Now that this season is over i don't know which is more important for next year, somebody dethroning the 2 time Eastern conference overacheiving Nets or the boring Spurs. These Spurs are the best that the mighty West could come up with? I would have rather watched the Lakers go for six in a row instead of watching the Spurs win a title and tying our beloved Rockets in trophies. Next year assuming everything won't change that much i definatly don't see the Spurs repeating or the Nets returning to the finals for a 3rd time. Lakers or Kings will probably be champs next year.
WHo gives a ****. A win is a win. If we were going to win a Championship, even if it was "UGLY" then who cares?! I would take the championship any day over a good looking loss.
RIght.....I will make tennis my favorite sport before I ever wish the Lakers were in the finals... Down with the Lakers....underachievers...SO good to see them go home early...
Six in a row? Were there 2 other championships that the Lakers won?? Don't EVER give that team more than they already have! Any way, I watched the end of this game and several things stood out for me: 1) Tim Duncan IS the best player in the game. Period. 21 points, 20 rebounds, 10 assists, and 8 blocked shots is an incredible stat line. 2) Tim Duncan is also the blandest human being that I have ever seen. Absolutely no charisma or personality. Watching him talk after the game was over was like getting a tooth pulled. Dude needs some lessons from Barkley on how to be a better interview. 3) Was it me or did David Robinson look like he had inhaled a gigantic gulp of laughing gas?? He looked so damn goofy when they were talking to him that I think they cut their interview short with him on purpose because of the supreme goofy look on his face. It is too bad that Webber got hurt because it would have been a lot easier on the eyes to see the Kings win the title.
Well, to be exact, and FYI for MrSpur, here's the article of the "great" 2003 NBA Finals... http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm..._sp_ba_ne/bkn_nba_finals_ratings&sid=95747870 NBA Finals Ratings Down 38 Percent Thu Jun 12, 5:56 PM ET NEW YORK - Ratings for the NBA Finals (news - web sites) are on their way to being the lowest since 1982 and are down 38 percent from last season. The finals, between the New Jersey Nets (news) and San Antonio Spurs (news), have an average rating of 6.3 through four games. No NBA Finals' series since 1982 has finished with an average rating in single digits, according to Nielsen Media Research. New Jersey's 77-76 victory over the Spurs in Game 4 on Wednesday night earned a 6.7 rating with a 12 share, a 38 percent drop from last year's Game 4. The Los Angeles Lakers (news), led by the star duo of Shaquille O'Neal (news) and Kobe Bryant (news), defeated the Nets in four games last season to win their third straight championship. Last year's finals had an average rating of 10.2. The Lakers' clinching victory in Game 4 earned a 10.8 rating. The Nets and Spurs are tied 2-2. Game 5 is Friday night in New Jersey. The rating is the percentage of all homes with televisions, whether or not they are in use. The share is the percentage of televisions in use tuned to a program.
But in fairness to Spur, it seems like the Finals ratings have been going down ever since Jordan left the Bulls for the second and final time.
I'm not jealous, you piece of Spur crap. I have watched Finals where my team, the Rockets for your information, are not in it (Lakers/Celtics 80s, Bulls/Jazz, Bulls/Suns, etc.). Below is an updated article of your sorry Spurs and how it grabbed so much attention to the country.... http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...u=/ap/20030617/ap_on_sp_ba_ne/bkn_nba_ratings Ratings for NBA Finals Hit Low Mark NEW YORK - The final ratings for the NBA Finals (news - web sites) between San Antonio and New Jersey were the lowest since the Nielsen ratings service began using the current method 27 years ago. The six games, all aired in prime time on ABC, drew a 6.5 with a 12 share. The previous low came in 1981, when Boston and Houston drew a 6.7 rating, said Nielsen spokeswoman Barbara Sudowski. This year's highest mark came in Game 6, when the Spurs won the series. By contrast, last year's finals, between the Los Angeles Lakers (news) and the Nets, had a 10.2 rating on NBC even though it went four games and was less competitive. That series, however, featured two of the game's biggest stars — the Lakers' Shaquille O'Neal (news) and Kobe Bryant (news). Star power appears to be a factor — one of the highest-rated games ever was Michael Jordan's final game for Chicago against Utah in 1998. It drew a rating of 18.7, more than three times the overall rating for this year's series. The Nets-Stars series also was a defensive struggle with long scoring droughts and low shooting percentages by both teams. The rating is the percentage of all homes with TVs, whether they are in use. The share is the percentage of sets in use tuned to a particular program.
My criticism of the series stems from the fact that it was unwatchable. The sorry ass ratings simply confirm that I'm not the only one who felt that way. The good news is that unless the Fakers, Kings, and Mavs all get hit by major injuries again in the playoffs next season, the Spurs will have a tough time repeating. Unfortunately, the East is doomed to suck for years.
I don't analyze on ratings. I only analyze how the Rockets play and we will see how they improve next season. I never said the Spurs sucked. Glad baseball season is alive and the Astros are doing well. I was setting a point ratings wise that this was the worst Finals to see. Nothing interesting about it at all. But this is a Rockets BBS. You can back up your Spurs crap at http://boards.espn.go.com/cgi/nba/request.dll?LIST&room=nba_sas. Don't need it here. Thanks.
Yet this is the "NBA Dish" and apparently it is appropriate for fans of other NBA teams to post here.
