What's new
By:
Filters

Is david locke a hack?

Is David Locke A Hack

  • Yes

    Votes: 37 38.9%

  • No

    Votes: 58 61.1%
  • Total voters
    95
Hack? no.

Hyperactive geek and bit of a homer, absolutely, but not a hack. As some have said and i concur, he is far and away the best radio personality in the Salt Lake valley, and is at least entertaining as a play by play guy if you don't mind his occasional ramblings and enthusiasm.
 
cctrackstar said:
Hack? no.

Hyperactive geek and bit of a homer, absolutely, but not a hack. As some have said and i concur, he is far and away the best radio personality in the Salt Lake valley, and is at least entertaining as a play by play guy if you don't mind his occasional ramblings and enthusiasm.
Click to expand...

Checketts >>>> Locke
 
Chad Feldheimer said:
Hack? No. He prepares and has an opinion with what he believes to be true and a reason why. Even if it's wrong.

Annoying? Sometimes. He isn't a great play-by-play announcer by any stretch. He tries a little too hard. Just call the game and don't worry about catch phrases. That sort of thing is lame.

He was much better suited in the radio show and pre-game/post game shows.
Click to expand...
I'm repping you for taking the words right out of my mouth.
 
Locke's problem is twofold: 1) He's not content with being a local analyst, he wants to be a pundit, and he's getting a little high on the horse with his personally invented stats when he's not a mathematician or truly knowledgeable about the game. 2) His access colors his perspective -- the reversal on Bell, who he praised to the heavens early in the year, is only one example. But he's just not truly objective because of his emotional/professional attachments so you have to take what he says with a grain of shill.

2a is the supremely irritating buh-du-buh thing he does on his videos where he simulates the opening theme music of an actual show. It's not substantive I realize, but god is it lame. Every time I see it (and I mostly skip it) it uncomfortably looks like a junior high kid pretending he's the star of the Late Show. But hey, he's got big dreams and I'll give him that.
 
Spaniard said:
Speaking of hacks, I can't listen to Gordon Monson. I feel bad about it because I bet he's a real nice guy. I just don't care for his 'topics' or tangents. I want to hear Jazz talk, even if its stuff I disagree with. That's where I miss Locke on my drive home. He's a geek but he wants to talk Jazz and I want to listen. Monson seems like he wants to talk about anything but sports. He's like me when my girl wants to talk about her nieces and nephews and I go into "how can I get away" mode. Imagine having a job where 4 hours a day you had to talk about your significant others nieces and nephews. I feel for Gordon, but I miss Locke.
Click to expand...
Monson is an arrogant *** who talks about stupid tangents because he thinks people are enamored with his opinion on everything. I don't even listen to sports radio on my commute anymore because the programs are pathetic... except for Through My Eyes which airs on random Wednesday's. That show is so pathetic it's actually entertaining. If Locke got a drive time slot again I'd be listening for sure (unless they teamed him up with the Monson or PK).
 
billyshelby said:
Locke's problem is twofold: 1) He's not content with being a local analyst, he wants to be a pundit, and he's getting a little high on the horse with his personally invented stats when he's not a mathematician or truly knowledgeable about the game. 2) His access colors his perspective -- the reversal on Bell, who he praised to the heavens early in the year, is only one example. But he's just not truly objective because of his emotional/professional attachments so you have to take what he says with a grain of shill.

2a is the supremely irritating buh-du-buh thing he does on his videos where he simulates the opening theme music of an actual show. It's not substantive I realize, but god is it lame. Every time I see it (and I mostly skip it) it uncomfortably looks like a junior high kid pretending he's the star of the Late Show. But hey, he's got big dreams and I'll give him that.
Click to expand...
You don't like him and don't think he knows what he's talking about yet you watch his podcasts?
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
You don't like him and don't think he knows what he's talking about yet you watch his podcasts?
Click to expand...

Jazz news is always my number one priority. I separate what he says on those fronts (rarely illuminating) from his personal analysis (rarely illuminating). But while he hasn't broken a credible story to date, he does offer up the occasional anecdote I enjoy because of his access. And since I'm a hopeless Jazz addict, I'll watch every one of his terrible videos so long as there's a chance I'll get something of use out of them. But I skip through all his crap.
 
billyshelby said:
But he's just not truly objective because of his emotional/professional attachments so you have to take what he says with a grain of shill.
Click to expand...

And this is why I consider him to be a hack, at least somewhat. I want the truth at all times, regardless of how uncomfortable it may be for certain people. I just can't take any journalist seriously, if I know his work is censored, sugarcoated, or just not the whole truth, because he's afraid of offending some important person. I actually like him as a personality, and I can appreciate anyone who puts so much into his love for the Jazz, but it would impress the hell out of me, if he would just write one single article, in which he threw just a little criticizm towards our FO. Just once. It doesn't even matter what. Hell, just say the popcorn is stale and the hot dogs cost too much, or something. Anything, so we know that he isn't just a prop being used to train our fragile little minds.
 
freakazoid said:
And this is why I consider him to be a hack, at least somewhat. I want the truth at all times, regardless of how uncomfortable it may be for certain people. I just can't take any journalist seriously, if I know his work is censored, sugarcoated, or just not the whole truth, because he's afraid of offending some important person. I actually like him as a personality, and I can appreciate anyone who puts so much into his love for the Jazz, but it would impress the hell out of me, if he would just write one single article, in which he threw just a little criticizm towards our FO. Just once. It doesn't even matter what. Hell, just say the popcorn is stale and the hot dogs cost too much, or something. Anything, so we know that he isn't just a prop being used to train our fragile little minds.
Click to expand...

Nailed it, and I don't know if I could add to what you said. Locke is effectively a high ranking Jazz employee. I can't remember when he's ever come out against KOC on anything. He's a little more critical of Ty, barely, but he'll talk himself into anything KOC does, and we all know who signs his checks. Bottom line: if you think he's objective, you're a fool.
 
Don't forget last year he also said "I'll give CJ Miles the benefit of the doubt FOREVER because he's SUCH a nice kid."
 
Lived in 6 NBA cities. Locke is by far the best basketball analyst in local market I have listened to.
 
gomretat said:
Lived in 6 NBA cities. Locke is by far the best basketball analyst in local market I have listened to.
Click to expand...

Nailed it. Sure he can get under your skin at times, but compare him to most others and he's not all that bad. I've listened to other market's stations and we really don't have it that bad. Oh, and I predict Checketts will eventually leave for a national gig someday. You can rag on him all you want, but the guy is really good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top