If I'm running ESPN, my view is that the site needs to be a source of credible journalism and opinion. Even if SVG and Mark Jackson say silly things when calling games, they've both coached. Michael Wilbon can say wrong things, but he's at least trying to provide serious commentary.
Then you have Stephen A. Smith and Skip Bayless, who directly create characters to stir up shit.
The ESPN makes most of its money through broadcasting. What I don't want is to broadcast stuff into a vacuum, then have the Internet uncontrollably perceiving it. The Internet gets more and more powerful every year. I need a stake in controlling how it thinks. I want the advertising dollars. I want the branding.
I want more personalities like Bill Simmons and Nate Silver, who write thoughtful and entertaining content. Stuff that people trust, believe in, and can't not read.
If I broadcast the NBA and know why people watch it (drama, personalities, excitement), I need to produce content in house that plays up those factors that people actually see. If I'm the network that produces quality content, people buy in. If I'm the network of Skip Bayless, people will think "oh, a bullshit hype piece, pass."
If this sounds ridiculous, all I'm doing is repeating back how Steve Jobs used marketing and branding to make Apple the biggest company in the world. This isn't crazy stuff. It's the most successful business tactic in the world.