The Los Angeles Lakers are in the NBA Finals.....and are odds on favorites to win the NBA title.
So, of course, fans of the other 28 NBA teams cry about the NBA "wants" the Lakers to win because of ratings....which equal sponsorhips....which equal big TV contracts....which equal money for the NBA. The NBA, apparantly, is a big puppet show with David Stern pushing the strings.
The great complaint is that David Stern loves the big markets and steps on "the little guy". Please, guys, stop being so blind.
Before Stern took over...the same teams were in the Finals every year. From 1980-1987....these teams were in the Finals: Celtics, Lakers, Rockets and Sixers. That is it. Four teams ate up all 16 of the Finals births in that time frame.
In 1988....the NBA expanded to small market Charlotte and a sketchy sports market in Miami. Remember, at that time, the only Miami sport was football [Phins and Canes]. The next season, Minneapolis and Orlando got teams. The NBA expanded into Canada 6 years later.....Toronto and Vancouver. And since Stern took over, Memphis, New Orleans and Sacramento all gained relocated franchises.
Also, cities like Orlando, Salt Lake City, Indianapolis, San Antonio and Portland all made it to the NBA Finals. Former ABA teams [Nets, Pacers and Spurs] have been in the Finals in 1999, 2000, 2002 and 2003. Sure, sure....cities like Los Angeles and Chicago have won 9 of the last 13 NBA championships...but those teams also had the NBA's premier player at that time.
So, if Stern was manipulating the playoffs....wouldn't the Knicks have done a little better than a 1st round sweep?? And wouldn't Stern have found a way to sneak LeBron in the playoffs?? Wouldn't the Clippers have a little better luck? Wouldn't Chicago's turnaround....already happened?? Wouldn't the first round been stretched out a little better??
Yeah, a Minnesota-Indiana Finals wouldn't do much rating-wise. Heck, just look at the Stanley Cup Finals with Calgary and Tampa. Nowadays, you can't make people watch two other teams battle for the ring while theirs sits at home. For them, it's baseball season or gearing up for football season. If the Lakers would have missed the Finals....my intrest would wane as well.
4 comments:
I agree...but a question comes to mind.
Didn't the Lakers have like 21 of their last 23 games at home?
If anyone knows the answer, it's the Sports Assassin. For those of you who are new here, this dude is a Stat Factory.
Yeah....the Lakers did have quite a few home games to close out the season.
But remember, the NBA's All-Star Game, the Oscars and quite a few other major events kept the Lakers out of the Staples Center during most of winter months. They had some hellacious road trips in that span.
Same thing with the Spurs. The Rodeo takes place in their SBC Center which knocks them out for darn near a month....so they get a few long homestands during the season.
I hear that, SA(pronounced "essay", like Puerto Ricans). Every February, the Celtics get forced out of the Gard...ummm, Fleet Center when the Ice Capades come to town. I'd be angrier, but I know Red Auerbach used an offer of some Ice shows to sweeten the deal that brought us Bill Russell. As for the converse, the Red Sox traded Babe Ruth for money needed to finance the play "No, No, Nanette".
If David Stern really backs the Lakers so much (as some say he does), tell him to either reinstate the illegal defense rules, or get rid of the defensive 3 second violation.
Post a Comment