***2021-2022 NBA Season Thread***

[Bozo the kKklown]

19 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

Okay, but that's not really true.  You are looking at the NFL's popularity through the modern scope of the NFL, but the NFL was already clearly more popular than the NBA by the early 1970s.  At the time the NFL was becoming hugely popular, the Eagles were fielding bad teams that had no shot at championships, but they still were able to develop a huge fan base.

 

75% of white people watch the NFL.  Only 15% of blacks.

 

45% of blacks watch the NBA.  Only 40% of whites.

 

(Noting there's 30% gap in one direct, and a 35% gap in the other, but in terms of number of people since there are many more white people in this country than black that makes a large difference in terms of number of people.)  From there, white people have (and have had) more economic power and more disposable time and money and so white people spend more time watching and spending money on sports. 

 

http://spokesman-recorder.com/2014/03/06/nielsen-report-reveals-racial-divide-in-sports-media-viewership/

 

if there were an equal number of blacks and whites in this country and blacks watched as much sports as whites, the viewership would be about equal.

 

Most of the difference between the NBA and NFL can be seen by differences in patterns how much different races watch the sport, the amount that race makes up the US (whites are a larger percentage of the US population), and the economic and time ability of that race to invest into sports.

 

Now, what sport through to the 1980s largely refused to play black players at the most important position on the field because of racial stereotypes (and I'm not blaming the NFL for this.  In the 1980s, it started in high school where high school football was largely popular where?)?

 

Given that sport is more popular today largely because of white viewership and that sport gained its greater popularity when this country was much more racist is not a coincidence.

 

(At some level this argument is academic.  I grew up in a town where some people were openly racist.  I grew up with (at the time young) people that openly would tell you that they listened to the Beastie Boys, but wouldn't listen to Run DMC and LL Cool J because of race.  I've heard people that watched and played football say they didn't like basketball because it is a sport for racial slur.  To then say race isn't relevant just doesn't jive with my personal experiences growing up.)

 

The simple fact is that if there were as many blacks in this country and blacks had as much time to watch sports on tv, the NBA would be as popular as the NFL.

 

This was the other reason the NBA population dipped in the 70s.

 

There were Sports Illustrated articles and evening news report broadcasts where white fans were complaining the sport was too black. If any of you watched that 20 hour espn documentary on basketball from October, there is a section that talks about this and uses actual news clips.

[ixcuincle]

in order of preference

 

Zion to DC

 

Zion to Lakers 

 

Otherwise IDC where he plays

you people need to understand if Zion is drafted by DC he would instantly be the most recognizable and marketable face in this city

 

 

[Hersh]

21 minutes ago, ixcuincle said:

in order of preference

 

Zion to DC

 

Zion to Lakers 

 

Otherwise IDC where he plays

you people need to understand if Zion is drafted by DC he would instantly be the most recognizable and marketable face in this city

 

 

 

He would not be more recognizable than Ovechkin

[Spaceman Spiff]

43 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

He would not be more recognizable than Ovechkin

 

He's already more recognizable on a nationwide scale.  Local to DC doesn't matter as basketball is inherently more popular than hockey.  It's not a catch-all metric but Zion has more than double the Instagram followers Ovi does.  He hasn't stepped on an NBA court and he's already one of the most popular athletes in the country right now.  

[PeterMP]

8 hours ago, Destino said:

Wha Steve is saying isn’t complicated.  There’s only so many bandwagon fans in patriot caps and Lebron jerseys.  There’s only so many front running fans “of greatness”.  If the nba wants what soccer and the nfl enjoy, they need to make each season seem less predestined and less about just one team or player.

 

More fans of individual teams need to feel like their team might have a shot, for at least half a season.  They can’t know, most of the time, which team is going to win the finals before the season starts.  That makes it much less likely to show up, tune in, or spend money on a their chosen franchise.  

 

Personally I think the nba needs to become less American and more international if they really want to be much larger than they are.  They won’t beat the nfl here, not ever, but they can beat them globally.  Basketball beats football globally and the nba is the mountain top.  How to do that, without angering the current owners, is a difficult question.  

 

 

No, what he's arguing is that the NBA needs a hard cap like the NFL so that it can become more popular and that ignores the fact that by the early 1970s the NFL was already easily and obviously more popular than the NBA.   The difference in popularity between the NBA and NFL in this country was established at a time  both operating under essentially the same economic system.

 

He's acting like the difference in the NBA and NFL in terms of popularity has come up in the last 25 years or so, which isn't true.

 

In fact, if anything, the NBA is closed the gap over the last ~25 years (and realistically if you talk globally the NBA has actually probably gone from way behind the NFL in the late 1970s to surpassing the NFL today.)  It would be a stupid  and incorrect argument, but especially if you consider the global market, you could better argue that the NBA soft cap is superior to the NFL hard cap.

 

It is a dumb argument that completely ignores history.

Edited May 14, 2019 by PeterMP

[Hersh]

50 minutes ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

 

He's already more recognizable on a nationwide scale.  Local to DC doesn't matter as basketball is inherently more popular than hockey.  It's not a catch-all metric but Zion has more than double the Instagram followers Ovi does.  He hasn't stepped on an NBA court and he's already one of the most popular athletes in the country right now.  

 

It’s not a metric that means anything within a city. 

[Spaceman Spiff]

1 minute ago, Hersh said:

 

It’s not a metric that means anything within a city. 

 

Correct, as I said it's not a catch all.  But that still basketball and basketball players are still more popular than hockey and hockey players.  Zion instantly becomes the most recognizable DC sports figure if the Wiz get the #1 pick.  I'm not taking anything away from Ovi as I like him and respect him. 

[Going Commando]

41 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

It is a dumb argument that completely ignores history. 

 

LOL!  I've tried to be polite to this point, but arguing that the NFL's massive popularity today is because white people in the 70's were so racist that white people today can't stand to watch black athletes compete in basketball, but wait we're fine with watching them compete in football because they used to be excluded from playing quarterback, but wait actually the NBA is more popular and successful than the NFL! is so. ****ing. dumb.  Hell no the NBA is not more popular and successful than the NFL, it isn't by any metric and the gap between them is huge.  The NFL's popularity exploded in the 90's, not the 70's, and racism wasn't the reason it happened.  Successful expansion, labor strife leading to work stoppages in each of the other leagues creating a vacuum for the NFL, and having good TV deals and a super popular college game are the main reasons it happened.  And it is dumb to argue that racism from the 70's is stopping the NBA from outstripping the NFL today.  The NBA has massive growth potential.  It's much closer to the heart of pop culture than the NFL is and basketball is a vastly more popular sport than American football.  But the league presents its game in an outdated way, and it's not competitive enough to supplant the regionally-based primacy of the NFL.  And one of the biggest things preventing competitive balance in the NBA is the league's terrible player acquisition system.  And the biggest problem with the player acquisition system in the NBA is the byzantine abomination that is it's salary cap, and the artificial market of exceptions it creates.  It's an awful system that's been patched over endlessly and the league would replace it with a hard cap tomorrow if they could.

[Hersh]

1 hour ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

 

Correct, as I said it's not a catch all.  But that still basketball and basketball players are still more popular than hockey and hockey players.  Zion instantly becomes the most recognizable DC sports figure if the Wiz get the #1 pick.  I'm not taking anything away from Ovi as I like him and respect him. 

 

This is 100 percent wrong. Everyone in DC knows Ovechkin for bringing a championship to DC. Zion might get there someday but you and lx are massively underestimating how recognizable Ovi is. Anywhere he goes in DC, people know who he is. No mistaking it. Zion isn’t close to that now unless you follow basketball. 

[Spaceman Spiff]

Just now, Hersh said:

 

This is 100 percent wrong. Everyone in DC knows Ovechkin for bringing a championship to DC. Zion might get there someday but you and lx are massively underestimating how recognizable Ovi is. Anywhere he goes in DC, people know who he is. No mistaking it. Zion isn’t close to that now unless you follow basketball. 

 

Zion is splashed all over Sportscenter all the time.  Ovi, as great as he is, is not.  The fact that Ovi is a hockey player puts him a step or two behind in recognition to begin with.   But agree to disagree.

[Hersh]

1 minute ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

 

Zion is splashed all over Sportscenter all the time.  Ovi, as great as he is, is not.  The fact that Ovi is a hockey player puts him a step or two behind in recognition to begin with.   But agree to disagree.

 

Ovechkin has been splashed all over every local channel and newspaper along with national coverage for the last 13 years in DC. Hate to break it to you but a lot of people know and follow local sports over Sportscenter. 

[Spaceman Spiff]

3 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

Ovechkin has been splashed all over every local channel and newspaper along with national coverage for the last 13 years in DC. Hate to break it to you but a lot of people know and follow local sports over Sportscenter. 

 

Hersh, I know how passionate you are about hockey.  I'm not trying to offend you man, relax.  

[Hersh]

Just now, Spaceman Spiff said:

 

Hersh, I know how passionate you are about hockey.  I'm not trying to offend you man, relax.  

 

I’m neither offended nor anything but relaxed. Just pointing out that Zion won’t INSTANTLY be more popular/recognizable in DC.

[Llevron]

I think all of yall are wrong. About everything. 

[Hersh]

I don’t dispute basketball players being more popular/recognizable in general. My point is the power of local players being the ones that everyone recognizes. I guarantee that if a team like Portland drafted Zion (I know not possible) that Lillard would still be more popular and recognizable than Zion in Portland. A star player Being a part of a city for a long time does that.

[Mr. Sinister]

Lord help this area if Zion goes to Hogwarts. Wont be a man, woman or child alive by dawn.

[ixcuincle]

 

people forget how overrated d'antoni is as a coach

 

no finals appearances with STACKED rosters

 

if you could not coach a team to the playoffs with kobe you are not that good !

[PeterMP]

3 hours ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

The NFL's popularity exploded in the 90's, not the 70's, and racism wasn't the reason it happened.

 

The SuperBowl's maximum viewership by counting households happened in 1987.  By rating, the max value was in 1982.  By share, it was 1976.

 

Go back to the post I made responding to you before this post you quoted, almost all of the differences in television viewing between the NBA and the NFL in the US can be explained by differences between the breakdown of the viewing habits of the races.

 

I wouldn't say that race and historical racism is all of it (LKB touched on 5 v. 5 vs. 11 v 11 and certainly the violence in football and basketball is different), but in terms of what drives the difference, hard cap vs. soft cap is not worth talking about at all.

 

Edited May 14, 2019 by PeterMP

[ixcuincle]

23 minutes ago, PeterMP said:

 

The SuperBowl's maximum viewership by counting households happened in 1987.  By rating, the max value was in 1982.  By share, it was 1976.

 

Go back to the post I made responding to you before this post you quoted, almost all of the differences in television viewing between the NBA and the NFL in the US can be explained by differences between the breakdown of the viewing habits of the races.

 

I wouldn't say that race and historical racism is all of it (LKB touched on 5 v. 5 vs. 11 v 11 and certainly the violence in football and basketball is different), but in terms of what drives the difference hard cap vs. soft cap is not worth talking about at all.

 

how the hell did brett brown keep his job? 

[PeterMP]

11 minutes ago, ixcuincle said:

how the hell did brett brown keep his job? 

 

Why wouldn't he keep his job?

 

His starting 5 had played like 25 games together before the playoffs.  The Raptors were the favorite.  Game 7 was on their court.  They had the best player in the series.  And they won it on  a lucky bounce.

 

I said before they lost that game and maybe even before they won game 6, the only way you fire Brown is if you think firing him sends a message about accountability to the players (which I don't think it really does.  I don't think firing the coach makes the players feel more accountable.)  Game 7 doesn't change that.  His players had an awful shooting night and missed relatively easy shot after shot, and they still almost won the game.

Edited May 14, 2019 by PeterMP

[Going Commando]

4 hours ago, Mr. Sinister said:

Lord help this area if Zion goes to Hogwarts. Wont be a man, woman or child alive by dawn. 

 

We don't deserve the good luck.

 

But neither does Cleveland nor Phoenix.  Honestly, it should be the Knicks.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Steve's theory that the league's popularity would increase in directly contradicted by the league's most popular eras.

 

The Finals became must-see national viewing in 1984 when a Lakers team that made 9 Finals and won 5 took on a Celtics team that made 5 and won 3.

 

Jordan's Bulls were and are the most popular team of all time. And they played in, what, one competitive Finals?

 

Lebron has consistently posted monster TV ratings, because people want to see Lebron.

 

The only other team that really had a chance to reach this level was the Kobe-Shaq Lakers, but the league as a whole was fairly unwatchable then and those two were never as likeable as they clearly thought they were.

 

Super teams lead to the best NBA eras.

 

80s Lakers

80s Celtics

90s Bulls.

00 Lakers

'10s Heat

'10s Warriors

 

You can make a case that those are the only teams in NBA history that actually matter in a cultural sense. There was no one watching Russell's Celtics - even in Boston. They were always out-drawn by the Bruins.

Edited May 14, 2019 by Lombardi's_kid_brother

[Mr. Sinister]

57 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

We don't deserve the good luck.

 

But neither does Cleveland nor Phoenix.  Honestly, it should be the Knicks.

 

If theres anyone that doesnt deserve the luck, its the Knicks

 

[TradeTheBeal!]

Blazers +7.5?

 

Dont mind if I do!

[Mr. Sinister]

I've been hesitant to do any sports betting since I nearly picked Philly outright to win the SB in '17. 

 

I honestly think Portland can get this one outright.  Maybe even go up 2-0.