Adam Silver on KD-Warriors: Not Good For NBA

[Robotech]

People who hate that only three teams have a shot at the title now....

sure must have hated the NBA in the 80s when it was Boston, LA and everyone else losing to them.

And we all know ya'll hated the 90s when the Bulls won 6 titles in 8 years.

Or the first decade of the 21st Century when Spurs and Lakers pretty much owned the Western Conference as well as most of the NBA Championships during that time.

Bull

Fucking

Shit!

I guess some people would rather see two 48-win teams go at it in the Finals every year instead of watching great teams.

 

[CodeBreaker]

Just like John Cena said...

NBA had to make a new Villain after LeBron turned face (good guy).

 

[WiggyRuss]

Just like John Cena said...

NBA had to make a new Villain after LeBron turned face (good guy).

his ass is gonna get fried if he comes up short like no other....itll make LeBron vs. Dallas look like nothing.

 

[Bulletz]

If Silver didn't like that, he's gonna really be pissed next year when Lebron, Westbrook and CP3 all sign with the Lakers.

The writing's on the wall. Battle of the superduperteams from now on.

 

[The Q]

his ass is gonna get fried if he comes up short like no other....itll make LeBron vs. Dallas look like nothing.

People can pretend it's not true....but every great story has a great villain.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

Disagree with Silver. When the Heat Big 3 formed, ratings went through the roof. People either loved or loathed the Heat. They'd watch just to see them lose, same thing with this version of the Cavs.

The same approach will be taken with the Warriors. The NBA has always had 3-4 teams that are true contenders for the title. This year we have 3 (Cavs, Warriors, and Spurs).

I agree and not only that the NBA has had five years since that happened to address one team getting to much talent. They were okay with it when Lebron and Bosh joined Wade. Besides that the Warriors gave up some players to get KD. I don't think it's a slam dunk that they win. They have to build chemistry and learn how to play together first.

 

[msgkings322]

I agree and not only that the NBA has had five years since that happened to address one team getting to much talent. They were okay with it when Lebron and Bosh joined Wade. Besides that the Warriors gave up some players to get KD. I don't think it's a slam dunk that they win. They have to build chemistry and learn how to play together first.

They also have a thin bench now, the depth was one of their primary strengths last year. There's nowhere near a guarantee they win a ring. I'd say the greatest chance of all the teams but still probably around 35% chance. The field has a 60% chance.

Just spitballing, Ws 35%, Cavs 30%, Spurs 20%, everyone else 15% maybe?

 

[CodeBreaker]

They also have a thin bench now, the depth was one of their primary strengths last year. There's nowhere near a guarantee they win a ring. I'd say the greatest chance of all the teams but still probably around 35% chance. The field has a 60% chance.

Just spitballing, Ws 35%, Cavs 30%, Spurs 20%, everyone else 15% maybe?

Warriors with 40
Cavs with 25

 

[The Derski]

Who is the NBA kidding? They're making more money than ever and the existence of high power teams like the Warriors, Cavs and Spurs will help them make a ton more. I don't think the league will be better if they make rules to weaken the top teams for the sake of parity/mediocrity. Fans remember the great teams. As impressive as the 2004 Pistons or 2011 Mavericks were for their accomplishments, no one really talks about them, but people will always remember the Shaq-Kobe Lakers and the LeBron Heat.

Also, the situation right now is still plenty competitive. The Warriors and Cavs are leading the way, but the Spurs are still the Spurs, the Clippers have plenty of star power, and the Celtics are getting really good. The Grizzlies are coming back healthy and have added Parsons. You also have some young teams like the Wolves and the Blazers who are on the rise. Do we really want rules that will force those young teams to break up before they reach their peak?

The Warriors drafted well, planned well, and took advantage of a large cap spike. All the things that came together to land them Durant will be hard to replicate in the future. Do we really need rules for something that is unlikely to happen again?

Put your long paragraph/essay/homerism aside and think for a while... Then say it's not bad for the NBA. Congrats. You have a super team. Don't let it blind you from reality.

 

[The Derski]

Who is the NBA kidding? They're making more money than ever and the existence of high power teams like the Warriors, Cavs and Spurs will help them make a ton more. I don't think the league will be better if they make rules to weaken the top teams for the sake of parity/mediocrity. Fans remember the great teams. As impressive as the 2004 Pistons or 2011 Mavericks were for their accomplishments, no one really talks about them, but people will always remember the Shaq-Kobe Lakers and the LeBron Heat.

Also, the situation right now is still plenty competitive. The Warriors and Cavs are leading the way, but the Spurs are still the Spurs, the Clippers have plenty of star power, and the Celtics are getting really good. The Grizzlies are coming back healthy and have added Parsons. You also have some young teams like the Wolves and the Blazers who are on the rise. Do we really want rules that will force those young teams to break up before they reach their peak?

The Warriors drafted well, planned well, and took advantage of a large cap spike. All the things that came together to land them Durant will be hard to replicate in the future. Do we really need rules for something that is unlikely to happen again?

Plenty competitive? There's like a 90% chance the finals will be the same as the two previous years. Get a grip dude. I get it. You're extatic that your team is good and you just gained another superstar. As a fan that's an exciting and awesome place to be. Quit trying to defend parity. There is no such thing right now. Your team is a favorite. Enjoy it and don't write stupid comments.

 

[tlance]

Warriors with 40
Cavs with 25

More like:

Golden State: 70%
Cleveland: 25%
San Antonio: 3%
Boston: 1.9%- because they have so many assets to trade
Everybody else: .1%

 

[True Lakers Fan]

Plenty competitive? There's like a 90% chance the finals will be the same as the two previous years. Get a grip dude. I get it. You're extatic that your team is good and you just gained another superstar. As a fan that's an exciting and awesome place to be. Quit trying to defend parity. There is no such thing right now. Your team is a favorite. Enjoy it and don't write stupid comments.

Since when has it been any other way?

Super Teams

Lakers went to the finals something like 8 or 9 times in 10 years
Spurs and Lakers consisted of the finals for an entire decade
Miami Heat for five years straight

And now they are bitching about it?

 

[Hambombs]

Since when has it been any other way?

Super Teams

Lakers went to the finals something like 8 or 9 times in 10 years
Spurs and Lakers consisted of the finals for an entire decade
Miami Heat for five years straight

And now they are bitching about it?

Yeah its unreal thag so much bitching is going on when the warriors have signed one free agent

 

[True Lakers Fan]

Yeah its unreal thag so much bitching is going on when the warriors have signed one free agent

I didn't even mention that the Celtics won 11 championships straight and then the Celtics and the Lakers dominated the next generation together - so who are they kidding

 

[GNG]

“I’ve read several stories suggesting that that’s something that the league wants, this notion of two super teams, that it’s a huge television attraction,” Silver said. “I don’t think it’s good for the league, just to be really clear.

“There’s no question, when you aggregate a group of great players, they have a better chance of winning than many other teams. On the other hand, there are lots of things that have to happen. We’ll see what happens in Golden State. You had a great, great chemistry among a group of players and you’re adding another superstar to the mix, so it’ll be interesting to see what happens. But just to be absolutely clear, I do not think that's ideal from a league standpoint.”


Source: KD to Warriors bad for NBA? Adam Silver chimes in

Most fans would prefer competitive balance. This why the NFL is the most popular professional sport in the USA.

 

[GNG]

I didn't even mention that the Celtics won 11 championships straight and then the Celtics and the Lakers dominated the next generation together - so who are they kidding

It didn't help the NBA become as popular as the NFL.

 

[The Q]

Most fans would prefer competitive balance. This why the NFL is the most popular professional sport in the USA.

Except the NFL doesn't actually have it.

It has less parity than baseball for sure. I bet hockey does too.

Football is easy, it's time with simple breaks. But it only has an illusion of competitive balance. Look at the AFC. The SB rep has been either Brady, Manning, Ben or Flacco for like 15 years.

 

[GNG]

Except the NFL doesn't actually have it.

It has less parity than baseball for sure. I bet hockey does too.

Football is easy, it's time with simple breaks. But it only has an illusion of competitive balance. Look at the AFC. The SB rep has been either Brady, Manning, Ben or Flacco for like 15 years.

MLB does not have parity. An NFL team can go from worst to first in one season.

 

[The Q]

MLB does not have parity. An NFL team can go from worst to first in one season.

It's a statistical fact that MLB has had more parity than the NFL.

Stark: Say it with me -- MLB still has greater parity than the NFL

Stark has been doing this for a while. The NFL has built their foundation on a house of lies.

 

[The Q]

Think the NFL has greater parity than MLB? Well, think again!