Is the NBA on its way to a collapse?
Options
Comments
-
If I recall correctly, 5 years after Jordan retired, we have an AI and Kobe running the league. Guys like Duncan were successful and that one Kings team that was always so close but so far.
Thing that one has to realize is that during the decline, a lot of these guys are not only passing down their knowledge to their teammates, but also you have kids out there going to enter the draft and get the same shone these older guys received during their tenure.
Basketball is a global sport, so if not from here, you may get another Dirk from overseas. That is the fun of all sports, to see what the new generation of talent can bring. -
bow to royalty wrote: »The premise of your argument has some merit.
When Mike left for good, the NBA had some down years.
But Jordan was such an immensely popular global brand, his departure would have left a gaping hole in any industry; necessitating a recovery period.
Also, the business model for the NBA has transformed considerably since then, as has the market for how money is made in the sports arena.
You are placing to much dependency on the superstar narrative, as @OG pointed out in last comment:
The NBA just signed a lucrative tv deal based on ... What the players have been doing in the regular season on the court. That is what drives this business. Good product. New tv deals, rising salary caps and global recognition tells me that the ratings are good enough. Adam Silver>>>Roger Goodell
Does the NBA have the most Risk Averse business model out there?
No
Is it what the they have to work with?
Yes
Can/ will the league be successful with it, long term?
Definitely
When Mike finally left Kobe and Shaq were doing their 3-peat though. 2 of the most dominant players the league has ever seen were out there killin people. So the baton was successfully passed. But when he was gone, it hit the league.
" The 1993 Finals between Chicago and Phoenix, with Jordan vs. Barkley, had averaged a 17.9 rating. That dipped to 12.4 in 1994 and 13.9 in 1995. When Jordan and the Bulls got back to winning Larry O’Brien trophies, the average ratings were 16.7, 16.8 and a record 18.7 in 1998 that still stands. The 1999 Finals, after Jordan’s next exit? Just 11.3."
You're right though. My wording was too strong with collapse. The league won't go out of business. The NBA may be running into harder times after Bron leaves.
Despite those declining numbers the talent pool got better and the salaries and tv contracts got bigger. Nobody knows the future of the NBA. Not you or I. If the past is any indication of the future than the NBA will be Just fine. All I am saying is you should not put so much emphases on Finals ratings to determine how well the league is doing. Just bcuz casuals were not watching, doesn't mean that Hakeem didn't dominate during '94 & '95 and it is still talked about. The game goes on it will be fine moving forward. Let's not act like Zaire Wade ain't about to come through and crush the buildings. Have faith my brotha.
-
NBA isnt worried about Kobe or Lebron retiring and the ratings dropping, there will be some new ? named Henry McFiggle that ppl will be labeling as the GOAT or top 5 and it will be sooner than later...
Larry Bird said back at the peak of his playing career "All I know is that people tend to forget how great the older great players were. It'll happen that way with me too." Then sure enough just only a few years later when KG and Ai were dominating in high school ppl were already saying that competition and talent was better...
In 10-15 years ? and kids will look back at Lebron and KD highlights and say that the talent and competition sucks compared to the NBA in the year of 2034, each new generation does it to the one before them and the generation that was before the last gets ? on even worse, but the NBA will always win... -
There will always be some new player that will emerge.
After Jordan's second retirement after the '98 season nobody envisioned a Kobe Bryant, Lebron James, or even an Allen Iverson type player when he was running things 10-15 years ago for a few years.
Remember cats were saying we might not even see a talent close to Jordans in our lifetimes; I don't think Kobe or Lebron are better than he was up to this point in their respective careers but they're as close to him as you can get without being better and one of which still has plenty of time left in the league.
Before Jordan there was Dr. J, Magic, and Bird many say those were the Golden Years of the league, then there was Jordan, after Jordan there was Kobe and LeBron.
Eventually when Lebron decides to hang it up there will be some new guy that's either already in the league or in college coming into the league that will be the next big thing and arguably nearly as good as or better than the aforementioned players.
It's the cycle of life; the NBA will be fine.
-
Lol that was a troll thread
-
My moms favorite bball player is Chris Paul so.....
-
numbaz...80's baby wrote: »Lol that was a troll thread
hmmm, saving face i see lol -
t/s we've already determined nba topics arent for youbow to royalty wrote: »Shizlansky wrote: »bow to royalty wrote: »I'm an 80's baby too and I can say you have more All-Stars in today's game (superstars is debateable) than yesterday and overrall players.
Can't really get into an argument with you besides using numbers. These are the players of today.
We have to put structure to the years we're talking about for players primes within a generation.
I say 10 year stretches is fair. In other words give me the 80's or 90's and I'll give you a list of players from the years 2015 to 2005. You'll see that today the past 10 years has been pretty good to basketball.
For the sake of the 4 year stretch you're probably talking about I'll leave off players like Kevin Garnett or Ray Allen and go for the list below for the past 4 years and compare that with 10 years.
Stephen Curry, Westbrook, Durant, Chris Paul, Tony Parker, Aldridge, D-Rose, Kyrie Irving are Superstars in ANY day.
But here's a list of All-Stars comparable with any day in numbers you're talking, some of them I already listed above as Superstars:
Westbrook
John Wall
Durant
Chris Paul
Tony Parker
La Marcus Aldridge
Kyrie Irving
Damian Lillard
Stephen Curry
Anthony Davis
Dwyane Wade
Carmelo
Dirk
Dwight (hard to put him on this list cause he's a lion in the land of oz with no heart)
Derrick Rose
(intentionally left off regular All-Stars such as: Demarcus Cousins, Jimmy Butler, Chris Bosh,Derron Williams,Zach Randolph, Klay Thompson,Pau Gasol, Tim Duncan (only b/c of his age today is he not a superstar), Horford,Teague, Brook Lopez, Paul Pierce, Blake Griffin (almost superstar but just isn't and might not ever be)
I wouldn't call the bold superstars. Even Durant's debatable. Superstars have a certain amount of popularity within the general public, and a certain amount of success. Curry is working on getting on superstar level. Westbrook is the #2 guy on a team that has 1 finals appearance and got swept. Chris Paul has had too little team success for someone's who's 30 and has been in the league for a decade. Aldridge....c'mon. I'm skeptical on Rose, but gave him the benefit of the doubt. And Irving isn't there yet, but if him and Lebron can stream together some titles it could happen.
KD easily a superstar
And Russ didn't get the broom
Yall forget how old Curry is too
KD was on his way to superstar then fell off the path, but I think he didn't reach the level of team success people expected of him. Then the media stopped loving him as much (and loving Westbrook more because of this year). Hard to be easily a superstar when people debate if it's your team, unless you have a beastly team (Shaq/Kobe, Shaq/Wade, Lebron/Wade, Spurs, etc.). I'm not a NBA fan at all, and only watch some games in some series. But that may make me an even better judge of all-star because sometimes big NBA fans forget non-fans dunno these people. Dude said Aldridge up there...I had to think hard about who he was.
-
Unlike american football, basketball is a global game that's getting even bigger internationally
-
Peezy_Jenkins wrote: »numbaz...80's baby wrote: »Lol that was a troll thread
hmmm, saving face i see lol
No, I said it was a troll thread, in that thread, a week ago. -
-
numbaz...80's baby wrote: »Lol that was a troll thread
This is a different question than that one. But I wanted to give credit where it was due for what got me thinking this -
Peezy_Jenkins wrote: »t/s we've already determined nba topics arent for youbow to royalty wrote: »Shizlansky wrote: »bow to royalty wrote: »I'm an 80's baby too and I can say you have more All-Stars in today's game (superstars is debateable) than yesterday and overrall players.
Can't really get into an argument with you besides using numbers. These are the players of today.
We have to put structure to the years we're talking about for players primes within a generation.
I say 10 year stretches is fair. In other words give me the 80's or 90's and I'll give you a list of players from the years 2015 to 2005. You'll see that today the past 10 years has been pretty good to basketball.
For the sake of the 4 year stretch you're probably talking about I'll leave off players like Kevin Garnett or Ray Allen and go for the list below for the past 4 years and compare that with 10 years.
Stephen Curry, Westbrook, Durant, Chris Paul, Tony Parker, Aldridge, D-Rose, Kyrie Irving are Superstars in ANY day.
But here's a list of All-Stars comparable with any day in numbers you're talking, some of them I already listed above as Superstars:
Westbrook
John Wall
Durant
Chris Paul
Tony Parker
La Marcus Aldridge
Kyrie Irving
Damian Lillard
Stephen Curry
Anthony Davis
Dwyane Wade
Carmelo
Dirk
Dwight (hard to put him on this list cause he's a lion in the land of oz with no heart)
Derrick Rose
(intentionally left off regular All-Stars such as: Demarcus Cousins, Jimmy Butler, Chris Bosh,Derron Williams,Zach Randolph, Klay Thompson,Pau Gasol, Tim Duncan (only b/c of his age today is he not a superstar), Horford,Teague, Brook Lopez, Paul Pierce, Blake Griffin (almost superstar but just isn't and might not ever be)
I wouldn't call the bold superstars. Even Durant's debatable. Superstars have a certain amount of popularity within the general public, and a certain amount of success. Curry is working on getting on superstar level. Westbrook is the #2 guy on a team that has 1 finals appearance and got swept. Chris Paul has had too little team success for someone's who's 30 and has been in the league for a decade. Aldridge....c'mon. I'm skeptical on Rose, but gave him the benefit of the doubt. And Irving isn't there yet, but if him and Lebron can stream together some titles it could happen.
KD easily a superstar
And Russ didn't get the broom
Yall forget how old Curry is too
KD was on his way to superstar then fell off the path, but I think he didn't reach the level of team success people expected of him. Then the media stopped loving him as much (and loving Westbrook more because of this year). Hard to be easily a superstar when people debate if it's your team, unless you have a beastly team (Shaq/Kobe, Shaq/Wade, Lebron/Wade, Spurs, etc.). I'm not a NBA fan at all, and only watch some games in some series. But that may make me an even better judge of all-star because sometimes big NBA fans forget non-fans dunno these people. Dude said Aldridge up there...I had to think hard about who he was.
What did I say that wasn't true? KD isn't a superstar, and he hasn't yet reached the level of team success people expected of him. And me not really messing with basketball like that is irrelevant... I'm talking business, not X's and O's. -
ur talking go ask the middle age ladies.... bruh who gives a ? ? if a 50 year old lady knows certain players are u got damn kidding me? i kno an older female who knew enough to cheer for boston during they run because of rondo, and now is a "thunder fan" cuz of KD and stressbrook and is currently cheering for "that curry boy" cuz "lebron ugly", them women bless they heart they damn watch basketball based on looks just as much as to see a good game
ur talking business but asking if the nba is about to fail when its thriving right now. playoff ratings are high, cap goin up, and two franchises that have been stuck in oblivion at least since ive been alive have the finals ratings as high as they've ever been
KD is a superstar by whatever silly superstar definition u wanna have, u not really messing with basketball is why u dont know that and dont even know who some star players are
and u talkin about kd not reaching a level of team success like hes ? 40, that ? 26 years old, entering his prime years. bruh please just ask a mod to erase this stupid ass thread. for the betterment of the cheap seats. -
bow to royalty wrote: »The premise of your argument has some merit.
When Mike left for good, the NBA had some down years.
But Jordan was such an immensely popular global brand, his departure would have left a gaping hole in any industry; necessitating a recovery period.
Also, the business model for the NBA has transformed considerably since then, as has the market for how money is made in the sports arena.
You are placing to much dependency on the superstar narrative, as @OG pointed out in last comment:
The NBA just signed a lucrative tv deal based on ... What the players have been doing in the regular season on the court. That is what drives this business. Good product. New tv deals, rising salary caps and global recognition tells me that the ratings are good enough. Adam Silver>>>Roger Goodell
Does the NBA have the most Risk Averse business model out there?
No
Is it what the they have to work with?
Yes
Can/ will the league be successful with it, long term?
Definitely
When Mike finally left Kobe and Shaq were doing their 3-peat though. 2 of the most dominant players the league has ever seen were out there killin people. So the baton was successfully passed. But when he was gone, it hit the league.
" The 1993 Finals between Chicago and Phoenix, with Jordan vs. Barkley, had averaged a 17.9 rating. That dipped to 12.4 in 1994 and 13.9 in 1995. When Jordan and the Bulls got back to winning Larry O’Brien trophies, the average ratings were 16.7, 16.8 and a record 18.7 in 1998 that still stands. The 1999 Finals, after Jordan’s next exit? Just 11.3."
You're right though. My wording was too strong with collapse. The league won't go out of business. The NBA may be running into harder times after Bron leaves.
Despite those declining numbers the talent pool got better and the salaries and tv contracts got bigger. Nobody knows the future of the NBA. Not you or I. If the past is any indication of the future than the NBA will be Just fine. All I am saying is you should not put so much emphases on Finals ratings to determine how well the league is doing. Just bcuz casuals were not watching, doesn't mean that Hakeem didn't dominate during '94 & '95 and it is still talked about. The game goes on it will be fine moving forward. Let's not act like Zaire Wade ain't about to come through and crush the buildings. Have faith my brotha.
I hear you. I just put emphasis on the finals because that's the big show. It's intended to be a best of 7 series of the 2 best teams the league has to offer. Also your last dose of basketball until next season. Hakeem was a beast, and fans will talk about it. But the same could be said about players in the Stanley Cup Finals right now. The talent is there, and the games are good...but the NHL needs people to watch. It'll be interesting to see how it plays out. -
Peezy_Jenkins wrote: »ur talking go ask the middle age ladies.... bruh who gives a ? ? if a 50 year old lady knows certain players are u got damn kidding me? i kno an older female who knew enough to cheer for boston during they run because of rondo, and now is a "thunder fan" cuz of KD and stressbrook and is currently cheering for "that curry boy" cuz "lebron ugly", them women bless they heart they damn watch basketball based on looks just as much as to see a good game
ur talking business but asking if the nba is about to fail when its thriving right now. playoff ratings are high, cap goin up, and two franchises that have been stuck in oblivion at least since ive been alive have the finals ratings as high as they've ever been
KD is a superstar by whatever silly superstar definition u wanna have, u not really messing with basketball is why u dont know that and dont even know who some star players are
and u talkin about kd not reaching a level of team success like hes ? 40, that ? 26 years old, entering his prime years. bruh please just ask a mod to erase this stupid ass thread. for the betterment of the cheap seats.
Those old ass ladies were just an example of people who know superstars. KD isn't a superstar. Shaq, Kobe, and Lebron were the last big superstars. Now with STAR POWER, you think KD is on the same level as those 3? Hell naw.
Someone needs to teach reading comprehension on here. I said the NBA is doing really well right now with the formula it's using. My question was for the future. Guess what...every successful company that failed was doing well at some point. So doing well now, doesn't mean you do well forever. I say the long term plan may not be a good one, and the reply is "What are you talking about? Everything's fine right now."
Again reading comprehension. I said KD "Hasn't yet" reached the level of team success. Meaning there's still time for it to happen. How is that talking about him like he's 40, and his time us up? But for comparison, at this point in their careers Kobe had 3 rings, Shaq had the first championship in the 3-peat, and Lebron was finishing up his first year in Miami. KD isn't the superstar Shaq/Kobe were with the Lakers, or Bron was by the end of his first year in Miami.
I feel like if you would focus on what you read, it may help you a lot. -
There will always be some new player that will emerge.
After Jordan's second retirement after the '98 season nobody envisioned a Kobe Bryant, Lebron James, or even an Allen Iverson type player when he was running things 10-15 years ago for a few years.
Remember cats were saying we might not even see a talent close to Jordans in our lifetimes; I don't think Kobe or Lebron are better than he was up to this point in their respective careers but they're as close to him as you can get without being better and one of which still has plenty of time left in the league.
Before Jordan there was Dr. J, Magic, and Bird many say those were the Golden Years of the league, then there was Jordan, after Jordan there was Kobe and LeBron.
Eventually when Lebron decides to hang it up there will be some new guy that's either already in the league or in college coming into the league that will be the next big thing and arguably nearly as good as or better than the aforementioned players.
It's the cycle of life; the NBA will be fine.
I hear you, but just the strategy of thinking someone'll pop up seems risky. Like if there wasn't a Lebron now, there wouldn't be another Lebron. Dominant centers use to keep emerging, but after Shaq who's that been? Dwight Howard is no Shaq.
Kobe and Lebron are beasts, but the fact that you're only thinking of 2 people in the past 17 years, kinda shows that you're constantly teetering on the edge of not having the superstar you need.
And you're right. It definitely could happen. The league didn't have Lebron, until it did. But the fact that we're looking at the NBA and college right now and don't see the replacement, at least makes it a valid question to wonder if the replacement is out there. -
Two words. Anthony. Davis.
-
fortyacres&amule wrote: »? basketball is international ? you talking about
So is golf...tennis...swimming...track...baseball...hockey...soccer...cricket...gymnastics...boxing...volleyball...racing. That's not the question, and it doesn't address the reasoning behind the question. Reading comprehension.... -
If Kevin Durant goes to china nobody gonna know who he is?
-
What is your definition of a superstar player
-
Chi-Town Bully wrote: »What is your definition of a superstar player
I'm looking mostly at popularity. Although, you do need to have the talent to back it up (popularity drops quickly when you're a loser), and most superstars are a very rare talent. People who's popularity is kinda bigger than the sport they play, are the level of superstar I mean. People like Jordan, Kobe, Shaq, and Lebron. Going further back you have guys like Jabar, Magic, and Bird. They've been out the game for damn near 30 years, and still everyone knows them. So with all due respect to KD, I'm not super confident that in 2050, his name will be as popular as those 3 guy's names are today. But Jordan, Shaq, Kobe, and Lebron's names will live on and be familiar to the masses (not just true basketball fans) long, long, after they retire. That's the type of player basketball has had for decade, after decade now. I haven't seen that next player out there, so I asked this question. People are acting like it's the most insane ? to wonder about.
There's only been 1 finals in the past 12 years without Shaq, Kobe, or Lebron in them. To have that kind of person missing every year could be a blow. -
And for people that think it's more about talent than star power. Here are the least watched finals from 1981 - 2008. Notice anything extremely obvious? The Spurs, the second most talented and successful franchises of the past 15 years are in EVERY SINGLE GAME. But Lebron surrounded by scrubs, playing against younger less established (but talented) players are getting double the viewers.
If you disagree with me...cool, I understand. But if you think I'm just pulling this question out of my ass based on nothing, you're trippin.
5.2: New Jersey at San Antonio, 2003 Game 2
5.6: Cleveland at San Antonio, 2007 Game 2
6.2: San Antonio at New Jersey, 2003 Game 5
6.3: Cleveland at San Antonio, 2007 Game 1
6.4: New Jersey at San Antonio, 2003 Game 1
6.4: San Antonio at Cleveland, 2007 Game 3
6.5: San Antonio at Cleveland, 2007 Game 4
6.6: San Antonio at New Jersey, 2003 Game 4
6.9: Detroit at San Antonio, 2005 Game 2
7.0: San Antonio at New Jersey, 2003 Game 3
7.2: Three tied
Detroit at San Antonio, 2005 Game 1
San Antonio at Detroit, 2005 Game 3
San Antonio at Detroit, 2005 Game 4
7.5: New Jersey at San Antonio, 2003 Game 6 -
bow to royalty wrote: »Peezy_Jenkins wrote: »ur talking go ask the middle age ladies.... bruh who gives a ? ? if a 50 year old lady knows certain players are u got damn kidding me? i kno an older female who knew enough to cheer for boston during they run because of rondo, and now is a "thunder fan" cuz of KD and stressbrook and is currently cheering for "that curry boy" cuz "lebron ugly", them women bless they heart they damn watch basketball based on looks just as much as to see a good game
ur talking business but asking if the nba is about to fail when its thriving right now. playoff ratings are high, cap goin up, and two franchises that have been stuck in oblivion at least since ive been alive have the finals ratings as high as they've ever been
KD is a superstar by whatever silly superstar definition u wanna have, u not really messing with basketball is why u dont know that and dont even know who some star players are
and u talkin about kd not reaching a level of team success like hes ? 40, that ? 26 years old, entering his prime years. bruh please just ask a mod to erase this stupid ass thread. for the betterment of the cheap seats.
Those old ass ladies were just an example of people who know superstars. KD isn't a superstar. Shaq, Kobe, and Lebron were the last big superstars. Now with STAR POWER, you think KD is on the same level as those 3? Hell naw.
Someone needs to teach reading comprehension on here. I said the NBA is doing really well right now with the formula it's using. My question was for the future. Guess what...every successful company that failed was doing well at some point. So doing well now, doesn't mean you do well forever. I say the long term plan may not be a good one, and the reply is "What are you talking about? Everything's fine right now."
Again reading comprehension. I said KD "Hasn't yet" reached the level of team success. Meaning there's still time for it to happen. How is that talking about him like he's 40, and his time us up? But for comparison, at this point in their careers Kobe had 3 rings, Shaq had the first championship in the 3-peat, and Lebron was finishing up his first year in Miami. KD isn't the superstar Shaq/Kobe were with the Lakers, or Bron was by the end of his first year in Miami.
I feel like if you would focus on what you read, it may help you a lot.
u can claim no one is comprehending all u want.
one thing i do comprehend, is this is a ? thread. -
i see what he trying to say.. but they will always be superstars after Jordan retired u had kobe, shaq, Ai, Vince, Tmac then Lebron, Wade, Anthony etc etc.. Spurs were great teams but casual fans, hell even some true basketball fans find Spurs boring times.
What brings in the casuals is wanting to see great players and hope they win or lose..
