2018 NBA Playoffs

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally Posted by Underdog

See, though, that's literally the only debate we're having here... Not that LeBron James isn't great, just that's he's not as great as Michael Jordan. That's why there's a million caveats to this discussion. Because if we were debating LeBron versus anyone else it wouldn't be much of a debate.

And to that I say "here, here!"

Honestly it seems to me that the MJ vs. Lebron debate often simply comes down to whether or not you like the guy personally. It's easy to dislike him. I get that- especially for us Mavs fans given the history between the Mavs and the Heat. I personally got over that as soon as he went back to Cleveland, because- even though I do believe it was a purely calculated basketball decision- it was still a very "feel good" story, and I'm a sucker for those. Plus, the Mavs became less and less relevant with each passing year after 2011, so while they'll always be my first love, I needed a team to root for come playoff time.

So starting in 2014, for the first time in his career (and he'd been in the league more than a decade by that point) I started watching Lebron simply as an NBA fan and not specifically as a Mavs fan, bound to root against him for no other reason than he wasn't in a Mavs uniform. What I saw reignited my love of basketball- which had been severely diminished since the Mavs had become irrelevant. As I stated before, I simply feel privileged to watch Lebron in the same way that I now feel privileged to have seen Jordan as a child. I honestly feel sorry for younger NBA fans who never got to see Jordan. By the same token, I think a lot of people who hate Lebron now will miss him when he's gone.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

Honestly it seems to me that the MJ vs. Lebron debate often simply comes down to whether or not you like the guy personally.

You're probably right for the most part, although that certainly doesn't apply to me -- there was plenty to hate about Jordan as well... For one, he turned a lot of people off from the NBA (myself included) because he was just too damn dominant. The league was no fun anymore. Same problem we're seeing with GSW right now -- nobody likes to be able to pencil in a champion before the season even begins... Also, for as much as LeBron is a bitch when it comes to loyalty and team-building, at least he never got his father murdered over gambling debts (yeah, that's not the official narrative, but like Bron being on HGH, anyone paying attention knows it's true). I don't expect these guys to be saints, which is why neither is anywhere close to being my FAVORITE players of all time... But being well-liked isn't the same as being great -- at least not in my book.

I mean, at the end of the day I guess 6/6 vs. 3/8 is as good of a tie-breaker as any.

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

I honestly feel sorry for younger NBA fans who never got to see Jordan. By the same token, I think a lot of people who hate Lebron now will miss him when he's gone.

I'll drink to that!

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Where is all of this Lebron vs Jordan stuff even coming from? I've heard it all over social media and the radio.

Was this spurned on by sweeping a terribly coached team with no superstar? Like sweeping the fricken' Raptors means we have to start talking about Lebron versus Jordan?

I guess we suddenly forgot that the Cavs very, very nearly lost to the Pacers in the first round. But hey, moving on I guess.

[Bryan_Wilson]

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

Where is all of this Lebron vs Jordan stuff even coming from? I've heard it all over social media and the radio.

Was this spurned on by sweeping a terribly coached team with no superstar? Like sweeping the fricken' Raptors means we have to start talking about Lebron versus Jordan?

I guess we suddenly forgot that the Cavs very, very nearly lost to the Pacers in the first round. But hey, moving on I guess.

It comes up every year now doesn't it? And after every milestone, no matter how significant or otherwise.

[Harpospoke]

Originally Posted by Underdog

Basketball is less of a team sport than most, that's why you don't see squads without a top-10 player winning championships... Aside from the 2004 Pistons, every single team to win a ring since Jordan retired had either LeBron, Kobe, Duncan, Shaq, Curry, Pierce, or Dirk on the roster... And we can take this exercise back further if you want: Jordan, Olajuwon, Isiah, Magic, Bird, Kareem, Dr. J -- all but one championship squad in the 38 years that the Mavericks have existed as a franchise had one of those 14 players leading them... A single superstar can make a HUGE impact when each team only has 5 guys on the floor at a time. This isn't football.

I don't agree with your conclusion at all.

Sure you need the superstar, but that doesn't mean anything close to a "ring" without the great team around them. You made sure to mention the stars, but left out all the great players around every one of them that won a ring. None of them won anything without a great team. Ask Jerry West how it goes when the other team is better.

Or to put it in the terms of MJ. He was on teams that finished below .500 and also on teams that won 60+ games and championships. So how is basketball "less of a team sport"? I'm not seeing anything there that suggests one guy does it all. Clearly MJ could have gone his entire career without ever winning anything or could have won 10 rings. There was never a time when "MJ beat Magic"....the Bulls beat the Lakers.

Or should I start saying that "Bird was undefeated against Jordan in the playoffs"? How about Isiah went 3-1 against MJ in the playoffs"? I'm betting you just remembered we are talking about a team sport.

MJ was actually putting up better numbers on the teams that DIDN'T win anything....they didn't come close to winning anything in the 80s when MJ was having his best seasons. MJ fans claim he is this imaginary "GOAT" thing....but the Bulls improved by just 11 games when he showed up. That's the effect you get when you acquire the greatest player of all time? Doesn't sound like one player wins to me.

So can you explain how a MJ in 1996 was on a 72 win team that won the championship even though he wasn't as good as he was in 1987 when they went out in the 1st round?

As a matter of fact, MJ was better in the playoffs in 1995 when they went out in the 2nd round than he was in 1996 too.

95: 6.5 rebounds 4.5 assists 2.3 steals 1.4 blocks 31.5 (48%)
96: 4.9 rebounds 4.1 assists 1.8 steals 0.3 blocks 30.7 (46%)

What was different in 95? No third star...Horace Grant was gone. He played for the team that beat them. The next year the Bulls get that third star while Grant is hurt for the Magic...suddenly everything flips back the other way even though MJ wasn't as good.

In fact, MJ was pretty bad in the Finals against the Sonics in 96 and they still walked away with the championship. MJ was really horrible in the deciding game 6....he shot 26%. (Yet MJ gets credit for "never going to game 7 in the Finals)

Just watch this game. MJ didn't win that game...he was terrible. If any one player won that game it was Rodman. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bn0eJniLtic

Lebron averages a triple double and his team lost in the Finals. How does this support the idea that one player is winning these rings? Did "Curry beat Lebron"? Or was it "KD beat Lebron"? Maybe "Green beat Lebron"? Hard to pick one there. None of them played as well as Lebron did either...but they each get to claim they "beat Lebron"?

The fact that LeBron rarely has to go through the best players in the league is relevant... Especially if you're comparing him to Michael Jordan, who defeated the following Hall of Famers in the Finals alone: Magic Johnson, James Worthy, Clyde Drexler, Charles Barkley, Gary Payton, Karl Malone, and John Stockton... And then there's the HoFers he had to beat to even get to the Finals: 76ers Barkley, Patrick Ewing, Isiah Thomas, Joe Dumars, Dennis Rodman, Shaquille O'Neal, Dominique Wilkins, and Alonzo Mourning... All those names in just 6 trips, several defeated multiple times.

So who's the best player LeBron beat, again?

Downplay the importance of superstar competition all you want, but NBA history does not regard your opinion.

Hard to believe there are fans of the sport who believe things like that.

Ok...let's roll with it then. Bird must be the "GOAT" since he owned MJ in the playoffs. Now can you see how that sounds?

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

Dude.. come on. That's so insanely ridiculous, I honestly don't even know how to respond.

Well you need to come up with something if you are claiming Lebron wanted an easy path to a ring. You'll need to explain why he didn't go to one of the top teams in the West and work something out. They of course would do what needed to be done to sign him. Maybe not a minimum contract, but of course any of the teams in the West would do whatever it took. Lebron had his choice of teams.

You're in full blown conspiracy land now, and it's ridiculous. You think Lebron (or any other player for that matter) chose not to sign with Dallas, because they think Dallas is a racist city?????? That is INSANE. If you really want to make that argument, I defy you to show me one quote, or one report, about ANY NBA player EVER saying they chose not to sign with Dallas for that reason.

Dallas has never been an attractive destination for free agents, but I can assure you Dallas being perceived as a racist city has absolutely nothing to do with it. For pretty much all of the 2000s, the team had one of the highest payrolls in the league and very few trade assets to work a sign-and-trade. In the 2010s, Dirk and the rest of the entire team was old.

I fully admit it's just a theory, but you can't do anything close to assuring me it has "absolutely nothing to do with it". Because that is the perception of Dallas. And the Mavs did have that "white" image in the 80s, 90s, and 00s for the reasons I mentioned. It was a real thing. The Jazz have the same problem.

If a big star wanted to come to Dallas, they would have worked something out. They can always make moves to get that done. It's not like GS could offer KD the most money. He went to the team he wanted to go to and they made roster moves to make it happen. Shaq wouldn't even take a meeting in Dallas. Same with Lebron.

There was never any perfect situation for him to land in. Certainly nothing was ever going to be "easy." But it was pretty obvious then that Cleveland was the BEST option for him. His options were severely limited anyway. It was always either going to be coming back to Cleveland or staying in Miami. Knowing that it was really down to those two, Cleveland was BY FAR the better option.

Still not seeing anything showing that the Cavs were the best option for him. One of the superior teams in the West would of course been a better option. Add Lebron to any number of the top teams in the West and they become the favorite every year. The Cavs were a hope and a prayer that maybe they could put something together despite their history of failure (which they continue to add to). The Cavs are a dumpster fire.

If you really don't believe me, then I defy you to name me the other team(s) that he could have signed with that would have provided an "easy" path to a title- BARRING THIS RIDICULOUS IDEA OF LEBRON SIGNING FOR THE MINIMUM. Even now in 2018, Lebron has made it clear that he is not playing for less than the maximum and won't even entertain the idea of taking a paycut. So knowing that, this is the challenge- name the other teams in 2010 or 2014 that had CAP ROOM to take on a max contract, that would have provided a better path to a title for him than Miami or Cleveland.

Ok...so the two options are "max contract" or "league minimum". Nothing in between?

You are claiming Lebron's highest priority was the "easy path" so where is the proof? He went to Cleveland instead of a strong team out West. That defeats your claim.

It's pretty obvious that any numbers of teams in the West would have been better options. Any one of them would take a meeting with Lebron and they would work something out. You know that. You think the Spurs wouldn't figure out how to make it work under the salary cap? Did Lebron even call them?

The whole claim has never made sense. That he would somehow prefer to play for a weaker team that goes to the Finals and loses.

Originally Posted by Underdog

See, though, that's literally the only debate we're having here... Not that LeBron James isn't great, just that's he's not as great as Michael Jordan. That's why there's a million caveats to this discussion. Because if we were debating LeBron versus anyone else it wouldn't be much of a debate.

There would be plenty to debate with a lot of players. Nothing would ever be proven of course just like no one can prove this fake "GOAT" thing with MJ or any other player.

I would first need to be convinced why anyone would take a 6'6" guard like MJ or a 6'8" forward like Lebron over one of the all time great centers. Anyone saying that must have never picked teams in pickup basketball. That's not how it works. Lebron and MJ are great obviously...but why would I leave Wilt, Russell, or Kareem on the board to take them?

There is a reason why centers and forwards are taken with the #1 pick so much more often than guards.

And if you claim "it doesn't work that way anymore"....you should check out this year's draft prospects. https://www.si.com/nba/2018/04/24/nb...on-luka-doncic

[Harpospoke]

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

Where is all of this Lebron vs Jordan stuff even coming from? I've heard it all over social media and the radio.

Was this spurned on by sweeping a terribly coached team with no superstar? Like sweeping the fricken' Raptors means we have to start talking about Lebron versus Jordan?

I guess we suddenly forgot that the Cavs very, very nearly lost to the Pacers in the first round. But hey, moving on I guess.

Well first of all, because fans are not smart. We somehow believe we can rank players in a team sport. No two rankings will ever be the same between two fans but we keep doing it.

Secondly, probably because Lebron is having one of the all time great playoff runs. He's hit 2 game winning shots in one playoff. That's more than most get in their entire career.

A team losing in the 1st round obviously isn't a problem for greatness. It's happened to a lot of great players. (yet some still claim one player is winning these series)


-----------------

On that subject, Can't wait to see how today's game plays out.

Rest for Lebron and the other older Cavs. That's bad for the Celtics.
Rest for the Celtics. Could that be bad for young players to have too much time to think?

However....time for Bad Brad to think....that could be bad for the Cavs. If Love, Smith, Korver, and West regress to their Pacers performance due to Celtics defense, it probably won't matter what Lebron does. Lebron will get his numbers, but how hard will he have to work for it? That could be key to late game performance.

It's going to be interesting. The Celtics continue to be doubted and keep proving people wrong. Coaching matters and team defense definitely matters. The Celtics have that advantage in this series.

[sefant77]

OMG, this is epic:

https://www.instagram.com/p/BiuNeO3A...ource=ig_embed

[DevinHarriswillstart]

LMAO! You will be stuck with Jeff Green.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Brad Stevens not being selected coach of the year is a huge joke.

[Harpospoke]

And look what happens when the Cavs play a team that plays defense.

[sefant77]

Lebr(g)one in the summer

[BPo001]

Originally Posted by Harpospoke

And look what happens when the Cavs play a team that plays defense.

35 points in the first half.

[Harpospoke]

So...if tomorrow is a blowout and these conference finals are mismatches....how weird will it be to look back and realize the 1st round was the only interesting games in the 2018 playoffs?

[dirt_dobber]

Cavs with 4 made 3 pointers in today's modern game is pitiful - 4 of 26 - 15.4%

[Melonhead]

Lebron could get 40 15 15 and it wont matter. Too many playmakers on the Celtics team. I expect them to go into cleveland down 0-2

[MavzMan]

Originally Posted by Harpospoke

So...if tomorrow is a blowout and these conference finals are mismatches....how weird will it be to look back and realize the 1st round was the only interesting games in the 2018 playoffs?

There have been interesting games this playoffs? I've enjoyed watching Lebron play but that's really about it. I guess it's amazing to watch the Celtics keep winning even though their 2 "star" players are out. Can't really say anything else has got me to watch.

Although I am so looking forward to Harden sulking on the bench after they go down 0-3 against GS.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Conference finals off to a good start. Too bad Harden came back from that "injury" of his.

[Bryan_Wilson]

Originally Posted by DevinHarriswillstart

Conference finals off to a good start. Too bad Harden came back from that "injury" of his.

Hey he's been through a lot! He almost had his head taken off by Green. We know because he checked for blood and winced all the way down the court when Green shoved his shoulder. Then he took a shot to the gut by someones backside while he was trying to pretend to play defense, definitely learning his lesson to not even pretend. And then he took a shot to the beard on an offensive rebound and again it was so strong he had to check for blood. You should be moved by his toughness.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

I cannot believe Chris Paul is telling Durant to shut up...wow.

[Bryan_Wilson]

Houston is so ugly to watch seriously. Every play is switching Looney or Curry onto Harden or CP3 and then 10-12 seconds of dribbling while we watch them take turns playing ISO.

[BPo001]

Originally Posted by Bryan_Wilson

Houston is so ugly to watch seriously. Every play is switching Looney or Curry onto Harden or CP3 and then 10-12 seconds of dribbling while we watch them take turns playing ISO.

It's literally ISO ball every time down the floor.

[sefant77]

Warriors trashing Rockets in 5
Celtics sweeping Cavs
Warriors trashing Celtics

[sefant77]

Oh Look its the playoffs and Pringles has no plan B

[Underdog]

[sefant77]

That +1.5 Line was like printing money

[Bryan_Wilson]

Originally Posted by sefant77

That +1.5 Line was like printing money

I choked on my drink when I read that line this morning.

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally Posted by Harpospoke

Well you need to come up with something if you are claiming Lebron wanted an easy path to a ring. You'll need to explain why he didn't go to one of the top teams in the West and work something out. They of course would do what needed to be done to sign him. Maybe not a minimum contract, but of course any of the teams in the West would do whatever it took. Lebron had his choice of teams.

LIKE.... WHO??????!!!!!!! NAME ONE TEAM WHO WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER THAT HAD CAP ROOM FFS!!!!

I fully admit it's just a theory, but you can't do anything close to assuring me it has "absolutely nothing to do with it". Because that is the perception of Dallas. And the Mavs did have that "white" image in the 80s, 90s, and 00s for the reasons I mentioned. It was a real thing. The Jazz have the same problem.

And YOU can't do anything close to assuring me that this is anything but conspiratorial nonsense- unless you show me a quote or report that any NBA player has ever turned down Dallas for that reason.

Shaq wouldn't even take a meeting in Dallas. Same with Lebron.

And you're honestly trying to argue that it was because they thought Dallas is a racist city?
Again, show me evidence of this. A report or quote from any NBA player to that effect. You concede that it's "just a theory" but that's not accurate. A theory is a system of ideas supported by evidence. Without evidence, it's not even a theory, it's a baseless claim. Until you show me the evidence, I'm going to stick with the simpler and more logical explanation that Dallas didn't attract free agents because A: they never had cap room, and B: when they finally DID have cap room, there were better options out there.

Still not seeing anything showing that the Cavs were the best option for him. One of the superior teams in the West would of course been a better option. Add Lebron to any number of the top teams in the West and they become the favorite every year. The Cavs were a hope and a prayer that maybe they could put something together despite their history of failure (which they continue to add to). The Cavs are a dumpster fire.

For Lebron, going to a team with Kyrie Irving and Kevin Love is a million f*cking light years from a "dumpster fire." When Lebron came back to Cleveland, a lot of people were pissed because they thought it was a new "superteam." The only reason it wasn't a superteam is because Love has never fit in and never come close to his Minnesota production level. Superteam or no, in 3 seasons the Cavs had 3 straight finals appearances and a championship. That is a resounding success by any definition. It's about the exact opposite of a "dumpster fire." If they're a dumpster fire now, it's because Kyrie unexpectedly demanded a trade, and they traded him away for pennies on the dollar. (Also, for reasons I don't understand, they fired David Griffin, who for my money was one of the best GM's in the league- further undermining your claim that the Cavs were a "dumpster fire" when Lebron returned in 2014.)

Ok...so the two options are "max contract" or "league minimum". Nothing in between?

Dude, you were the one who suggested that Lebron could have signed for the minimum, or a "small" contract. You brought it up. Even with Lebron only taking a minor paycut (as Durant did to join GSW), any team that wanted him would still need cap room. And yeah, to straight up sign as a free agent with a team that is over the salary cap, Lebron would basically have to take the minimum. Or at least the MLE, which practically the same as singing for the minimum. Seriously, what part of this do you not understand?

You are claiming Lebron's highest priority was the "easy path" so where is the proof?

For the record, I have at any point used the words "easy path." In fact, I specifically went out of my way not to use those words. I said "best path." I stand by that 100%.

He went to Cleveland instead of a strong team out West. That defeats your claim.

No it doesn't. I'm saying any one of the "strong teams out West" in 2010 or 2014 were either A: not an option for him at all (Spurs, Thunder), or B: a poorer option for him than Miami or Cleveland (Mavs) You keep denying this, but you have still yet to make an actual argument to the contrary. You state flatly that he could gone to a pre-established contender, but you still have yet to provide examples, supported by at least a vague understanding of what said team's financial situation was in 2010 or 2014.

Just a generic "strong team out West" wave-off is not an argument. Give me specifics, and then tell me how said team could "work it out."

It's pretty obvious that any numbers of teams in the West would have been better options.

I don't think that's obvious at all. Better options than teaming up with both Wade and Bosh in 2010? Or Kyrie and Kevin Love in 2014? Even IF Lebron could pick any team he wanted, I'd say one or two teams at best would have been better options- Spurs and maybe OKC. (Honestly I'm not even sure about OKC.) And again, I'm telling you that neither of those teams were options for Lebron.

Any one of them would take a meeting with Lebron and they would work something out. You know that. You think the Spurs wouldn't figure out how to make it work under the salary cap?

NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THEM was in the market for a big name free agent in 2010 or 2014.

If it was as easy as you say to just "work something out," then how come not ONE of those Western teams landed any of other big free agent in that historic class of 2010? Tell me, HOW the Spurs, or anyone else, would "work something out" to sigh Lebron James. The only way it would be even possible is a sign-and-trade, in which this hypothetical team have to trade away probably half of its depth in order to make the salaries match. Keep in mind that the Cavs would also have to agree to this deal, so if Cleveland would have to take massive bad contracts, they'd nix the deal.

Sign-and-trades are complicated. The NBA salary cap is f*cking complicated. If any superstar could just sign for whatever team they want any time because it's that easy to just "work it out," you don't think more players and teams would do it? If it's that easy, why aren't pre-established contenders in the market for big-name free agents every year? Why do so many superstars rot away on bad teams with no supporting cast? Why don't they all just join the Spurs or some other "strong team out West?"

Better yet, if it's as easy as you say to just "work it out," why in their 20 years of dominance have Spurs almost never been in the market for the biggest free agents? Only once in 20 years did they make a big free agent signing- Aldrige in 2015- and, unsurprisingly, they had cap room that year. Hell, if OKC was so attractive during this time, how come they not only didn't sign any big free agents, they ended up LOSING their guys to free agency?

When a superstar like Lebron hits free agency at any given point, there are only ever a handful of teams that are realistic options. That team has to have either cap room to take on a max contract (or something pretty close to it), or the assets (and the desire) to work a sign and trade without decimating the rest of their roster.

Lebron is a free agent again this summer, and it's no different. You think he can just go wherever he wants? There are only a handful of realistic options- off the top of my head I'd say Sixers, Rockets, Lakers, and of course Cavs.

Did Lebron even call them?

Typically when a superstar hits the market, teams call him, not the other way around. So your question is all wrong. The question you should be asking is- Did the Spurs even call Lebron?

But did Lebron talk to the Spurs in 2010, or 2014? I have no idea. Maybe. For all I know, maybe the Lebron did show interest in working a sign-and-trade, but the different sides couldn't come to an agreement.

The whole claim has never made sense. That he would somehow prefer to play for a weaker team that goes to the Finals and loses.

I would like to point out that you are now confusing your own argument. YOU are the one saying that he "prefers to play for a weaker team that goes to the finals and loses," because you are the one saying that he had better options than Miami and Cleveland. I am saying that Miami and Cleveland were NOT "weaker teams." I'm saying they were the best teams that were realistically available to him. He's won three titles the eight years since then. I'd say it worked out pretty well for him.

Since you are saying that Miami and Cleveland were NOT the best options for him, then why again did he not sign with the aforementioned "strong team out West?" I guess team loyalty for Cleveland, but why Miami?

[Harpospoke]

Originally Posted by sefant77

Warriors trashing Rockets in 5
Celtics sweeping Cavs
Warriors trashing Celtics

That looks pretty close to me.

We should start planning how we'll fool ourselves into believing someone can give the Warriors a challenge next season.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

Shaq owned a ton of land in Frisco at one point, and Lebron is a huge Cowboys fan. The idea they wouldn't come here because Dallas is racist is 1000000% untrue.

[MavzMan]

Originally Posted by Harpospoke

That looks pretty close to me.

We should start planning how we'll fool ourselves into believing someone can give the Warriors a challenge next season.

I love Barkley's quote from last night ... "I'm changing my mind from Warriors win in 5 to Warriors win in 3."

[j0Shi]

I'm actually in shock that NBA ratings are up. Why do people enjoy these kind of playoffs?

[sefant77]

Originally Posted by j0Shi

I'm actually in shock that NBA ratings are up. Why do people enjoy these kind of playoffs?

I think people becoming more and more braindead and are just much easier to entertain with garbage. Just look at several TV formats with high ratings.

Same with the Allstar Game, i have no idea why anyone with a working brain would watch this pointless garbage.

[MavzMan]

Because it's about the super stars and marketing. Ask anyone on the street who Lebron and Kevin Durant are and they know. Even Harden and they will say "Fear the Beard". Now when you say that Lebron might lose a series, that draws interest from people. Or when you hear KD and Steph Curry have arguably the best team of all time, they want to see it.

Basically everything that legit fans of the other teams hate is what is pulling the other 90% of viewing audience.

[EricaLubarsky]

Originally Posted by j0Shi

I'm actually in shock that NBA ratings are up. Why do people enjoy these kind of playoffs?

At the end of the 2017-18 regular season, NBA ratings were up across all four networks when compared to last season. ABC led the way at +17%, while TNT was +13%, ESPN +4% and NBA TV +1%. It was the NBA’s highest-rated season in five years. The audience growth was led by hard-to-reach young adults, with ratings for 18-34 demographic up by 14% and the 18-49 age group up by 15%. The median age of the NBA viewer is relatively young at 42, compared to the NFL (50) and Major League Baseball (57). Local TV ratings grew by 3%, after a drop of 14% in 2016-17 season.

NBA fans are not just staying home to watch the action on TV, either. Attendance for regular season games increased for the fourth straight season reaching 22.1 million. Average attendance per game was 17,978, with a record high 741 sellouts. By the end of the season, the league had sold 95% of all tickets available.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/bradadg.../#483e37202ecb

Those are some crazy numbers. This season has been really good for the NBA and really bad for the NFL.

Tanking can't have hurt the league that bad. Throw in another 5-10 amazing prospects this summer and the NBA can't feel too bad.

My only complaint is that refs made Harden a superstar with their calls. High ratings and billions in profits? There obviously isn't any pressure from the NBA to bring him back to earth and start reffing him better. If anything, they may need to build him up more with numbers that good.

[Melonhead]

Originally Posted by sefant77

That +1.5 Line was like printing money

I laid off out of fear that is was too good to be true...sometimes vegas is flat wrong on the line.

[Harpospoke]

Originally Posted by j0Shi

I'm actually in shock that NBA ratings are up. Why do people enjoy these kind of playoffs?

I think a lot of it was fans deluding themselves into believing the Warriors would have a challenge this year. Will be interested to see if the rating take a hit if the Warriors make their series into a joke.

And in the East there are a ton of story lines. The Sixers and Celtics making a big comeback is big. Those two fan bases are huge. But again...if the Warriors start owning the Celtics in the Finals I wonder if that will keep up. I don't think even the refs could get the Celtics past game 5.

[MavzMan]

I give the Celtics defense and Brad Stevens all the credit in the world, but the Warriors are a really good defensive team and an absolute juggernaut on offense. Compare that to the Cavs who are bad defensively and rely on Lebron to go for 40+, 10, 10 in order to have a chance at winning.

[EricaLubarsky]

Originally Posted by MavzMan

I give the Celtics defense and Brad Stevens all the credit in the world, but the Warriors are a really good defensive team and an absolute juggernaut on offense. Compare that to the Cavs who are bad defensively and rely on Lebron to go for 40+, 10, 10 in order to have a chance at winning.

I don't see a lot of defensive adjustments being made by Celtics, but good lord-- that team is long. Every member of the starting five is capable of defending at least 2-3 positions. They're crazy versatile.

Really think that that may be how the NBA looks in the future. No Shaq-types, but a lot of long, lean, strong, versatile players that can guard multiple positions.

[mac222b]

Originally Posted by EricaLubarsky

I don't see a lot of defensive adjustments being made by Celtics, but good lord-- that team is long. Every member of the starting five is capable of defending at least 2-3 positions. They're crazy versatile.

Really think that that may be how the NBA looks in the future. No Shaq-types, but a lot of long, lean, strong, versatile players that can guard multiple positions.

This is either the best argument against or for Ayton, depending on where you stand.

[DevinHarriswillstart]

It entirely depends on how good the next crop of big men are. If they're good enough, then the league/rules will change with them. If not, then it won't.