honestly, as somebody
who was cheering for Edmonton last night, the first five
minutes of overtime felt like twenty minutes of game time
because it didn't seem like they were in control, and
you're just like, my goodness, when is this going to
When are you going to be able to do something here?
It felt like Florida had all the chances and all
the momentum, and I remember looking up at the clock
and I'm like, wow, there's only like five point twenty
(14:28):
that's gone by in this overtime session. Ultimately, from what
you guys are saying, how the game ends is an
indicative of how the end of the game was played,
and that's what's frustrating to you. But I just look
at it as like, if you have a dog in
the fight, every single possession, every single pass that you
have could set up that goal. And that's what that's
(14:50):
what makes it interesting. It's meant it interesting to me
with a dog in this fight.
Speaker 1 (14:56):
It's a fair way to look at it's a fair prejective.
But yes, that's ultimately I do sometimes become a result
orienton like I don't I don't understand, and it hurts
my desire to view the sport because I just don't understand,
or maybe I do, or say maybe that's that's that's hockey.
It's like we talk about that space.
Speaker 3 (15:15):
Yeah, here's the funny thing as well. Just quickly, like
as we're having this conversation, we're talking and I'm not
pigging on Sam. I think that this is a this
is a legitimate thing that goes on. We're looking at
Florida as being the halves and Edmonton being the have
nots for what's not happened in hockey. Yeah, Edmonton is
home ice. They both were three seeds in their conferences.
(15:38):
Edmonton actually finished with more points this season. They have
the best player in all of hockey. So there are
all these seemingly inherent advantages towards Edmonton that we really
don't pay attention to because we look at the Panthers
as the defending Stanley Cup champs, and we look at
Edmonton as trying to break through with Canada and again
Canadian streak. Yeah, and I think that's awesome. I actually
think it's awesome that it's it's a bit of the opposite.
(16:00):
So like we try to compare it to the NBA,
that's not necessarily the case. And I'm talking as a
guy that didn't care about last year's Stanley Cup, even
with Edmonton in it. There is something about this year's
that just brought me in and I have no idea
what it was. And I don't know if it's the
NBA and having the playoffs be how they played out.
But my buddy back in Wisconsin that I visited a
(16:22):
couple of weeks ago, who I never thought would ever
watch a hockey game. We're sitting at Buffalo Wild Wings
eating and goes. It's been really good because I've watched
it more than the NBA, and I found that very interesting.
Speaker 1 (16:34):
It was a Buffalo Wings order.
Speaker 3 (16:36):
I did a boneless with some honey barbecue garlic palm,
and I think I did a medium with it.
Speaker 1 (16:44):
They have a new they have like a new honey
barbecue ranch or something like all combining ones. Yummy. Yeah,
it's really good.
Speaker 6 (16:55):
This is the best of the Done Dot Leap Show
on Fox Sports Radio.
Speaker 1 (17:03):
Hey, what up, Doug Gottlieb Show, Fox Sports Radio. iHeartRadio
app Welcome, Welcome, welcome in m m mmmm mmmmmm. So,
I there's been a lot of discussion about the NBA
Finals and NBA ratings in general, and I don't know.
(17:32):
I actually think when I've listened to our Fox Sports
Radio and Fox Sports One shows, there's been a wide
variance of it in terms of how it's been portrayed.
But I again, I actually think Adam Silver says a
(17:54):
lot of interesting stuff. I don't know if that stuff
is incentive in terms of the state of the NBA.
Even if a lot of his stuff does, like multiple
things can be true. So I'm going to play for
you what Adam Silver said, and then we're going to
discuss it as we get ready for Game four. NBA
Finals tonight in Indianapolis, Pacers up two games to one.
(18:17):
Here was Adam Silver in an interview with ESPN. He's
asked about the NBA Finals ratings.
Speaker 7 (18:23):
So we have two markets we've all been around for
the last week in Oklahoma City Indianapolis, that are completely
captured by the finals. I mean, every store you go to,
the signage, everyone look at this concourse here, everybody on
the streets is wearing the team colors. I mean, and
I think I've been doing this for a long time.
I don't remember being in two markets where it feels
(18:44):
like so dominant to have these games. Then on, as
a media matter, it's interesting people compare us to twenty
years ago. But for these games one and two so
far are the highest rated programs in May and June
so far on television, and if something beats us, it'll
be another sports. Back twenty years ago, we often didn't
win the night when the finals were on.
Speaker 1 (19:07):
Okay, So the argument is, basically, hey, here's the deal.
You guys are looking at today's ratings through a lens
of yesterday. And the point he's making is it's not
necessarily about what the number is, It's about winning the
(19:30):
night because fewer and fewer people watch traditional TV, so
the ratings, especially in midweek, are gonna reflect as much.
Now again, does he does? He make a case that
I would agree with in terms of if you've been
to Oklahoma, and obviously most of you guys know, I
spent a ton of time in Oklahoma. Yeah, the entire
(19:50):
state is completely all windows, doors, street lights, whatever. Everything
is Oklahoma City thunder. And the same is in Indiana.
But you get that because you're in smaller markets, right,
So the idea that, Okay, maybe it's better because they
actually carry here. Look if you had in New York,
it wouldn't be the same, but there'd be way more
(20:12):
people that care to wait a lot more same thing
in Boston, bigger markets. The argument he's making about about
ratings is an interesting one. He also talked about how
it's been kind of politicized in terms of ratings, and
I don't know if that's why people watch Jay Stu.
(20:32):
What are your thoughts on Silver's comments on the ratings?
Speaker 5 (20:37):
All Right, so I'm gonna throw this out here to
the three of you or maybe listeners. I want to
I want to know if streaming numbers are factored into
these little ratings. I have a feeling they are. If
they're not by now, that's pretty nonsensical, So I want
to know that. And then as we effort that, I
think that him saying that the concourse here in Indianapolis
(21:00):
is full, so it definitely speaks to how excited people
are that that was a complete nothing burn. Yeah, him
saying that it's tough to compare the ratings to twenty
years ago because we would go nights where we wouldn't
even win nights twenty years ago and we're winning nights
(21:21):
this time around. Okay, that's cool. That sounds like a
lot of word salad, and it sounds like and we
just had an election season, so I'm just gonna make
this as a reference. This isn't a political stance. During
the election season, one side of the political aisle wanted
us to believe the crime was down and that prices
(21:42):
were down our day to day the eye test told
us different. So don't lie to us, Adam Silver. I
wake up every morning and go through NBA content, and
I see how other shows stack their shows and how
they treat NBA Finals content. There just hasn't been a
whole lot of buzz. I don't think any of the
(22:03):
four of us could disagree with that. So it's like
you're telling me something that the ratings are actually good
and that your your sport is being watched and as popular,
but the eye test tells us differently.
Speaker 1 (22:21):
I agree with a lot of that. I agree with
a lot of that. I would say, if we're going
to go politics, there were lies coming from both sides
which were blatantly and patently falls And it's like you said, like, well,
let's follow up. Did anybody follow up to see did
they actually not win nights when they were in the
NBA finals. I'm guessing he's talking about post Michael Jordan,
(22:43):
not during the Michael Jordan era.
Speaker 3 (22:46):
I do think go ahead, and to answer Jason's question
from the information that I've gathered, yes, streaming numbers are included.
Speaker 1 (22:55):
Yeah, in those numbers, why do you guys think less
a smaller percentage of people watch the NBA than used
to watch the NBA as there's no there's no right
or wrong answer, Buyer, what do you think.
Speaker 2 (23:18):
The NBA as a whole? Are we talking about the playoffs?
Speaker 3 (23:20):
Because part of my reason why I think like regular
season ratings are down is because we make the playoffs
and the finals everything.
Speaker 1 (23:27):
Yeah, a lot, but the finals numbers are playoff numbers
are not what they used to be there.
Speaker 3 (23:31):
And I think that your point about the markets like
just of like, obviously, if the Lakers made it or
the Knicks made it, you're you're just you're going to
have a bigger number.
Speaker 2 (23:42):
That is. That is obvious.
Speaker 1 (23:44):
And if the Lakers were in the NBA Finals, it
would be a gigantic thing in the city of Los Angeles, right, Yes,
maybe not as all encompassing as in Oklahoma City, but
the Lakers are kind of big in LA kind of
sort of so that that argument he makes, the concourse
argument the city arguments is now it's not worlds where
it's solid. It's like, yeah, okay, it's a red herring.
(24:07):
It aren't existed, correct.
Speaker 2 (24:11):
Yeah. I just think the product as a whole.
Speaker 3 (24:13):
I just don't think that that people are buying in.
I think it's the season is extremely long. I've told
you that. I think that the NBA is tiresome, it's draining,
and it's funny. I had seen a clip on TikTok
and I forgot who it was, but in just in
(24:34):
how we're like digesting this this finals and digesting these games.
Not everything is an indictment on legacy. And I've felt
that same point as well, like if you just take
the game for what it is and what it is,
but it's either a legacy play or it's a no play,
and I don't think I feel that's good for the game.
(24:55):
But ultimately, I just think that following the NBA is exhausting.
Speaker 1 (25:02):
Sam, why do you think less people watch the NBA?
Speaker 4 (25:05):
Thinking of four kind of reasons, And it's taught me
if any of them kind of don't make sense you.
But I do think that post mj that's the reason.
And that's like twenty five years of posts Michael Jordan.
The continuing rise of the NFL, even though it was huge.
Obviously it was huge back thirty years ago, but it's
(25:27):
it's even bigger now. Somehow, maybe rule changes making it
so that offenses just have more freedom and you can't,
you know, mug guys like you used to, and uh yeah,
maybe in politics maybe plays a role.
Speaker 2 (25:42):
I don't.
Speaker 4 (25:42):
I don't really sense the political vibe this year so much,
or guys making you know, political statements or stands or
gestures and there's a lot going on in the world.
But those are the four reasons NFL steal some attention
post MJ. Maybe some rule change, maybe some politics.
Speaker 1 (26:02):
Okay, I I think the politics thing is just confirmation bias.
I think if you didn't like the NBA, you don't
like those guys. I do think that there is an element.
I actually really agree with Dan on two different fronts. One,
we do make it all about the postseason. And then
(26:22):
I think you combined with the fact that more regular
season games are on national TV now that have ever
been on before, and it's too much. The games don't matter,
Nobody focuses on them, and there's more there's more of
them on than ever and it's just it just tiresome.
I do think that the inside the NBA and the
(26:44):
old head holds, that heads that cover it, that talking
about how they don't like the new NBA or how
it's played, I don't think that helps. That's just that's
not You don't have to dot your eyes with hearts,
but there just isn't.
Speaker 8 (26:59):
Uh.
Speaker 1 (27:01):
That just isn't a good way to sell the fringe on.
You should watch Hey, you should watch this thing, even
though it used to be way better. They shoot too
many threes, they take games off, right, like they just
pointing out the bad parts is not a good thing.
It's not a good thing. And then you know, I
just think they leave themselves up for criticism with so
(27:24):
much of the drama and the trade demands and too
many podcasts. Just like too much drama. It's like, it's
one thing if you have a season that last what
is it, like nine months?
Speaker 2 (27:39):
It plots?
Speaker 1 (27:42):
Okay, it's one, let's say nine. It's one thing. If
you have a season that last nine months. It's the
other thing. If you have a season that last nine
months where guys are making gargantuan contracts and nobody appears
to be happy. Right, So so many of the current
players don't appear to be happy, the foreign player, the
past players aren't happy with the new players being unhappy
(28:03):
or how they play, And so fans are like, like,
so I'm supposed to buy into this stuff. Yet yet
kids love it. There's still a huge number of basketball
fans internationally. Of our exports sports, I would say it's
the most popular. I don't think it's particularly close. And
yet it's kind of stalled out here and we're creeping
(28:25):
up on the post Lebron Steph Era and the league
is going to really really struggle to find that next star,
super super super superstar. Just just we had to wait
how long after Jordan retired before we got Lebron. And look,
Kobe was great, but Kobe wasn't beloved. He just wasn't.
(28:48):
He was really hard to deal with for a really
long time. He didn't like his own teammates, his own coaches.
Even when he won. He was hard for people love.
And he's more beloved now because the last two titles,
but also look because he kind of evolved as a
human and then he died way too early. But there
was a massive gap, a huge fall off when Jordan
(29:09):
left the game, and I think we're getting ready for
one of those. And then you factor in that the
NBA has just lost a PR battle. I don't think
it's a you know, I and I've kind of won
Jay Stu over with this thing. I'd like it to baseball.
It's way better than anybody's perception of it is. The
(29:30):
NBA is way better than even the NFL playoffs and
the NFL as Jay, I don't think it's as bad
as Jay Stu makes it. But the product oftentimes is
not great, and yet people watch. Why it's easy to
gamble on why because it's only on three days a week,
whereas the NBA is on all the time. People are
(29:50):
always talking about it. It's kind of heavy. No one
ever appears to be happy. People who played in it,
cover it, coached it. Everybody bitches all all the time,
and at some point you're just like, yeah, I'm kind
of good and I as despite the fact this is
a super competitive series, it has zero buzz none.
Speaker 3 (30:11):
In a way, it's counterproductive because the people that aren't
going to watch aren't gonna watch even if there are
more games, and then the people who are going to
watch aren't going to watch as much because there are
more games.
Speaker 4 (30:22):
Can I also say that do we consider the play
in game? The playing game is the start of the
playoffs like the playing games. The NBA doesn't, but I do, Okay,
So they started the playing games was April fifteenth. I
know we love the NBA playoffs and we kind of
put the spotlight on it more than the regular season,
but the playoffs are really long. Yeah, two months to
(30:43):
get halfway through the finals.
Speaker 2 (30:45):
Sam, I've done the math on this. I said this
on the network.
Speaker 3 (30:47):
If this was an NFL schedule, the NBA Playoffs would
last from Week one to the beginning of week eleven.
In the NFL, it's more than half of the regular season.
If you were to like to spread it out and
be like, Okay, this was week one of the season,
Week two, Week three, that's great, and the NBA Draft
two night a fair now starting in less than two
weeks the twenty fifth. Then you have free agency in
(31:08):
Summer League after that. So you're in mid July still
kind of talking about the NBA in training camps start
in September. Now that mid October is the start of
the season. So Doug, when you say nine months, August
is the only month that there isn't something NBA related
going on. I mean NBA Media Days happen on like
September twentieth. It's like week two of the NFL season.
Speaker 1 (31:31):
It's long, it's crazy, And you know, then summer basketball
is a thing. Last year was the Olympics as well. Yeah,
it's a lot. And then the off season, whatever the
off season is, there's so many trades and so much
player movement that I think it does feed into the
(31:51):
narrative of unhappiness and it just constantly, constantly being a
part of the of what's going on in sports, and people.
Speaker 2 (32:01):
Tire of it.
Speaker 6 (32:01):
Fox Sports Radio had the best sports talk lineup in
the nation. Catch all of our shows at Fox sports
Radio dot com and within the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 1 (32:11):
The Doug Gottlieb Show, it's Fox Sports Radio. It's the
Doug Gotlieb Show, Fox Sports Radio. Any house in a moment.
But if you're wondering what's going on in Oakmont, Doug
Gottlieb Show here on Fox Sports Radio. Okay, so buyer,
(32:33):
I was watching I think it was on social media
show the ninety four Open at Oakmont, and it's like
a completely different course, right, It's like someone's like photoshopped,
Like if you cut out all the trees, what do
you think of transformation of this course?
Speaker 3 (32:48):
Yeah, And it's funny because I was thinking about this
driving in because they were talking about it as I
was listening to the broadcast. And this has been like
that for the last couple of opens. But it's always
remains a story and it's crazy because it's Oakmont. You
would think there'd be just tons of oak trees. No,
not the case, but Wow, yeah, I don't necessarily.
Speaker 2 (33:06):
Can you call it Oakmon if there's no oaks? Right?
Something we can get into later.
Speaker 1 (33:11):
Now we get into now, I mean, oh.
Speaker 2 (33:13):
Okay, all right, I'm sorry, house on hold them so.
Speaker 1 (33:15):
No, no, he's we'll get him a second. So what was
the impetus behind the course change? So because it is
a dramatic change, yes, like it's literally from country club
golf to Lynskulf.
Speaker 3 (33:29):
So prior to the two thousand and seven US Open,
they wanted to restore Oakmont to what its original layout was,
and that was basically no trees. And the stories they
told telling up to that point is they would sometimes
go out at night to cut the trees down so
membership wouldn't necessarily know that they were cutting trees down.
(33:51):
And after a while, all of a sudden, all these
trees were cut down and wait, like wait a second, hey,
that's missing. But it was to reflect and restore to
what the course was from the beginning. From Henry Phones
then Doug, there's also been this move away from more
link style. Trees don't help grass grow. You're seeing a
(34:15):
lot more courses remove trees. It's better for the grass,
it's better for the turf, but this was more to
be true to what Oakmont originally was and it went
under a recent restoration, which has been the main story
heading into this open where gil Hans took it over
and they've taken parts of the design that the different
(34:35):
designs that have occurred early on in Oakmont days and
tried to blend them into what is this current course.
But it did not have trees in its early going,
and the trees just ended up growing and growing throughout
the years. But that was the initial reason why they
decided to take them down prior to the seven Open.
Speaker 1 (34:52):
It is interesting, as you point out, you god so
many different course designers coming in, it becomes you know,
I had no idea, that's what was I just didn't.
But on some levels, when you have multiple course designers,
it's like when you have a really cool house, It's
like did you have different contractors here? Like no, this,
they redid this in OA, and they redid this, and
(35:12):
you know in fifteen and we just redid this or whatever,
and sometimes you get different tastes. But it is definitely
a linksy style now. It definitely looks like the original
game of golf, if you will, and it looks crazy, crazy, difficult.
Speaker 3 (35:29):
And there are some that don't like that it doesn't
have trees. And there's even some conversation of this week
that you know, is it too far one way as
opposed to the other, because when you and I play golfer,
others play golf, trees do make a difference.
Speaker 2 (35:44):
They absolutely do.
Speaker 3 (35:46):
But I don't I don't know if it's necessarily needed
at Oakmont just because of the defense is how fast
their greens are. When the US Open puts the rough
like this, you're getting scores like this.
Speaker 1 (35:57):
All right, let's turn from the US Open to the
NBA Finals. Eddie House went in an NBA championship in
two thousand and eight. Uh, dude is awesome at breaking
it down TV radio joins us now on the Doug
Gottlieb Show on Fox Sports Radio. Eddie, what's what's your
what's your EVL of what's going? What went wrong for
(36:20):
the thunder in the fourth quarter in Game three?
Speaker 8 (36:24):
I think, Uh, just Rick Carlisle his the way he
uh changes defenders on Shay so Say has to face.
You know, Say is so talented. You know, obviously the
league MVP. But I think what happened was picking him
up ninety four feet, wearing him down. And I think
(36:46):
what okay C needs to do is make an adjustment.
And that's what I'm looking for tonight, to see what
kind of adjustment uh Daggonov is gonna make as far
as because what I would do, I would take Shaye
off the ball. I would not allow him until the
fourth quarter. I wouldn't have him bring the ball up,
(37:07):
you know. I would have him get the ball with
a live dribble as opposed to having to bring the
ball up and have to fight ninety four feet to
get to his spot and then everybody else just standing around. No,
I will run my offense through somebody else. Jalen Williams
has to step up, and then from there in the
(37:28):
fourth quarter they could go to work. You just want
to try to conserve is as much energy for him
as you can.
Speaker 1 (37:35):
Yeah. Do you think they're tired? Do you think that's
one of the things hurting the thunder?
Speaker 7 (37:41):
No?
Speaker 8 (37:41):
Man? Yeah, A young, young many not tired. Man. You
remember how you was when you was twenty six twenty seven,
or you was twenty three twenty four. You wasn't You
didn't get tired, and you wanted to play. I don't
think that they're tired. I think that you can wear
on somebody, you know what I mean, and you can
make it where you're uncomfortable, And I don't think more
(38:03):
so than being tired. I think Shay just was uncomfortable
the whole time because he's usually able to just get
to a spot moved easily, but they made him have
to work for everything. So I won't buy the tiredness
because you know, anybody that won a championship, anybody that
played in the playoffs, anybody has that long run. You
(38:27):
all go through it. But especially if when you in
the finals. Man, there's no uh, you can't use that
as a crush or excuse.
Speaker 1 (38:36):
Hey, help me out, Eddie. Can you figure out Tyre's Haliburton.
There's some games that he plays where he just kind
of plays and floats and doesn't have a huge impact,
and then there are other games in which he feels
way more aggressive and he does have a huge impact.
I know, it's just kind of unique. What are your
thoughts on Halliburton and why some games he's just not
(39:01):
he's just not dominating in any way.
Speaker 8 (39:04):
Well, he does in different ways. Right as far as
assistance right. He always his assist numbers are always pretty
much up. I think the fact of the matter is
that he has to be aggressive offensively. And sometimes it's
a traditional point guard. You're a traditional point guard. You
played that position. So sometimes you're not going to have
(39:27):
a high you're not going to have a lot of
points in certain games. But then you got to understand
that that happy medium, you know what I mean, where
you're like, Okay, I have to be more aggressive and
this series, and that's the thing about it. Every series
is different, every game is every quarter is different, every
half is different, every game is different. And I believe
(39:50):
that he understands that he has to put his foot
on the gas for them to be for them to win.
And it's and being a great you know, people mix
it up when when when we say be aggressive, that
doesn't necessarily mean that you have to shoot the ball
all the time. That means just put pressure and be
(40:10):
aggressive and you can make the right play, whether it
be a play for yourself or a play for others.
That's what I I when I say aggressive, you know,
and a lot of people think about aggressiveness is oh,
you just got to go score, you got to get
up thirty shots and now sometimes you don't have to
do that. Sometimes you don't.
Speaker 1 (40:31):
Eddie House, our guest here at the Doug Gottlieb Show
on Fox Sports Radio. All right, let's uh, well, let's
get around the NBA just a little bit. Kevin Durant.
Everybody thinks he's going to be traded. Where's the best
spot for him? Oh?
Speaker 8 (40:44):
Man, you know it's it's a lot of good destinations
for him. If I was okay, see, even though they're
in this thing right now, they got a ton of
assets as far as draft picks and things like that,
and if you trade a guy like KD then you're
looking to basically rebuild, you know, if you're Phoenix, So
(41:06):
I will look, okay, see, would be somebody that I
would be interested in. I'm not sure what everything that
the Rockets have over there, what they can make happen,
but they're they're ready made right now to keep trying
to push. I think maybe Jalen Green And do you
want to get off a youngster that that fast? I
(41:27):
don't know, you know what I mean for somebody that's old,
improving older, I should say improving. Uh So I would
say it would be I think it would be a
happy marriage between okay see and uh for him to
go back to ok se.
Speaker 1 (41:46):
Uh, I do too. I just again, we're it feels
like if he's going to be traded now or if
the discuss her now, I don't know if. And again
I don't know if OKC is in that mode. But yeah,
they do need they need a guy who win the
houses upires like I got it. I'll get us a bucket.
We're good. They just don't don't have that. If if
(42:07):
you're the Celtics.
Speaker 8 (42:09):
What do you do, Well, you got to look at uh,
you know, a Drew Holliday contract. You got to look
at a Christaps Porzingis. Who has you know, shown that
he's been you know, injury prone. Uh you know, I
don't know what was going on last I mean this
past season. They still hasn't been disclosed what kind of
(42:32):
illness that he had. But the fact of the matter
that he wasn't there. But he's the people Christoph kp
is the people's champ. Everybody loves him, not only in
when you go into the garden, but when you on
the road and when he comes out, the people go
crazy for him. Right, So I think that you are,
(42:56):
you know, Sam Houser, though, I think those are the
the contracts that you could look at and you know,
you could try to put something together and see if
you know, if Kadie come up, You're still didn't win
mold right now, Jalen Brown, I don't think that you.
I don't think that you get rid of Jalen Brown.
(43:16):
To me, the reason why I wouldn't trade Jalen Brown
because Jason Tatum's not there and you have to have
that star power there, and you have to have two
star powers, you know, And I think that I think
that that would be like kind of the way to go,
So you have to unload some of these other other contracts.
(43:38):
I wouldn't get rid of Derek White. I wouldn't get
rid of Derek White at all. He does so much.
Speaker 1 (43:45):
Eddie House. Of course, Eddie we truly appreciates joining us.
He's an analyst for NBC Sports Boston. We'll see what
the Celtics do. We'll watch tonight's NBA Finals game, and
we'll talk with him again. Any of the best. Man,
really appreciate you spend some time.
Speaker 8 (43:57):
Oh problem man, thanks for having me
Host
Doug Gottlieb
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Ridiculous History
History is beautiful, brutal and, often, ridiculous. Join Ben Bowlin and Noel Brown as they dive into some of the weirdest stories from across the span of human civilization in Ridiculous History, a podcast by iHeartRadio.