G-Man Temporarily Taking Over TV PBP

Do you like getting the chance to hear the best announcer in the league on your TV?

  • Yes

    Votes: 27 96.4%
  • No, because I hate beautiful things and step on puppies.

    Votes: 1 3.6%

  • Total voters
    28
N

NBA.com

Guest
#5
The Sacramento Kings announced today that broadcasting icon Gary Gerould has been named the team’s interim TV play-by-play announcer for the remainder of the 2019-20 NBA season. Affectionately known among Kings players, personnel, fans and throughout the NBA as “The G-Man,” Gerould will call the historic game action in Orlando with Kings TV color analyst and Kings Legend Doug Christie virtually from Golden 1 Center when the season resumes on NBC Sports California, the exclusive home of Kings bas...

Continue reading...
 
#7
I proposed G-Man when the news of GN's departure first broke. It just makes the most sense. He's been calling games since the team arrived in 1985 and is a SAC area icon. He's also among the best at what he does.

I just wish they'd go with a simulcast. I'm not understanding why they didn't go in that direction. Nothing against J-Ross, who is a good dude. But he's no Gary Gerould. The likes of Chick Hearn and Vin Scully did simulcasts. G-Man is our version of those guys. He's more than capable of pulling it off.

Regardless, I'm happy to hear he'll be doing the TV side for at least for the immediate future. But hopefully even longer.

G-Man and Doug should be a great combo. And hopefully Jerry Reynolds will fill in from time to time as he did last season. I love all three of those guys.
 
#15
Didn’t G-Man do some TV games in the early 90’s? I seem to remember him doing some games
Yes he did. For 4 seasons from 1994-98. The switched things up, as I recall. GN was on radio those years.

I'm fairly sure G-Man called some pre-1988 games as well. I can't recall exactly how long Ted Green held the gig, but I seem to remember Gerould doing it from time to time too. He also called NFL games back then.

When the KINGS first moved to SAC, they were typically on local TV only about 25 times per season. Hard to believe, I know.
Even dating back to the birth of the 1998-2006 era KINGS, those first few seasons not all the games were televised.

It wasn't til the Magoof family launched their own network in the early 2000's that they finally began airing ALL 82.

So the TV gig wasn't as big a deal as it is now. Whereas G-Man called each and every game on radio.
 
Last edited:
#17
I doubt it is, he doesn’t like doing TV.
I've wondered about this myself. Is it true? IDK. Might be since he never left radio permanently.

I commented on his twitter account sort of postulating that perhaps he enjoys radio more than TV, and that I'd hoped they simulcast so KINGS fans could get the best of both worlds. He liked both my responses but didn't comment (he has in the past). So IDK what his true thoughts are, but I'd tend to side with what you've said here considering history.
 
#18
I believe G-Man older than semi-retired Jerry Reynolds or same age but probably at least year or two older. Great choice but most likely just interim play-by-play on TV as indicated.
Yep. By a few years too. G-Man actually turns 80 this Tuesday.
He got an early b-day gift from the KINGS org with this announcement. :cool:
 
#22
I've wondered about this myself. Is it true? IDK. Might be since he never left radio permanently.

I commented on his twitter account sort of postulating that perhaps he enjoys radio more than TV, and that I'd hoped they simulcast so KINGS fans could get the best of both worlds. He liked both my responses but didn't comment (he has in the past). So IDK what his true thoughts are, but I'd tend to side with what you've said here considering history.
Yeah I wonder too. Gman is so good at describing the action that I bet that he just likes radio more in this era. TV pbp has moved further and further away from describing action as the cameras/tv have gotten better over the past 50 years
 
#23
Am I the only one who is not a fan of the G-Man? As a person, I think he's terrific. And he has his facts - i.e. does his homework etc. But he is a bit too quick (for my taste) to fall back on cliches like "there they go again." Or "will they never learn?" Or "they're not going to have a chance if they can't..." I don't want our play-by-play man/woman to be a homey who can't see reality. But I think G-Man goes a bit too far in not wanting to be disappointed.
I hope Kayte gets a chance to do some play by play to see if she might not be a great tandem with DC (after this bubble season).
 

VF21

#KingsFansForever
Staff member
#24
Am I the only one who is not a fan of the G-Man? As a person, I think he's terrific. And he has his facts - i.e. does his homework etc. But he is a bit too quick (for my taste) to fall back on cliches like "there they go again." Or "will they never learn?" Or "they're not going to have a chance if they can't..." I don't want our play-by-play man/woman to be a homey who can't see reality. But I think G-Man goes a bit too far in not wanting to be disappointed.
I hope Kayte gets a chance to do some play by play to see if she might not be a great tandem with DC (after this bubble season).
In all honesty, you are the only person I can EVER recall saying they're not a fan of his.

I doubt if Kayte is tagged to do any play-by-play.
 
#25
Am I the only one who is not a fan of the G-Man? As a person, I think he's terrific. And he has his facts - i.e. does his homework etc. But he is a bit too quick (for my taste) to fall back on cliches like "there they go again." Or "will they never learn?" Or "they're not going to have a chance if they can't..." I don't want our play-by-play man/woman to be a homey who can't see reality. But I think G-Man goes a bit too far in not wanting to be disappointed.
I hope Kayte gets a chance to do some play by play to see if she might not be a great tandem with DC (after this bubble season).
You may not be the only one, but you are surely in the minority.

I also think you're way off regarding G-Man's objectivity. Sure, he's probably a bit more as you describe on radio -- but that's understandable. Because it's a regional broadcast only, the overwhelming number of listeners are going to be KINGS fans. But even so, G-Man is critical of the team when warranted and always complimentary of the opponent. As someone that's been listening to him for 35 years, he's always been a well-balanced play-by-play man. His work in auto racing, the NFL, and other sporting events at a Nat'l level furthers the point.

Is he perfect? Absolutely not. Nobody is. And I get that personal taste varies. So more power to you for not being a fan. I'm just providing feedback and opinion on some of your critiques with my own.

With regard to your comment about "can't see reality", do you have some examples to share? You also realize who the previous announcers were, right? Did you not like them either?

Lastly, I get that the majority of members here are huge fans of Kayte Hunter. She gets a lot of love in this forum. But be real, you're talking down a supremely respected veteran announcer while lobbying for someone that's never shown or proved an ability to be able to perform that job, let alone to the level of someone as seasoned as Gary Gerould.

I'm not saying she can't do it or wouldn't be good at it. But, if she even has aspirations of doing it, shouldn't she pay dues at some other level to demonstrate whether she's even good at it? You know, like Jason Ross, Deuce Mason and Morgan Ragan are have been doing?

Does she have anything on her resume to demonstrate aptitude or competence for a play-by-play position? To my knowledge, she has zero experience. Sideline and team reporter, which I believe she's been good at, doesn't translate to play-by-play.

Now, if we're talking color commentator, clearly there's a much larger precedent set of not requiring previous experience or having to work one's way up a ladder to land that type of gig. But last time I checked, both the KINGS and their G-League affiliate already have those roles filled.
 
#26
Yeah I wonder too. Gman is so good at describing the action that I bet that he just likes radio more in this era. TV pbp has moved further and further away from describing action as the cameras/tv have gotten better over the past 50 years
As I touched upon earlier, radio was clearly the better gig up til around the early 2000's because not all game were broadcast locally. Prior to the early 2000's, the number of locally televised games generally ranged from 25-50 games per season whereas every game was broadcast on radio.

So historically speaking, I can see why radio would have been the preferred gig. But lots of things have changed over the past 20 years. ALL 82 games are televised by the local broadcaster. IDK if that was ever enough to change G-Man's mind, but perhaps it might?

As someone else alluded to, his age is likely playing into his decision making. He might be planning on retiring in the next few years thus doesn't want to take the gig. And as you also pointed out, there are differences between describing the action on radio vs. TV. But that's why I suggested simulcast. I believe G-Man is the type of announcer that could pull that off. Have him simulcast for the next few years or until he decides to retire. Then backfill both positions at that time.

That's how I'd do it.
 
#27
In all honesty, you are the only person I can EVER recall saying they're not a fan of his.
To be clear, I do respect the G-Man. I would take him 10 times out of 10 over the former play by play guy. But I stop short of calling myself a G-Man FAN when I find his style annoying at times. If I'm the only one affected by it, so be it. Call me an outlier.
The hope I expressed about Kayte is nothing more than that: hope. I understand that she doesn't have any play-by-play credentials (yet) to make her a serious consideration for that job in the near-future. But that doesn't prevent me from hoping that she gets a chance to show if she does or doesn't have what it takes.
 

Mr. S£im Citrus

Doryphore of KingsFans.com
Staff member
#28
As I touched upon earlier, radio was clearly the better gig up til around the early 2000's because not all game were broadcast locally. Prior to the early 2000's, the number of locally televised games generally ranged from 25-50 games per season whereas every game was broadcast on radio.

So historically speaking, I can see why radio would have been the preferred gig. But lots of things have changed over the past 20 years. ALL 82 games are televised by the local broadcaster. IDK if that was ever enough to change G-Man's mind, but perhaps it might?
I think that your argument would be a better one in a world where everybody agreed that the most important thing about being an announcer was how many games you got to cover. I don't think that G-Man preferred radio to TV, based on how many games he got to call, and I don't think that local television now covering all the games affects his opinion, in the slightest.


As someone else alluded to, his age is likely playing into his decision making. He might be planning on retiring in the next few years thus doesn't want to take the gig. And as you also pointed out, there are differences between describing the action on radio vs. TV. But that's why I suggested simulcast. I believe G-Man is the type of announcer that could pull that off. Have him simulcast for the next few years or until he decides to retire. Then backfill both positions at that time.
I gotta back the chief on this: modern television viewers, in the aggregate, don't want the play-by-play announcer describing every detail of what's happening on the court, in the way it has to be described on radio, for the benefit of people who can't actually see what's going on. If Chick Hearn were still alive, he'd either adjust his style to be less descriptive, or he'd be doing radio only. And Vin Scully is an even worse comparison, in my opinion, since baseball has way fewer moving parts than basketball, so there's no actual difference in the way the game needs to be called.
 

Mr. S£im Citrus

Doryphore of KingsFans.com
Staff member
#29
To be clear, I do respect the G-Man. I would take him 10 times out of 10 over the former play by play guy. But I stop short of calling myself a G-Man FAN when I find his style annoying at times. If I'm the only one affected by it, so be it. Call me an outlier.
The hope I expressed about Kayte is nothing more than that: hope. I understand that she doesn't have any play-by-play credentials (yet) to make her a serious consideration for that job in the near-future. But that doesn't prevent me from hoping that she gets a chance to show if she does or doesn't have what it takes.
Kayte Christensen is a damned good analyst. She would be absolutely wasted as a play caller.
 

Tetsujin

The Game Thread Dude
#30
I think that your argument would be a better one in a world where everybody agreed that the most important thing about being an announcer was how many games you got to cover. I don't think that G-Man preferred radio to TV, based on how many games he got to call, and I don't think that local television now covering all the games affects his opinion, in the slightest.



I gotta back the chief on this: modern television viewers, in the aggregate, don't want the play-by-play announcer describing every detail of what's happening on the court, in the way it has to be described on radio, for the benefit of people who can't actually see what's going on. If Chick Hearn were still alive, he'd either adjust his style to be less descriptive, or he'd be doing radio only. And Vin Scully is an even worse comparison, in my opinion, since baseball has way fewer moving parts than basketball, so there's no actual difference in the way the game needs to be called.
And by the end of his career, Vin was barely even calling the game anyways.