How old do you need to be to witness a player?
Options
bow to royalty
Members Posts: 3,985 ✭✭✭✭✭
Not too busy in the CS right now, so I figure I'd make a thread.
We've all seen dudes up here talking about players/teams they watched back in the day. But does their memory and opinion really hold weight? Like Jordan for example. I'm knocking on 30's door, and I can't claim Jordan like that. I say someone needs to be about high school age to really witness a player, be old enough to evaluate his game, and not just be caught up on what other people tell them about the player.
What are your opinions on how old you need to be to really say you grew up watching a player/team?
We've all seen dudes up here talking about players/teams they watched back in the day. But does their memory and opinion really hold weight? Like Jordan for example. I'm knocking on 30's door, and I can't claim Jordan like that. I say someone needs to be about high school age to really witness a player, be old enough to evaluate his game, and not just be caught up on what other people tell them about the player.
What are your opinions on how old you need to be to really say you grew up watching a player/team?
Comments
-
I'd say middle school. At least for me that's when I gained a true appreciation of certain athletes and developed an analytical eye. That's also when I started playing sports myself so there's probably a correlation there
-
lord nemesis wrote: »I'd say middle school. At least for me that's when I gained a true appreciation of certain athletes and developed an analytical eye. That's also when I started playing sports myself so there's probably a correlation there
I can see that. I had to think of what age I'd have a real sports convo with a kid at. If an 11-12 year old tried to have one with me right now, I probably wouldn't take him serious. -
11-12 for me. And I was congnizant of Dr J when I was younger but wasn't watching like that
-
Yeah you've got to be 11-12 min in general.
That's also usually the age that you're playing said sport to the degree of understanding different positions, tactics, rules etc so the appreciation is there for witnessing greatness -
king hassan wrote: »11-12 for me. And I was congnizant of Dr J when I was younger but wasn't watching like that
I'm like that with some players too. I remember watching them play. But I wouldn't say they were out there passing my eye test.
My eyes were hype for the power rangers movie, and Ninja Turtles: Secret of the ooze when Barry Sanders was out there embarrassing people...Not comparing the quality of him and E Smith's OL and supporting cast. -
bow to royalty wrote: »lord nemesis wrote: »I'd say middle school. At least for me that's when I gained a true appreciation of certain athletes and developed an analytical eye. That's also when I started playing sports myself so there's probably a correlation there
I can see that. I had to think of what age I'd have a real sports convo with a kid at. If an 11-12 year old tried to have one with me right now, I probably wouldn't take him serious.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7q6gHW9fo0
This kid gotta be at least 13
-
probably 13, that's when you start getting into high school sports, start learning the rules and recognizing the game better.
but with technology and 2k that age will probably drop, because kids can correlate a virtual image to a 90+ rating and understand and appreciate a player more. -
there's kids out here who know more about zones and basketball play calling than adults because they use them online...btw add me on PSN and get this 2k work
-
Around 10 is cool, but you cant catch the end of an athletes career around 10 and have witnessed him.
If you was 10 in 98 when Jordan won his last ring, you cant claim to have witnessed his greatness. -
It just depends on how early you learn the concept of the game. For me it was hella early bcuz i come from a family that was heavy into sports. Had a uncle on the early 70's Steelers . So that team was a part of my childhood. Since i played football as early as PeeWee or Pop Warner league i knew what i was watching on tv.
Dr. J is the reason i became a Sixers and nba fan. Family was already taking us to Lakers games as a youngin but when I first saw Doc. I quickly became a huge fan. It was all i could think about. So i followed his career the best you could back then. -
10 years old
-
high school at the oldest. Also actually playing that sport gives you insight on how hard it is. Especially what constitutes talent. Talent is something that can be overlooked and sometimes mistaken for hustle. When you play a mfer with actual talent for the sport. You see it and understand what it means when everyone on the field or court has talent.
JJ Reddick has talent. Marshall Henderson played with hustle. JJ Reddick had to implement more hustle in his game to complement his true talent. Marshall Henderson was all hustle with no real NBA talent. That is why he is in Iraq and other third world countries playing. -
king hassan wrote: »11-12 for me. And I was congnizant of Dr J Jordan when I was younger but wasn't watching like that
*Updated for my era* -
The age is subjective IMO.
I would say once a person starts to understand the strategy and ruless of the games they are playing and watching. Take a coaches son for example. If they are around their father they are more than likely constantly soaking up game. So they would be able to recognize and understand things about said sport at a much earlier age than say a kid who just watching said sport cause it looks interesting even though they are the same age.
I think the worst sport out of all this is boxing. People watch boxing for years and still don't truly ever grasp an understanding of what they are looking at.
Also boxing is the only sport I know of where fans don't actually follow the rules set forth in how to score a fight. That is one of the reasons people get so many wild opinions about who won or lost a particular fight. -
13+.10 year olds can't understand sports like that.I have a nephew who is 10 and watches the nba and his favorite players are russ and curry cuz they are exciting to him.You think he can understand how flawed russ style of play is at age 10? Lol no
-
Tommy bilfiger wrote: »13+.10 year olds can't understand sports like that.I have a nephew who is 10 and watches the nba and his favorite players are russ and curry cuz they are exciting to him.You think he can understand how flawed russ style of play is at age 10? Lol no
I'm with you on that. I think we as adults can forget what a 10 year old is like. They dunno much. At that age I think you're still too heavily influenced by who your friends and older folks around you (dad, uncles, cousins, etc.) think is nice. If I'm 10 and dad tells me players X is the ? , then that's what he is to me. And that gets burned into you, so you'll possibly always have that skewed view of them.
By high school though (about 13-14), I'll tell dad/unc/cousin he's wylin because I'm able to evaluate things better on my own. -
I'm skeptical on 10 because at that age you may not even understand some math concepts, let alone how to evaluate them. If you don't fully grasp averages, what does ppg, ypc, completion % mean to you? If you don't understand a small sample size can make averages unreliable you can't evaluate stats right. If you can't look at averages you can't compare players that didn't play the same number of games (from suspensions, injuries, etc).
-
12 and up
Coincidentally that's when I started caring about sports enough to watch them -
For me it was Larry Bird's rookie season that made me see the flaws in Dr. J's game. He still was my fave tho.
-
That marching band geek who celebrates whitey holidays and drinks draughts at delaware breweries tried to say he was watching kareem at age 5 FOH aint no 5 year old kid understanding sports.You got grown ass cheap seats posters who don't know ? .
Same apply with music.If you were 9-10 when tutu shakur and big died don't say you grew up in that era you a revisionist -
king hassan wrote: »11-12 for me. And I was congnizant of Dr J when I was younger but wasn't watching like that
Cosign.
I had an older brother. He is 3 years older than me. So we used to watch basketball together. Growing up in Boston I remember the rivalry between the Sixers and the Celtics and the Celtics and the Lakers.
The finals was always a big deal because it was either the Celtics or the Lakers for about 7-8 years in a row.
I remember being a big Dr J fan but I don't ever remember seeing him do anything spectacular. He was more like a living legend in the twilight of his career.
But I remember vividly when Michael Jordan came into the league. Not because I saw him play but because his sneakers were $60 and my brother had a summer job and bought a pair. $60 for a pair of sneakers was a lot of money back then. I think a regular pair of basketball sneakers ranged from $20-$30. So when the Jordans came out at $60 and my brother bought them, it was a big deal.
I think when I really got old enough to really care and understand the game was around 86/87/88 when the Lakers repeated. That was a big deal, nobody had repeated since the 60s. I was about 14 or 15. -
This internet era has it way better than us Dr.J/MJ era kids had it. They have instant access to all kinds of info, games, highlights etc.
-
This internet era has it way better than us Dr.J/MJ era kids had it. They have instant access to all kinds of info, games, highlights etc.
So would you say that makes older people evaluating older talent a little less reliable? Like right now some players will be beasting, but on a squad with no TV time. Or quietly having a good season, but on a bad team. We can miss that now in the era of Redzone, Firesticks, Sports bars, the internet, fantasy football...So how good could you really keep up back then, with players that weren't superstars? I imagine the bias created by sports commentators had to be insanely high if that's all you had to go on with a lot of players. -
bow to royalty wrote: »This internet era has it way better than us Dr.J/MJ era kids had it. They have instant access to all kinds of info, games, highlights etc.
So would you say that makes older people evaluating older talent a little less reliable? Like right now some players will be beasting, but on a squad with no TV time. Or quietly having a good season, but on a bad team. We can miss that now in the era of Redzone, Firesticks, Sports bars, the internet, fantasy football...So how good could you really keep up back then, with players that weren't superstars? I imagine the bias created by sports commentators had to be insanely high if that's all you had to go on with a lot of players.
I would say that a lot of old heads prolly are going off of sport "legend" when they say they saw some players play. For example my older brother is a huge David Thompson fan. Let him tell it Thompson was the best player ever. The problem with him telling it is that Thompson was hardly ever on TV. My brother was a boxscore ? . Before Sportscenter all most of america had was newspaper scoreboards. Before Magic and Bird made the nba popular you were lucky to catch one regional game a week unless you had a big ass satellite tv. My family did. I was lucky. I still prolly saw Iceman Gervin play live vs the Lakers more than i actually seen him on TV.
Not to take anything away from legends. They are legends for a reason, but alot of "witnesses" didn't peep them night in and night out. Including myself. (with the exception of the Steelers and pre Magic Lakers)
With that said i think a young teen can be smart enough to evaluate players with the info that is there for them. He's 15 now but even at 11 i would bet my son could hold his own in a deep baseball convo with @Tommy Billfiger and @ckfree -
I guess i should speak for myself then because i was brought up different and learned how to play ball at a young age. Your parents, brothers, and coaches can have a major influence in making you understand.
