NBA: *** 2024 NBA thread ***

SolterraCyclone

Well-Known Member
Jul 26, 2021
2,378
3,230
113
38
The TV execs will be sick over a Indy/OKC matchup! It would be a very entertaining series though! Heck...even a MSP/Indy series would draw yawns from both coasts and we all know that is not what the TV execs want...
I agree with you.

But, without a doubt, my least favorite aspect of sports fandom from 2010 - present, for all sports, is fans caring about what the TV ratings are for games. I’m as guilty as anyone of this, but I really shouldn’t care what the TV execs want.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: NWICY and cyfanatic

HFCS

Well-Known Member
Aug 13, 2010
75,254
65,449
113
LA LA Land
I agree with you.

But, without a doubt, my least favorite aspect of sports fandom from 2010 - present, for all sports, is fans caring about what the TV ratings are for games. I’m as guilty as anyone of this, but I really shouldn’t care what the TV execs want.

I don't care about the ratings as like a fan bragging point but I think the NBA has been REALLY REALLY REALLY dumb by almost never putting players like SGA, Ant, Haliburton and even Joker on national games over the years because they don't play for their favored teams. It makes no sense to cater to markets vs building up star power, especially in basketball vs say football. Eventually Jokic and Denver became worthy of a nationally televised game but he had to win a handful of MVPs and a championship to do it, they didn't just identify him as a once in a generation player and try to get people to see him more.

If Brunson played the exact same way and had the same record but played in Charlotte he'd have probably been on one or two national regular season games his entire career instead of a several times every month. Would the league be better off if casual fans didn't know his name at all (like casual fans didn't know Tyrese until the past year and half of so) or having him in a stable of stars who are known?
 

cyfanatic

Well-Known Member
Oct 18, 2006
7,089
3,121
113
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
I agree with you.

But, without a doubt, my least favorite aspect of sports fandom from 2010 - present, for all sports, is fans caring about what the TV ratings are for games. I’m as guilty as anyone of this, but I really shouldn’t care what the TV execs want.
AGREE! I think a OKC/Indy matchup would provide some wonderful basketball! I don't care about the hype/drama/attention-seekers in uniform...I want to watch the game! And OKC/Indy just might present the best opportunity to watch a fantastic series without the garbage the media creates! If the Knicks make it (I enjoy watching them as well)...the NYC hype machine will be ridiculous. Ratings to me...doesn't matter...I just want to see an entertaining Finals!
 

AuH2O

Well-Known Member
Sep 7, 2013
12,954
20,858
113
I don't care about the ratings as like a fan bragging point but I think the NBA has been REALLY REALLY REALLY dumb by almost never putting players like SGA, Ant, Haliburton and even Joker on national games over the years because they don't play for their favored teams. It makes no sense to cater to markets vs building up star power, especially in basketball vs say football. Eventually Jokic and Denver became worthy of a nationally televised game but he had to win a handful of MVPs and a championship to do it, they didn't just identify him as a once in a generation player and try to get people to see him more.

If Brunson played the exact same way and had the same record but played in Charlotte he'd have probably been on one or two national regular season games his entire career instead of a several times every month. Would the league be better off if casual fans didn't know his name at all (like casual fans didn't know Tyrese until the past year and half of so) or having him in a stable of stars who are known?
This x1000. It's like they have completely forgotten what made the NBA blow up in the 80s and 90s. They completely marketed the players. People didn't tune in to watch the Bulls, they tuned in to watch MJ. They didn't watch the Magic, they watched Shaq. They were lucky with Bird and Magic being on Celtics and Lakers, but they also enjoyed a boom promoting guys in the 90s playing in Phoenix, Houston, Salt Lake City, San Antonio, etc.

I appreciate Brunson, but overall that Knicks team is one of the least interesting in terms of players. But I think the story and the drought, MSG, all that is interesting. But major malpractice by the NBA not jamming the most exciting players in the league - Edwards, SGA, Haliburton, and absolutely Jokic no matter what people say. How they did not see early this season that it was likely we were going to have a lot of small market team stars taking center stage in the playoffs, and market accordingly is beyond me. This is MLB-level malpractice in marketing.
 

MJ271

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Aug 9, 2012
2,117
2,729
113
Atkins
If Brunson played the exact same way and had the same record but played in Charlotte he'd have probably been on one or two national regular season games his entire career instead of a several times every month. Would the league be better off if casual fans didn't know his name at all (like casual fans didn't know Tyrese until the past year and half of so) or having him in a stable of stars who are known?
It's pretty funny (and sad) to imagine how Brunson and Tyrese would be covered differently if they simply swapped teams. To be fair, at least most national media didn't jump on the "overrated" train in the wake of that player poll. But that's mostly because Tyrese's huge shots in the playoffs quickly forced the media to talk positively about him, and otherwise, he has still been mostly overlooked.

If Tyrese were playing for the Knicks, he'd be declared a combination of Magic Johnson and Steve Nash, one of the league's most exciting players and brightest young stars. (And perhaps all or some of that is true, it's just talked about by a small group of people right now.) They would get a crazy number of national games, and fans would get sick of how much he'd be talked about while media would bend over backwards to wonder out loud whether every small-market star might force their way to New York to play with him.
 

HFCS

Well-Known Member
Aug 13, 2010
75,254
65,449
113
LA LA Land
This x1000. It's like they have completely forgotten what made the NBA blow up in the 80s and 90s. They completely marketed the players. People didn't tune in to watch the Bulls, they tuned in to watch MJ. They didn't watch the Magic, they watched Shaq. They were lucky with Bird and Magic being on Celtics and Lakers, but they also enjoyed a boom promoting guys in the 90s playing in Phoenix, Houston, Salt Lake City, San Antonio, etc.

I appreciate Brunson, but overall that Knicks team is one of the least interesting in terms of players. But I think the story and the drought, MSG, all that is interesting. But major malpractice by the NBA not jamming the most exciting players in the league - Edwards, SGA, Haliburton, and absolutely Jokic no matter what people say. How they did not see early this season that it was likely we were going to have a lot of small market team stars taking center stage in the playoffs, and market accordingly is beyond me. This is MLB-level malpractice in marketing.

Shaq and Orlando is a great one to bring up. Nobody cared it was Orlando, get Shaq on tv and profit.
 

madguy30

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Nov 15, 2011
57,201
55,093
113
Ben Stiller's commentary makes it sound like it's a NYE party.
 

madguy30

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Nov 15, 2011
57,201
55,093
113
Lots of game left but so far it looks like Boston's Ewing effect is done.