What's with Walton?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from concord27. Show concord27's posts

    What's with Walton?

    Listening to tonight's game is torture with Bill Walton repeating himself over and over again about the absence of Shaq and how we don't look right as a team.  Mike Gorman is often just quiet clearly not pleased with his sidekick tonight.  At least that is my interpretation.

    Walton must be torn having his son of the enemies team and living out here. He should not be doing Celtic games. He has been criticizing the team throughout the first half and really brings little in the way of useful analysis.  It almost seems if he has been drinking.  The guy is weird enough though to just be Walton the anti-celtic fan tonight

    Whatever it is they should not use him again as his lack of insight and knowledge about the team is evident. Maybe it will change in the second half.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from pinnacle10. Show pinnacle10's posts

    Re: What's with Walton?

    I live in the LA area and loved when Walton did clippers games (he was the regular color guy for a few years).  He's sort of like Tommy in that you can't take everything he says seriously. He's just great to listen to.  Admittedly, I'm not watching or listening tonight, but in general I always like when he does games.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re: What's with Walton?

    A little too much acid in his youth.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneNation. Show OneNation's posts

    Re: What's with Walton?

    Try turning the sound off when he is doing the commentating. It could save you a migrain or some of your sanity
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from allen2034. Show allen2034's posts

    Re: What's with Walton?

    Worst guy to listen to ever i mean come on this is the same guy that said the celtics win at LA this season was the biggest win in the celtics franchise history...its a good win but come on..this guy is a complete joke
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from RUWorthy. Show RUWorthy's posts

    Re: What's with Walton?

    In Response to Re: What's with Walton?:
    A little too much acid in his youth.
    Posted by OneOnOne


    Or not enough?
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from cpjohn1. Show cpjohn1's posts

    Re: What's with Walton?

    At the beginning of the game Walton said that if the Celtics play like this, they're winning the championship.  A minute later, he was saying the Celtics are out of sorts, not getting it done. LOL

    And everything is either the worst in history or the best in history.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from frommaine. Show frommaine's posts

    Re: What's with Walton?

    Maybe the advertisors should remember that when we turn off the sound of Walton, we turn off the sounds of their ads they paid for us to hear.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from champs08. Show champs08's posts

    Re: What's with Walton?

    Seems like Bill Walton's comments are either really high or "gloom and doom." Not much in-between. He tries to be "colorful" by exaggerating what he sees play by play. Maybe "bombastic hyperbole" could sum up what Walton brings to the table.

    In the recent past Donny Marshall traveled out West and did the commentary alongside Mike Gorman. I wonder if Walton's presence is a cost-cutting move since I believe he lives in SoCal.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from existentialparquet. Show existentialparquet's posts

    Re: What's with Walton?

    Come on. He is fine. I think it is good to mix it up a little bit.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from concord27. Show concord27's posts

    Re: What's with Walton?

    He kept saying the Celtics had a bad all star weekend over and over again. Because Ray and Paul did not win the 3 pt contest.  It was stupid really. Mike Gorman was oddly silent letting him die a slow death with his comments.  I don't hate Walton at all it just that what he says has less and less value. I really think he might have a drinking problem. 
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from RajonRondowski. Show RajonRondowski's posts

    Re: What's with Walton?

    I like Walton a lot.  I think he does great color commentary. I think he's just a bit over a lot of people's heads, i.e, they don't know what he's talking about.

    Walton's a very intelligent guy, very funny, and highly entertaining.  It's just that you have to go with the flow, Man, roll with it and loosen up a little bit, have a little fun, don't be so uptight and take so seriously everything he says.

    The worse ever is that TNT team with Van Gundy & crew, talking over the game and not paying attention to what's going on on the floor.

    But I just hope Donny Marshall never becomes Mike's color guy, he just bores and irritates the heck out of me.  And I think I can tell that Tommy feels the same way as I do about him.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from concord27. Show concord27's posts

    Re: What's with Walton?

    I like Walton on many levels but when he is just plain off and not making sense he bothers me as he did last night.  I have been disappointed in his commentary the last road trip with the Celtics and think it has to do with his allegiance to the Celtics being lessened due to his son being on the Lakers.  

    The guy is a character but recently he has not been such a enjoyable one to listen to. He needs to do his homework in the Celtics. He has not been prepared for the games at all.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from jerrycole. Show jerrycole's posts

    Re: What's with Walton?

    For all of his bombast, Walton is more interesting than Tommy Heinsohn, by far.  And Donny Marshall is better than either of them, because  Donny provides more information and real analysis than either of them.

    By the way, have you ever noticed that most guys on TV and the radio are completely incapable of analyzing shots taken stats?  It never occurs to them that frequently the reason why a team has taken fewer shots than the other team is neither turnvers nor rebounding, but is because one team is going to the line far more than the other.   Fewer shots does not necessarily mean fewer offensive opportunities - it can mean that you are getting a lot of two-shot fouls, which are, on average, a better way to score than taking FGs.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from jdm894g. Show jdm894g's posts

    Re: What's with Walton?

    Walton plyed how many seasons in Boston????   Dont expect any loyalty from him.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneNation. Show OneNation's posts

    Re: What's with Walton?

    Being innovative and fun with your comments is one thing. Making No sense at all is another. Against G.S. he was all over the place. I'll turn off the sound when he is around, thank you very much.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from RajonRondowski. Show RajonRondowski's posts

    Re: What's with Walton?

    In Response to Re: What's with Walton?:

    For all of his bombast, Walton is more interesting than Tommy Heinsohn, by far.  And Donny Marshall is better than either of them, because  Donny provides more information and real analysis than either of them. By the way, have you ever noticed that most guys on TV and the radio are completely incapable of analyzing shots taken stats?  It never occurs to them that frequently the reason why a team has taken fewer shots than the other team is neither turnvers nor rebounding, but is because one team is going to the line far more than the other.   Fewer shots does not necessarily mean fewer offensive opportunities - it can mean that you are getting a lot of two-shot fouls, which are, on average, a better way to score than taking FGs.

    Posted by jerrycole


    -

    Spare me the Donny Marshall hype, please, he is an irritating narcissist with zero personality who thinks he knows-it-all but who is often so far off the mark it is laughable.  To claim that either he or Walton is better than Heinsohn seems to me a good way to establish a lack of credibility for oneself.

    It seems to me that a lot of the criticism on this thread is about the lack of an ability to listen and discern the gist of a speakers comments and understand their style.

    Tommy is quite laconic, which I see as a good thing, for with him and Mike you can focus on the game, and when something needs commenting on, Tommy usually has a spot on explanation.  But they are comfortable with silence and in their broadcasts sometimes the only sound you hear is the ball and sneakers squeaking on the floor.  That is a thing of beauty.

    Walton is, by contrast, quite loquacious.  and he says some off the wall stuff.  But the stuff he says is largely entertaining, and his knowledge of basketball fundamentals, how a successful team operates, cannot be questioned.

    Walton grows quite emotional with the ups and downs of a game and in that he is no different than most of us.  When the C's played well in GS, he was effusive with his praise, and when they stunk it up he grew frustrated with their play and this was reflected in his commentary.

    -Being innovative and fun with your comments is one thing. Making No sense at all is another. Against G.S. he was all over the place. I'll turn off the sound when he is around, thank you very much.-

    I find that Walton's being all over the place reflected the way in which the C's at times looked virtually unbeatable while at other times looked as if they were self-destructing.  As a viewer I noticed the same things, and his reaction, much the same as mine, made me chuckle and made him seem even more human.

    Maybe Bill is a little off his game, not having done much commentary since his illness and recovery a few years ago, but he should improve and get his edge back. 

    As for being a Celtic fan, his loyalty, his bona fides should not be questioned.  I don't get where this is coming from.

    But for God's Sake, anything is preferable to the Van Gundy crew who manage to spoil every Celtic game they work.

    I also do remember Mike and Tommy commenting on the number of shots thrown up and the impact the number of fouls and free-throws has on this stat.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from TeamUmbutu. Show TeamUmbutu's posts

    Re: What's with Walton?

    Bill was over the top, and he is frequently, with his characterizations. He takes the Johnny Most approach far beyond what Johnny would do, and he loses credibility.

    Tommy also takes the John approach, but limits it to "the Celtics never foul". His other observations are usually pretty good.

    My favorite is Hubie Brown. He is objective, knowledgeable and interesting.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from existentialparquet. Show existentialparquet's posts

    Re: What's with Walton?

    In Response to Re: What's with Walton?:
    In Response to Re: What's with Walton? : - Spare me the Donny Marshall hype, please, he is an irritating narcissist with zero personality who thinks he knows-it-all but who is often so far off the mark it is laughable.  To claim that either he or Walton is better than Heinsohn seems to me a good way to establish a lack of credibility for oneself. It seems to me that a lot of the criticism on this thread is about the lack of an ability to listen and discern the gist of a speakers comments and understand their style. Tommy is quite laconic, which I see as a good thing, for with him and Mike you can focus on the game, and when something needs commenting on, Tommy usually has a spot on explanation.  But they are comfortable with silence and in their broadcasts sometimes the only sound you hear is the ball and sneakers squeaking on the floor.  That is a thing of beauty. Walton is, by contrast, quite loquacious.  and he says some off the wall stuff.  But the stuff he says is largely entertaining, and his knowledge of basketball fundamentals, how a successful team operates, cannot be questioned. Walton grows quite emotional with the ups and downs of a game and in that he is no different than most of us.  When the C's played well in GS, he was effusive with his praise, and when they stunk it up he grew frustrated with their play and this was reflected in his commentary. -Being innovative and fun with your comments is one thing. Making No sense at all is another. Against G.S. he was all over the place. I'll turn off the sound when he is around, thank you very much.- I find that Walton's being all over the place reflected the way in which the C's at times looked virtually unbeatable while at other times looked as if they were self-destructing.  As a viewer I noticed the same things, and his reaction, much the same as mine, made me chuckle and made him seem even more human. Maybe Bill is a little off his game, not having done much commentary since his illness and recovery a few years ago, but he should improve and get his edge back.  As for being a Celtic fan, his loyalty, his bona fides should not be questioned.  I don't get where this is coming from. But for God's Sake, anything is preferable to the Van Gundy crew who manage to spoil every Celtic game they work. I also do remember Mike and Tommy commenting on the number of shots thrown up and the impact the number of fouls and free-throws has on this stat.
    Posted by RajonRondowski


    Don't you dare talk about Donny that way. Donny knows his stuff. I think he has a different style that takes getting used to. I think people have been listening to Tommy for so long that they forget that at one point they had to get used to the way he does things. I don't think Donny is necessarily better than Bill or Tommy, but he definitely has a chance to be as good. I think that cool demeanor is a bit of nerves more so than narcissism. I think when he relaxes and reacts more naturally you will see he is pretty solid.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re: What's with Walton?

    In Response to Re: What's with Walton?:
    In Response to Re: What's with Walton? : Or not enough?
    Posted by RUWorthy


    You may have a point there
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from kccorwin. Show kccorwin's posts

    Re: What's with Walton?

    I didn't hear the last game but I agree Bill Walton is horrible. He is all over the place with one minute saying how wonderful a player is and the next minute just the opposite. I can't stand to isten to him and no I don't think it is because he talks over my head or I don't understand he just exaggerates way to much period both positive and negative. Even when he is gloating about a Celtic I have a hard time listening as it is never based on what is going on in the game.
    Great Celtic player but horrible announcer.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share