One afternoon last month, Spurs guard Manu Ginobili and his wife drove an hour and a half to Austin for a lecture delivered by astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson. In a speech titled “The Cosmic Perspective,” Tyson talked about our planet’s place in a vast universe, and Ginobili could not get enough of it.

Then, in two separate interviews during the past few days, Cavaliers guard Kyrie Irving expressed his apparently sincere suspicion that Earth is flat.

Aside from providing a reason to wonder about the academic rigors of Duke University, where Irving spent two semesters, this NBA juxtaposition of curiosity and ignorance presents an opportunity.

If most of us, hopefully, can accept there are not two valid sides to an argument about the shape of the planet, the same should go for other debates, too.

Some truths, even now, are indisputable. And there is a difference between knowledge and belief.

The sports world, like much of the realm outside it, traditionally has struggled with this distinction. No one likes to admit he was wrong, but few hate it more than certain folks who used to play a game for a living.

Take baseball Hall of Famer Rich “Goose” Gossage, for instance. Gossage pitched during an age when men were men, which basically means they threw until their arms fell off and they did not comprehend any statistic more complicated than batting average.

In Gossage’s day, you bunted the runner over, you had your biggest slugger hit cleanup, and you never counted pitches. That was the way it was, and you didn’t need any dork to tell you otherwise.

We’ve learned a few things since then, though. Statistical analysis has shown that bunting is usually counterproductive, and there are better ways to construct lineups, and overuse of a pitcher can lead not only to ineffectiveness but injury.

But Gossage thinks — he believes — this is nonsense. On Friday, in an interview with NJ Advance Media, Gossage repeated his long-held belief that sabermetrics is “taking all the character out of the game and creating a bunch of soft guys.”

And it wasn’t the first time he’s made this point.

“The game is becoming a freaking joke because of the nerds who are running it,” Gossage told ESPN last year. “I'll tell you what has happened, these guys played rotisserie baseball at Harvard or wherever the (expletive) they went, and they thought they figured the (expletive) game out. They don't know (expletive). A bunch of (expletive) nerds running the game.”

Given a choice between new information and comfort in his old viewpoint, Gossage chooses the latter, and he’s not alone.

One of the most fascinating and revolutionary advancements in the NBA this century has been the overwhelming abundance of new data, from simple shot charts to technology that tracks every step a player takes during a game.

Because of this, general managers, coaches, players and fans can better understand basketball now than they did at any point in the history of the sport, with only one catch — they have to be willing to accept new knowledge.

Some people aren’t.

“Analytics don't work,” Charles Barkley said during a memorable 2015 rant on TNT. “What analytics did the Miami Heat have? What analytics did the Bulls have? What analytics do the Spurs have? They have the best players. They have coaching staffs who make players better.”

The funny thing is, the Heat and Spurs value analytics as much as any two franchises in the league. The great players and coaching staffs he mentioned? They use new data to make adjustments and find new matchup advantages every day.

Still, some people choose to be left behind, which is fine when it’s limited to topics like shot selection but less forgivable when more is at stake.

For years, the NFL dragged its feet in acknowledging a correlation between repetitive head trauma and chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), even when reams of scientific evidence made the link clear. Now, according to a USA Today report, the NHL remains skeptical, and has declined to help fund four leading centers for concussion research.

Pro hockey, like pro football before it, is trying to suggest the side of the debate based on belief is just as valid as the side based on science. That, of course, is dangerous, and it brings us back to Irving.

At first, when the clips of Irving insisting that the Earth is flat began to circulate, it seemed like a joke. But then he started questioning whether photographs of the planet from outer space were authentic, and even started receiving support from fellow players.

“It’s opinion - it’s what he thinks,” Warriors forward Draymond Green told reporters at All-Star weekend. “Who’s going to say that picture is telling the truth?”

Tyson and Ginobili are, for two. Science, logic, and all of the evidence in the world concur. And yet somehow, in this post-fact universe, here we are, debating whether up is down.

Chances are, the All-Star game won’t be competitive Sunday night, and the score will be inconsequential. But inside the arena and out of it, belief will continue to rally against knowledge.

We just need to hope the right side wins.

mfinger@express-news.net

Twitter: @mikefinger