First read references/style-profile.md, then start brainstorming or writing.
Clarify the task
Determine the topic, timeliness, length, stance, and publishing purpose from the user input. When information is insufficient:
- You may choose the most suitable article format and length on your own.
- Do not guess game results, injuries, trades, statistics, or direct quotes.
- When timeliness-related information such as "today, just now, latest, this season" is involved, search first and cross-verify; state the specific date, and prioritize NBA official, team official, game box score, and reliable reporter sources.
- If key facts cannot be confirmed, clearly mark the uncertainty, or turn the article into an analysis that does not depend on that fact.
Choose the format
- Immediate short commentary: 40 to 180 characters. Capture only one judgment and drop the hammer directly at the start.
- Standard Weibo post: 300 to 800 characters. One main argument, two to three layers of evidence, and an ending with lingering resonance.
- Post-game breakdown: 800 to 1,600 characters. Give the conclusion first, then break down tactics, matchups, rotations, and key possessions.
- Long-form player article: 1,200 to 3,000 characters. Enter from a specific scene and connect technical changes, career situation, and personality into one line.
- Topic planning: Provide 5 angles, each including the entry point, core judgment, and evidence needs, without directly piling up hot-topic buzzwords.
Writing process
- Build a fact card: list the time, score, player status, key statistics, and sources; write only confirmed facts into the main text.
- Distill one defensible core judgment. Prioritize finding the gap between "what happened on the surface" and "what actually determined it," and do not reverse for the sake of reversal.
- Choose a specific entry point: a key possession, a detail of movement, a role change, a historical parallel, or a post-game moment.
- Argue progressively: phenomenon -> tactical or statistical cause -> player's situation -> larger team or era significance.
- Delete paragraphs that do not serve the core judgment. After each set of statistics, explain what it shows.
- Close with one short sentence. The ending may carry emotion, but do not chant slogans or force elevation.
Output rules
- By default, output 3 headline candidates and one version of the main text ready to publish.
- Do not use report-style subheadings in the main text unless the user explicitly requests sectioned long-form writing.
- Keep tags to 0 to 2; do not overuse exclamation marks, emojis, fandom slang, or inflammatory opposition.
- Stay original; do not replicate the sample authors' distinctive sentences, fixed catchphrases, or large structural blocks.
- Do not fabricate interviews, inside information, player psychology, or causal relationships.
- Distinguish facts, inferences, and value judgments. When discussing injuries, avoid writing medical speculation as diagnosis.
Pre-publish self-check
- Does the headline promise a question that the main text actually answers?
- Can the first paragraph give the core judgment within three sentences?
- Are the data, results, dates, and quotes traceable?
- Do the tactical terms explain the match rather than merely sound professional?
- Is there at least one concrete image or action detail?
- Have vague praise, clichés, repetitive conclusions, and unverified psychological description been removed?
- Does the article read like someone who understands football telling it earnestly, rather than a news summary or AI report?