Jonathan Tjarks
Jonathan Tjarks is a very skillful writer who has worked for many news networks, including 'Dallas Morning News' and 'Talking Points Memo'. He has a very critical writing style, and mainly focuses on basketball.
Like previously said, Tjarks mainly focuses on basketball. Contrary to Simmons, he does not primarily focus on one team or area, he focuses on the National Basketball Association as a whole. This wide area of focus is really beneficial for Tjarks because he can write about many different teams and topics, not just one area.
Tjarks audience is basketball fans across the nation (or anybody interested in the American National Basketball Association). This wide variety of people interested in the NBA makes Tjarks are very well known writer, and many people consider Tjarks' opinion while they are formulating their own opinion just because of how strong of a mind he has for basketball.
Tjarks, like many of the popular sports writers, has a very conversational tone. The use of informal language, combined with sarcastic remarks, presents Tjark as a very fun loving and knowledgeable writer. His casual language such as "picked up the slack" and "dominating" makes his articles easier to read, and honestly more impactful because he seems like the type of person that you would love to sit down with and just talk too.
The purpose of many of Tjarks articles is to try and persuade his readers to think similarly to how he feels. He uses straight statistics while making his arguments, which makes him very persuasive, since you cannot argue against facts and statistics. In one of the articles I read by him, he was arguing that NBA player Joe Johnson is a prodigy, and while I had very strong opinions about Joe, after the article I ended up changing my opinion about him because of Tjarks persuasive techniques.
The subject of Tjarks articles is, like stated before, the National Basketball Association. He uses his lifelong experience of watching, playing, and analyzing basketball to help critique NBA teams/organizations. Of the 3 articles I read by him,
Tjarks likes to structure his arguments in a pattern. First, he introduces the topic. This can be done in a "real time" analysis of the team or player he is analyzing. Then, he moves his focus over to the statistics of that player. And finally he looks at what the statistics mean. Why do they matter? What assumptions/inferences can he make FROM those statistics. His argument construction is very strong. He is a very statistical judge, and while this is good at times, it can also be very weak. To make his argument even stronger than it is now, he could add opinions from coaches, players, or even other reporters. Since Tjarks argues with facts and statistics, his argument is very hard to argue against, and most of the readers that do not know as much about the topic as him would easily switch their opinion to match his, like myself.
Like previously said, Tjarks mainly focuses on basketball. Contrary to Simmons, he does not primarily focus on one team or area, he focuses on the National Basketball Association as a whole. This wide area of focus is really beneficial for Tjarks because he can write about many different teams and topics, not just one area.
Tjarks audience is basketball fans across the nation (or anybody interested in the American National Basketball Association). This wide variety of people interested in the NBA makes Tjarks are very well known writer, and many people consider Tjarks' opinion while they are formulating their own opinion just because of how strong of a mind he has for basketball.
Tjarks, like many of the popular sports writers, has a very conversational tone. The use of informal language, combined with sarcastic remarks, presents Tjark as a very fun loving and knowledgeable writer. His casual language such as "picked up the slack" and "dominating" makes his articles easier to read, and honestly more impactful because he seems like the type of person that you would love to sit down with and just talk too.
The purpose of many of Tjarks articles is to try and persuade his readers to think similarly to how he feels. He uses straight statistics while making his arguments, which makes him very persuasive, since you cannot argue against facts and statistics. In one of the articles I read by him, he was arguing that NBA player Joe Johnson is a prodigy, and while I had very strong opinions about Joe, after the article I ended up changing my opinion about him because of Tjarks persuasive techniques.
The subject of Tjarks articles is, like stated before, the National Basketball Association. He uses his lifelong experience of watching, playing, and analyzing basketball to help critique NBA teams/organizations. Of the 3 articles I read by him,
Tjarks likes to structure his arguments in a pattern. First, he introduces the topic. This can be done in a "real time" analysis of the team or player he is analyzing. Then, he moves his focus over to the statistics of that player. And finally he looks at what the statistics mean. Why do they matter? What assumptions/inferences can he make FROM those statistics. His argument construction is very strong. He is a very statistical judge, and while this is good at times, it can also be very weak. To make his argument even stronger than it is now, he could add opinions from coaches, players, or even other reporters. Since Tjarks argues with facts and statistics, his argument is very hard to argue against, and most of the readers that do not know as much about the topic as him would easily switch their opinion to match his, like myself.