My memory could be failing, and I do appreciate their heart, the iso ball of that era was the ultimate in boredom.
OT: It's also weird, how last year's finals was considered a ratings success on NBA sites, but not so great by outsiders...(Personally, I think it is very disingenuous to blame a team for the downfall of NBA ratings, shouldn't that be on the hands of the league) : Kobe Isn't Magic In NBA Finals http://www.forbes.com/2009/06/10/kobe-bryant-magic-business-sports-nba.html Television ratings for NBA finals down close to 10 percent from last year http://blog.taragana.com/e/2009/06/...down-close-to-10-percent-from-last-year-9680/ Low NBA Finals Ratings Shows Greatness Of Past Stars http://www.hoopsvibe.com/features/b...-finals-ratings-shows-greatness-of-past-stars (End is very true) Location more important than personalities in Finals ratings game http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/richard_deitsch/05/29/nba.finals/index.html --------------------------Other Side------------------------------------ Game 3 draws highest TV ratings since third game of 2004 Finals http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jun/12/sports/sp-nbatv12 (Author is mistaken, because that game did not have as many viewers as the Pistons and Spurs, Game 7... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Basketball_Association_Nielsen_ratings#Regular_season NBA Finals TV Ratings, 1974-2008 http://tvbythenumbers.com/2009/05/22/nba-finals-tv-ratings-1974-2008/19324 This Year's NBA Finals Ratings Could Outdraw Last Year's http://*******************/articles/190854-this-years-nba-finals-ratings-could-outdraw-last-years NBA Continues to Dominate U.S. TV Ratings http://www.slamonline.com/online/ne...9/05/nba-continues-to-dominate-us-tv-ratings/
Of course winning its all what you prefer to be a fan of the suns, every year is fun to watch the suns play, while they cant get to one NBA finals, or a spurs fan that is not "entertaining" but wins championships. also its very entertaining watching your team winning a championship every year, but not its very entertaining watchin getting out in the 1st round. and what do you think the colts fans wanted: be entertaining like they did the first 14 games of the season, or winning the superbowl? If you cant win you need entertainment to fill your stadium, but if you win championships, you dont need entertainment to fill your stadium.
I think that this also speaks to the difference in popularity of basketball and, say, football. The Super Bowl has become such a nationwide phenomenon that it will now generate high ratings regardless of the teams playing. Unfortunately, I don't think the same can be said of the NBA. Despite what you say about game 7 of the Pistons-Spurs finals, basketball relies heavily on guys like Kobe and Lebron to create buzz and attract casual fans. I don't think it's popular enough to be sustained otherwise. Personally I may not care for it, but I can understand why the NBA goes out of its way to promote the "flashier" side of the game.
I personally don't care for football. Why? Mostly because it is slow and plodding, but it is also crass. I look to basketball for something more fun, faster paced, and far more athletic. Hell, even a slow-paced NBA game is like Nascar compared to football. If I were an owner - I know, fat chance - I would acknowledge first that a championship is unlikely, and then do my best to put an entertaining and fun-to-watch team on the floor, with as much talent and team chemistry as possible. Aside from dropping Von Wafer, I think Morey and the Rockets have gone this way. Alas, I think the NBA will follow.
Winning is always entertaining. The Rockets' offense during the championship years was called slow, boring, and predictable. Somehow fans in Houston didn't give a damn when we started winning. Entertainment doesn't always leads to wins, or at least not the most important wins. Ask any run and gun team like the Warriors, Suns, or Nuggets of old, that has yet to win a championship using it.
If I cant have both, give me the entertainment in the loses and the ugly in the wins. :grin: But really I think you need a blend of both.
Exactly why it shocks me as management seems to be embracing this new up-tempo style, espicially considering Yao doesn't fit that kind of system will he adjust to the team or will the team have to adjust to him.
Simple answer to a simple q.: Wins- because wins provide entertainment. ( See 22 Win Streak and/or 2009 NBA playoffs)
IIRC while guesting on a radio show sometime this season, Morey was asked if various factors affected his decision to acquire a player, such as name value and the player's ability to help generate revenue for the team (probably an indirect question about Yao Ming). Morey flat out said the only factor he considered was how much the player will help the team win games and ultimately win the championship. Then he went on to say that if a team is winning, the increase in revenue will naturally occur. In other words, I think Morey is saying that people are entertained by a winning product more than anything else.
You can have an up-tempo style with a big man. You can still have 3-4 guys trying to run on the defense while the big man jogs down. The Lakers had a slow-as-molasses Kareem when they had the best running team in the NBA. Robert Parish wasn't exactly a gazelle when the Celtics had the 2nd best fast breaking team in the NBA. Yao can be the outlet passer, the trailer, etc. I don't think management is embracing the up-tempo style while dismissing defense (something the Suns, Warriors, and Mavs have done in the past). If you're going to run like gazelles and still play D, you're going to need depth, so they'll need a lot of the type players they've been going after lately. The other thing is that you can't plan your next 5-6 years on a quantity that is as variable as Yao's health is. Yao's useful career will probably be over in the next 5 years, and his peak will more than likely be gone by then as well. You can't continue drafting and signing 20-25 year olds in the hopes that a 30-35 year old will be the central focus of the team. Most of Adelman's teams didn't have a focal player from what I recall, and I doubt this one will be an exception.
Sometimes I think that's what hurts the team, because of no focal point in the offense guys like Ariza has freedom to shoot(miss) or dribble(turnover) because of the style of offense Adelman uses. When it's clear that the focal points should be brooks, scola and landry, and everyone else should be more focused on playing off those guys.
Really? Watching Kobe shoot 1-25, being shut down by someone like Bruce Bowen is more entertaining than watching Kobe go off for, example, 81 points?
So you prefer a team like the Suns, Nuggets, Warriors that are fun to watch, but never got to the Finals, over a team like the Spurs that had won 3 titles, but doesnt have a lot of offense entertainment? Its no fun watching your team score 100 points every night, when your opponent scores 101.
