Official Around the NBA May 2019 Playoff Edition Thread! (1 Viewer)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
BonesJones said:
That's because of their giant fanbases and because they had perennial stars, not because they were superteams. If you took away one or two of their star co-horts and put them on opposing teams, the playoffs would've gotten just as good of ratings if not better because the Lakers and Celtics would still be good and they'd still have their superstars.
Click to expand...

Bro what are you talking about???

Those Lakers and Celtics WERE DEFINITELY Superteams.

And you're talking like what you're saying is an exact certainty when there's no way to know.
 
BonesJones said:
I didnt say that. I said they got ratings for reasons other than them being superteams.
Click to expand...

I'm not tryna be rude bones...

But how can you say this when you weren't alive to experience it?

:dunno:
 
dviss1 said:
Bro what are you talking about???

Those Lakers and Celtics WERE DEFINITELY Superteams.

And you're talking like what you're saying is an exact certainty when there's no way to know.
Click to expand...
I WASN'T SAYING THEY WEREN'T. I literally said that to him when he had the same response.
 
BonesJones said:
Just because those teams werent as good and didnt pull ratings because of it doesnt mean superteams = ratings.
Click to expand...

It doesn't mean they don't either bones.

Why don't you understand that you're inserting your opinion here as well?
 
dviss1 said:
It doesn't mean they don't either bones.

Why don't you understand that you're inserting your opinion here as well?
Click to expand...
How is what I'm saying coming across as me not understanding I'm "inserting my opinion" when I'm literally disagreeing with an opinion stated as fact (superteams = ratings)?
 
dviss1 said:
Logic cannot be sound when you're missing information.
Click to expand...
So you think that those teams wouldn't have gotten the same ratings without the 3rd and 4th stars if they still met in the Finals?
 
BonesJones said:
So you think that those teams wouldn't have gotten the same ratings without the 3rd and 4th stars if they still met in the Finals?
Click to expand...

1st, I'm not sure why you're talking about the finals only.
Ratings happen all season. Secondly,

LA's 3rd star was Big game James Worthy.

The Celtics 3rd star was Kevin McHale.

To answer your question, No.

They might not have even made it to the finals with their third star gone let alone have the same or better ratings..
 
dviss1 said:
1st, I'm not sure why you're talking about the finals only.
Ratings happen all season. Secondly,

LA's 3rd star was Big game James Worthy.

The Celtics 3rd start was Kevin McHale.

To answer your question, No.

They might not have even made it to the finals with their third star gone.
Click to expand...
People weren't tuning in because of James Worthy and Kevin McHale...

Would people still watch the Warriors if they didn't have Klay? Yes. Would there be a ratings dip? No.
 
BonesJones said:
How is what I'm saying coming across as me not understanding I'm "inserting my opinion" when I'm literally disagreeing with an opinion stated as fact (superteams = ratings)?
Click to expand...

It's your opinion that they don't... It's not grounded in fact.
 
BonesJones said:
People weren't tuning in because of James Worthy and Kevin McHale...

Would people still watch the Warriors if they didn't have Klay? Yes. Would there be a ratings dip? No.
Click to expand...

You have no clue of what you're talking about right now bones.

No clue.
 
dviss1 said:
You have no clue of what you're talking about right now bones.

No clue.
Click to expand...
So you think people wouldn't have watched if those teams didn't have those guys... Nah. Nobody tunes in to see the 3rd player on the team and would tune out if that 3rd player wasn't there.
 
BonesJones said:
People weren't tuning in because of James Worthy and Kevin McHale...

Would people still watch the Warriors if they didn't have Klay? Yes. Would there be a ratings dip? No.
Click to expand...

Silly... They'd have Monta Ellis....

They simply wouldn't win...
 
dviss1 said:
Silly... They'd have Monta Ellis....

They simply wouldn't win...
Click to expand...
Smfh... What?

If you subtract Klay from that equation, how the hell do you wind up with Monta Ellis? Huh?
 
BonesJones said:
So you think people wouldn't have watched if those teams didn't have those guys... Nah. Nobody tunes in to see the 3rd player on the team and would tune out if that 3rd player wasn't there.
Click to expand...

You weren't born when McHale was THE huge prospect out of college that everyone knew would put The Celtics over the top.
 
BonesJones said:
Smfh... What?

If you subtract Klay from that equation, how the hell do you wind up with Monta Ellis? Huh?
Click to expand...

You're on some weird shit by dismissing how teams were built and gained their popularity.

It's not realistic to simply remove a 3rd best player and say:

"Would this team get the same ratings in the finals?"

What are you gonna do take said player off the day before the finals start?

No, take the player off before the season starts.

Or try never putting that player on the team in the first place.
 
dviss1 said:
You're on some weird shit by dismissing how teams were built and gained their popularity.

It's not realistic to simply remove a 3rd best player and say:

"Would this team get the same ratings in the finals?"

What are you gonna do take said player off the day before the finals start?

No, take the player off before the season starts.

Or try never putting that player on the team in the first place.
Click to expand...
Those teams wouldve still been frontrunners, just not nearly as dominant. Still wouldve had great basketball, stars, the rivalry, the big markets, and all of those things drives ratings. Losing a 3rd option doesnt take away from that.
 
kjironman1 said:
Reading that i can honestly say i should be ashamed of exactly how happy that makes me feel.
Click to expand...
From top to bottom, it's an absolute cluster down in Lala land. And I love it. Yes, Dame will leave what he's help build here to go there?

How much longer before Lebron demands a trade out? I want nothing to do with Rich Paul, but a strong ownership/president/GM would put an end to his nonsense. You didn't hear a peep out of them with Riley down in Miami.
 
BonesJones said:
Those teams wouldve still been frontrunners, just not nearly as dominant. Still wouldve had great basketball, stars, the rivalry, the big markets, and all of those things drives ratings. Losing a 3rd option doesnt take away from that.
Click to expand...

The Celtics most certainly would not have been a frontrunner without Kevin Mchale.

They traded the #1 Pick for him...
 
dviss1 said:
The Celtics most certainly would not have been a frontrunner without Kevin Mchale.

They traded the #1 Pick for him...
Click to expand...
Disagree.

A superteam is a team that, by definition, would still be a frontrunner even if it lost its 2nd or 3rd best players.
 
BonesJones said:
Disagree.

A superteam is a team that, by definition, would still be a frontrunner even if it lost its 2nd or 3rd best players.
Click to expand...

Bro, you're literally gonna say that Celtics team isn't a superteam then? Really?
 
yuyuza1 said:
Was just in SF over the weekend. Warrior fans are insufferable. They don't know how lucky they have it.
Click to expand...


Fake Warrior Fans don't know how lucky we are. The real ones suffered more than any fanbase for 20+ years. Worst ownership and management ever!! This run has been incredible, but I like to think the real fans earned it suffering through the Todd Fuller and Vonteego Cummings years.
 
Unless you have had to go to the corner store to buy "Hoops", "Basketball Digest", " Black Sports", or even "Sports Illustrated" because that was the only way you could get any stats at all and you were at the mercy of what they were writing you simply cannot understand the way the NBA was marketed. If you have ever had to stand in the magazine section and read an entire article because you didn't want to buy the magazine then you know what i'm talking about. Maybe you were one of the few that had them all coming in the mail? They even used to seal them so we had to find the one someone already cut. Hopefully they didn't rip the pages out of the magazine. (No this was not Porn. Those were behind the counter.)
Nobody knew what their favorite players stats were other than what you could pick up and remember. We were too busy remembering phone numbers. If you knew a players average scoring or rebounds it was because they were one of the leaders.

Then here is the even bigger part. Maybe you had a couple friends that were into the game as much as you? But at most you had 2 or 3? You watched games together and pretty much all watched the exact same thing so you all used the same metric. This was the difference between the game today and what we watch now. Even the CBA had to be changed to include the revenue it gets from TV. You did not have the internet or league pass. You had Chris Berman, Greg Gumble and Bob Ley. You had Stuart Scott (RIP) telling you what you needed to know. The only thing you had time for was a quick rundown of the scores and the highlights. Remember, back then we read the newspaper and changed our own oil in the car. You could actually get to the battery so you could change that also.

This is not a knock on millennial's. They have plenty of issues to deal with that we never had to worry about. But the fact is there are very few millennial's that can truly understand what dynamics were involved with the NBA 30-40 years ago.
 
I remember when the only stats I really had access to were the game box scores and the top-ten lists for scoring, rebounding, assists, blocks and steals in the newspaper's sports section. And I think those top-ten lists were only in the Sunday sports sections. Fandom is a very different experience now than when I was a kid/teen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top