FanNation - The Republic of Sport

Moondizzle... said 05/31, 12:29 AM
I really hate hate hate doing this via NMI. But Cincy, you're falling victim to the Captain Obvious Throwdown syndrome. I like where you're coming from, and you spoke knowledgebly. But anyone who knows basketball for the last 30 years can accurately state that Celts-Lakers is the best for 'everyone'...so to speak. But I'll argue it gently and without sarcasm.

When Michael Jordan was rattling off championships in the 1990's...were we concerned with his opponents? Were we concerned with the popularity of the sport and what was best for everyone? Hell no...the NBA was MJ...and his success brought immediate publicity.

Dont you think that the best thing for the NBA would be having a dominant superstar (Kobe aside) simply running game over every team in the league and dominating the sport? Because thats what Jordan did. Kobe hasn't yet. From what I recall, Jordan was IT. He was THE guy. And nobody suffered. What if Lebron carried his team year after year to title after title?

It'd be nice to re-introduce the Celts-Lakers rivalry. I love it. But would NY-LA be better? I hate to be a homer but why not? Best case scenario is not re-inventing rivalries.

This is too obvious.

Moondizzle... said 05/31, 12:54 AM
Everyone loves an epic matchup Cincy. I'll agree. But those epic matchups were won and lost by the likes of Bird, Magic, etc. Jordan took a Bulls team to the finals and won how many times? It's about the stars. It always has been. And while Kobe is a star and Garnett MAY be a legit hall of famer, we can't re-introduce ghosts because its easy.

Boston is the 23rd most populated market in the US. As far as advertising dollars are concerned. Cities like NY, Chicago, and Houston would destroy ad revenue from Boston. Thats math - and I'm not kidding this time.

Celebrities have always been at the games Cincy. They didn't just show up because Kobe re-ignited the team without big diesel. You are right - Spurs-Pistons drew awful ratings. But thats like comparing lions to lambs...of course that series would draw awful.

What was consistent in earlier NBA years was the presence of players that were able to transcend the game - players that could dominate the sport. KG doesn't do that for me. Kobe is close to doing it - BUT he hasn't won a title by himself. Jordan beat the Jazz, the Trailblazers, I believe the Suns....I mean cmon...who even bothered with what team he faced?

Moondizzle... said 05/31, 12:17 PM
Using Porkins' references, he's right. Boston IS in the top 10 in media markets. I mistakenly used population as per media market. That said - there are still numerous teams above Boston there. That includes Dallas, Philly, Chicago, and NY.

I simply don't think this matchup can simply be called the 'best for everyone'. I don't think people outside of California and New England will think this is great - besides basketball purists.

Yes - it is intriguing to have the Celtics and Lakers meet again. But when was the last time these 2 teams played anything meaningful? I dont think re-introducing Celts Lakers Part Deux is going to make everyone happy...and somehow people think this will create new fans? Having 3 straight matchups of Kobe-Lebron would do that.

(If I were going to start a TD and think about the most glorious matchup possible - I'd pick Celtics-Lakers....which is why I pointed this out as being obvious)

There were legendary players in those series' long ago. The only player fitting the bill is Kobe. If this series goes in 4 games, it will not have been best for everyone. Wish I could discuss further. That said...I think I took a close-to-unwinnable-TD