NBA popularity in the U.S. sliding off the charts

[sturt]

Quote:

---

"When Steve Smith, playing now for the Blazers,"

Sorry. I couldn't resist.

---

Couldn't sneak that one by you, eh Beav?

[beav]

but I did keep reading the rest of the post anyway...

[sturt]

Quote:

---

but I did keep reading the rest of the post anyway...

---

That took some stout determination on your part ... I appreciate the effort.

[Seano]

Well if the league were conspiring to influence results in favor of certain teams or players, then why are we seeing the Pistons and Spurs in the Finals rather than the Suns and Heat? Not necessarily that the Suns and Heat are better teams, but they are vastly more entertaining with very exciting offensive players, and I can guarandamntee that a Suns-Heat Finals would be blowing this thing right out of the water ratings-wise. Stoudamire, Wade, Nash, Shaq? C'mon, man.

This Pistons-Spurs was one of the leagues worst nightmare scenarios. Very little star power on either team. Great players on both teams, but beyond Ginobili neither one of them have much personality.

So, I don't buy the contention that the league is trying to influence results. In fact I believe that's just ridiculous.

[sturt]

Quote:

---

Well if the league were conspiring to influence results in favor of certain teams or players, then why are we seeing the Pistons and Spurs in the Finals rather than the Suns and Heat? ...So, I don't buy the contention that the league is trying to influence results. In fact I believe that's just ridiculous.

---

So you don't buy it. That's fine. But a question or two for you:

When one fixes games, as we all know, one controls the outcome fairly concretely. When one does what's is charged here, however, is the outcome controlled just as solidly?

Fwiw, I would suggest that a single test case does not make or break a theory.

Now here's the interesting thing... go to the NBA Finals History on this page, and just take note of all of the years when you can see any Finals that took place during the Stern era without the benefit of at least one top 4 US market represented (ie, NY, LA, Chi, or Hou).

http://www.nba.com/history/finals/champions.html

Important note: I don't present this so much as "evidence" that I'm right, as much as it is evidence that this certainly isn't evidence that I'm wrong.

And I guess the point is, it's just not a reliable measurement to show this "autocratic micromanagement" thing to be true or false, because what I'm contending is that the floor is tilted 51%...

Can you still win with the opponent having an advantage like that? Certainly. But over a period of time, the teams getting 51% are going to, on average, win more often than the teams that get the 49% tilt of the floor.

And I leave you with this... how do you not perceive any difference between the game now and the game before the Bad Boys era? That's something practically everyone sees... at least if you're old enough to have seen the mid-80s Celtics/Lakers series. The problem has always been that we just never could figure out why.

[Snaggle]

The upcoming lockout will further damage the leagues image. And there will be a lockout during the summer but games will start as scheduled in November.

[Lascar78]

You would be right if there was a lockout, but there won't be one. Besides, this has been the one CBA negotiation where it has been crystal clear that the league is willing to compromise to get it done, and the players are being stubborn. They'll get it done this week.

[chillzatl]

this is nothign more than writers who have, when not writing about the series, have nothing much else to do. So they prognosticate the "Demise of the NBA". The league has its best attendance in a decade this year. yah, so the finals are down? big deal, that's how it is when you have two small market teams playing. You are NEVER going to have nationwide interest in the finals unless you have L.A, NY or Chicago playing. Or whatever team happens to have the "It Guy" at the time (Cleveland, Miami).

To say that david stern doesn't care is laughable. This is the guy who is responsible for the NBA reaching the heights that it has. Just because it's not at the level that it was when they were handing titles to Jordan every season, doesn't mean it's the end of the world.

The fact that the NBA isn't as popular to some people could be more of a sign of the shallowness of the typical american viewer than anything else. The game is becoming more international and as we all know well, when we as americans don't dominate, we lose interest.

[Seano]

Quote:

---

how do you not perceive any difference between the game now and the game before the Bad Boys era? That's something practically everyone sees... at least if you're old enough to have seen the mid-80s Celtics/Lakers series. The problem has always been that we just never could figure out why.

---

Oh I perceive a very big difference between the game today and the way it was played back in the leagues heyday back in the '80s. I still don't know the exact reason *why* the quality of play has gone down so much since then (in my opinion), but I am not blind and can clearly see that it has. The game was just so much more entertaining then. Teams actually regularly scored in excess of 100 points per game *gasp*, and you didn't see all these 82-74 scores like you see today. Heck, I remember when the Pistons beat the Nuggets 186-184 in something like quadruple overtime back in the early '80s. Now that's a game! If I want to see clutching, grabbing, elbows and bodies flying and a physical mugging, I'll go to a hockey game! The fact is I could go watch a local high school team put up 82 points in a game, probably have more fun and see a better game in doing so, and save myself big, big dollars on the ticket price.

Pro basketball used to be much more artistic, and seemed much more skilled than the game we're seeing today. I still don't know why that is or what has caused this degradation, but I totally agree that the quality of play overall has gone way, way down.

[sturt]

Quote:

---

To say that david stern doesn't care is laughable. This is the guy who is responsible for the NBA reaching the heights that it has. Just because it's not at the level that it was when they were handing titles to Jordan every season, doesn't mean it's the end of the world.

---

(ASIDE: Good to hear from you, Chillz. Write me an e-mail sometime and catch me up on where you are and what you're doing. I'm still very proud of myself that I had the good sense to hand the keys over to you... you've been so good with this, and it's just so neat to see how this board has flourished under you.)

Indeed it IS laughable.

That he cares isn't the issue.

WHAT he cares ABOUT is the issue.

The argument here is that when you boil this down, you have a question of whether the game itself is greater than its star power or whether the star power is greater than the game itself -- and the choice is important because depending on which one the Commissioner chooses, the game will either make more money or make less money.

The Commissioner has made no bones about it -- he's placed his chips with the star power.

Game be damned.

Yes. I'll repeat. Game be damned.

Look back through all of these threads of the last couple of months. Practically no one argues that the game is ugly. And pardon me for thinking so, but I think I've made the case that it is ugly because it serves to benefit the goal of driving revenues through enhancing star power, as a derivative of influencing the results (not "fixing") of games.

I watched the same game you watched last night, and here's what's laughable -- that such a high percentage of the time, when the ball goes in the low post either via pass or as a result of a missed shot, there is so little consistency in officiating.

It'd be funny, if it weren't so sad what we've all lost.

Chillz, truly I believe it is a crime, because truly I believe that, indeed, there are more and greater athletes in the NBA in this era... this game ought to be just incredible, and off-the-charts in popularity.

I say that because I watch these games (what I can stomach of them anyway) and I say to myself, the passes that Magic used to distribute and the shots that Bird used to make -- what was limited to just a few stars back then -- literally dozens of players today do with regularity.

The NBA, were it not entrenched in this star-power-marketing thing that drives the league to support purposely lax officiating, would EXCEED the NFL's current popularity.

I truly believe that.

And that leads me to this point: the NFL isn't so beholden to whether a New York or Chicago team is playing in its playoffs, let alone its championship.

Has that occurred to you?

Now, let that sink in... heck, they don't even have an LA franchise and haven't for years...

And yet, how is it that the NFL can get by and even excel with that, and yet the NBA according to CNN, Sports Illustrated, and Basketball Digest writers (and more if I chose to dig further, I'm sure)... is heading south... ???

Quote:

---

The fact that the NBA isn't as popular to some people could be more of a sign of the shallowness of the typical american viewer than anything else. The game is becoming more international and as we all know well, when we as americans don't dominate, we lose interest.

---

Interesting theory, but I can't imagine that anyone tunes out because they think to themselves, "This is inferior basketball to the Euroleague," or "There's just too many international players on the floor."

Chillz, I just think it's so much simpler than that... when people choose to tune-in or not, it's the result of their answer to this question:

Will I enjoy watching this?

And more and more... the answer is simply, "Hmmmm... is anything else on???"

[chillzatl]

I agree completely with your take on the inconsistant officiating. After watching the first four games, I scrubbed them from my memory. The officiating had such a heavy influence, if not directly dictating the outcome, that I couldn't put much legitimacy in them. Game Five, as I predicted, was loosely officiated and the best team did in fact win. I think this was a product of the leagues desires to see this game go 6-7 games. I will not be surprised to see SA lose game 6, becuase things that were not fouls in games 1,2 and 5, will suddenly become fouls again.

I also agree that the officiating too often favors the more popular players. But I'm still not ready to call it a full on, league wide conspiracy. Simply because you just can't keep something of that magnitude quiet. League officials just aren't paid enough to ensure that one of them wouldn't belly up for a book deal in order to, as spreewell would say "feed his family". And believe you me, a book like that would make him a very very rich man. It would also bring the force of the US government down upon the league with very little mercy. That's mainly why I don't think Stern is directly involved with this in any way.

My opinion is that the refs themselves are more to blame than anything. I think that too many of them have been in the league for far too long. Much like umpires who used to call "their strike zone" as opposed to calling it the way the rules dictate. They call the game "their way" and not the way it should be called. I wonder how much cleaner the game would look if the league fired all the officials and brought in college and international refs to call the games? The problem is that even if the league wanted to do something like this, the unions would eat them alive.

[sturt]

We agree moreso than we disagree, to be sure.

Important point: I also don't consider it a "conspiracy," under the normal idea of a conspiracy.

So as not to repeat myself, I'll only refer to the too-long post I made to Weez above.

One more thing as to Stern's culpability in this... corporate corruption shouldn't be so hard for any of us to imagine, should it?

If you'd asked me a few years back, I would have remarked that Ken Lay seems a much more pleasant and ethically-driven CEO than most. Martha Stewart was a much too-public figure to be so personally involved in an investment faux pas...

Nothing should astound us these days.

[TroyMcClure]

I saw this thread by accident on the anonymous users. Good stuff. from what I've gathered, sturt started Hawksquawk, right? I wish he could post more often. I really enjoyed his take on things.

Does Lascar ever get tired of thinking he is the smartest person on earth? lol!

[Joker]

Quote:

---

I saw this thread by accident on the anonymous users. Good stuff. from what I've gathered, sturt started Hawksquawk, right? I wish he could post more often. I really enjoyed his take on things.

Does Lascar ever get tired of thinking he is the smartest person on earth? lol!

---

This was a good thread, one of the better threads I seen on this site.

[BusBoyIsBack]

It's because it's always the same teams dominating.

I think the popularity will go up when there is a power shift in a couple years when San Antonioa, Detroit, and Miami start to get old and the young players on teams like the Magic, Hawks, etc start to blossom.

The talent in this year's draft class and next year's will help the transition as well.

This year's class being loaded in the front court and next year's loaded in the backcourt.

[CBAreject]

The Hawks will blossom when they get Greg Oden or Kevin Durant on the roster. Time alone will not make the Hawks a winning team. JJ/Smoove is not Wade/Shaq or Howard/Dirk

[BusBoyIsBack]

Quote:

---

The Hawks will blossom when they get Greg Oden or Kevin Durant on the roster. Time alone will not make the Hawks a winning team. JJ/Smoove is not Wade/Shaq or Howard/Dirk

---

JJ/Smoove/Marvin could be just as good a trio as what they have in New Jersey and Washington.

Both of those are playoff teams when healthy.

What could seperate us from those teams is with added depth and front court help and an overall better starting lineup if you added a PG from the 1st round to the list.

Acie Law

Joe Johnson

Marvin Williams

Josh Smith

Solomon Jones

That is more than enough talent to make a championship run.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

JJ/Smoove/Marvin could be just as good a trio as what they have in New Jersey and Washington.

---

...I'm not impressed. Mind you, I don't think we have a player at a position of Kidd's overall impact (at least 2 or so years ago), but if we did, I'm still not impressed. We didn't gut and rebuild for that AT BEST.

W