The Argument that Tim Duncan is bad for the NBA...

[pad300]

http://jonesonthenba.blogspot.com/2007/10/tim-duncans-neutrality-more-devastating.html

[peskypesky]

He's good for the San Antonio Spurs and that's all I care about.

[FromWayDowntown]

This thing about Tim Duncan being unknowable strikes me as rather bizarre. Tim shows his personality with great regularity in talking with the media. What nobody seems to get is that in being genuinely modest and humble, in supporting his teammates, and in offering bits of dry humor here and there, Tim has shown himself and has let the world in at least a little bit. There are those who want to believe, apparently, that Tim must be something else and can't understand the reality that Tim's persona isn't bigger-than-life. That Tim doesn't need the spotlight as a form of validation is all the more indicative of his personality. It's that personality that so many apparently dislike; the dislike will change only when Tim chooses to change his personality -- to stray from genuine -- I guess.

The notion that Tim Duncan shows no emotion on the floor strikes me as laughable as well. It's there for those who choose to see it -- this forum is routinely filled with photographs of Tim Duncan showing great emotions on the basketball court. Sometimes (too often, I think) that emotion is frustration with officials, but more frequently than many will realize, it's shown in that face of determination, the look of focus, and the laughs of success. It's also shown in the way that he reacts to his teammates and the way that they react to him -- Tim spends many moments on the floor applauding teammates for their effort or supporting them if something has gone wrong. Those are emotions, too; they're just not the sorts of phony emotions or smack talk that more popular players offer, but they're nonetheless valid emotions.

I think the biggest problem with Tim's detractors is that they don't take the time to see what he offers; that or they've chosen to just dislike what he offers. In any event, the dislike, it seems to me, is on them and not on Timmy. Sustained excellence and an apparent unwillingness to be anything other than genuine have never before been the subject of such ridicule.

[howbouthemspurs]

This is typical kind of bullshit that Tim Duncan doesnt have to respond to. It is not Tim Duncan's Fault that the average fan thinks he is boring. It is the NBA's and the medias fault for their constant glamouration of flashy players and dunks. That is the only thing they show in sportcenter and NBA.com. They stuff all this irrelevent crap down our throats that when a player like Tim Duncan is the regular on the TV screens like he was in all his Finals apperances, the expectations for high flying theatrics is quickly subsided and the channels are changed. Tim Duncan doesnt care about what everybody thinks and he shouldnt have too. I think his game is pure and is really entertaining to watch. It is funny how people these days are so easily mongered by the perceptions of the media.

[Solid D]

Tim's good enough for the NBA to make kids want to emulate and adopt his moves and wear #21...sort of like he did for the author of the article.

[Spurminator]

Why is it that in sports (and especially the NBA), the opinion of the "Average Fan" is given so much credit? I'm not talking about in the business sense, I'm talking about taste.

Average Fans are what get shows like "According to Jim" five seasons and syndication while "Freaks and Geeks" gets one season. Average Fans get us 35 radio stations of absolute crap in major markets. Average Fans get us basketball experiences like the AAC. Average Fans do The Wave.

If Tim Duncan is bad for the NBA because he doesn't appeal to the Average Fan, then that's the Average Fan's problem. And the Average Fan can go averagely fuck himself for all I care.

[mavs>spurs2]

Is anybody else having trouble with the link?

[SRJ]

Why is it that in sports (and especially the NBA), the opinion of the "Average Fan" is given so much credit? I'm not talking about in the business sense, I'm talking about taste.

Unfortunately, the casual fans power the bottom line much more than the die-hards do.

[FromWayDowntown]

here's the blogger's view:

Wednesday, October 03, 2007
Tim Duncan’s Neutrality: More Devastating to the NBA than Tim Donaghy?

Before I start writing this, I’d like you all to know that this is by no means a knock on Tim Duncan as a person or as a basketball player. I don’t personally know him, so I can’t comment on his character. And as a basketball player, he’s simply one of the greatest to ever play the game. I admire Duncan’s game so much, that as a high school basketball player I wore number 21 and added a lot of his moves to my game. For a while, there was a running joke amongst my teammates that I wanted to be Tim Duncan. So no, I don’t have it out for TD.

The best players of the last decade have probably been Kobe Bryant, Shaquille O’neal, Kevin Garnett and Tim Duncan. But just because Duncan is a spectacular basketball player, doesn’t mean he’s been good for the league. Although his drop step moves and pin point bank shots might get basketball fundamentals junkies like me very excited, it’s obvious that his game is not that appealing to the average basketball fan.

When you get down to it, pro basketball--just like all other professional sports--is all about entertainment. People watch basketball to be entertained. For the average fan, fundamentals alone are not that entertaining. Don’t get me wrong, showmanship alone is not that appealing to the average fan either. What appeals most to fans is a balance between spectacular play and fundamentals. Fans crave players that are able to showcase their showmanship and athleticism while being fundamentally sound. As mentioned yesterday, Michael Jordan was the king of doing that very thing. Today, guys like Kobe Bryant, Kevin Garnett, Steve Nash and Dwyane Wade are also great at combining the flashy with the fundamental. And because of it, they are all some of the most marketable players in the league. These players use the basketball court as a giant stage by which to entertain. I don’t ever think Tim Duncan considers entertainment.

Over the years, Duncan has worked really hard not to let his emotions creep out onto the floor. Aside from giving an occasional wide eye reaction to a bad call by the refs, Duncan doesn’t really ever show emotion on the court. I can recall him mentioning that he intentionally does this because he feels he wouldn’t be as great of a player if he ever allowed himself to get too high or too low. He’s basically set his emotions to run on neutral. With his emotional gears running on neutral and his game tuned to be efficient and nothing more, it’s easy to see why when Tim Duncan is on television or in town, fans turn away.


The statistics don’t lie. Every year Duncan has been in the Finals, the ratings for the event have fallen from the previous year. However in seasons without Duncan and the Spurs in the Finals, the ratings have always managed to bounce back a bit. Don’t believe me? Well, take a look at these rating statistics. Yeah, I know, ABC/ESPN, new media, and the current NBA television structure has something to do with the ratings being lower overall. But even though ratings are down in general, they are always their lowest when Duncan and the Spurs are in the Finals.

As well, check out the road attendance rankings for the Spurs the last few years. They ranked number 22 this past season, number eight in 2006, number nine in 2005, number ten in 2004, and number eleven in 2003. Along with the Lakers, the Spurs have pretty much been the team of the decade. How is it that a team that has won four titles since 1999 has trouble cracking the top five in road attendance? It’s obvious that people aren't entertained by watching Tim Duncan play.

Update: Also take a look at his Jersey sales for 2007. The league's best player, on the league's best team is only 15th in Jersey sales. I wish they had actual numbers attached to those rankings. I have a feeling that there is a very large drop of after the top ten.

That's why every time Duncan and the Spurs end up in the Finals you can expect the league to take a hit. The NBA is not in a position to consistently have people turn around from its marquee event. The NBA is also not in a position for its best player and its best player to be unmarketable.

If Duncan were in Los Angeles, New York or Chicago he could get away with being the way he is, because by default, fans will watch those teams if they are good. But with a team from San Antonio, unless there’s a dynamic player throwing on their jersey, there is no way fans will tune in or show up to arenas to watch them.

But then again, I doubt it’s just about the team being from San Antonio. Replace Tim Duncan with Kevin Garnett on all of those Spurs championship teams and I guarantee there’s a different outcome in the TV ratings and attendance. Next to a dynamic player like Tony Parker, a KG led Spurs team would be one of the hottest tickets in the league. That just tells me that more than anything else, the Spurs’ lack of popularity can be attributed to Tim Duncan’s neutrality.

Kareem wasn’t that dynamic of a personality and he did pretty well for himself in the league. However, although he didn’t have a marketable personality, he did have one of the most beautiful shots in the history of the game. As well, he played with the two of the greatest guards to ever touch a basketball in Oscar Robertson and Magic Johnson. Playing the majority of his career in Los Angeles probably didn’t hurt his cause too much either. And at least he was able to show a little bit of his personality in Airplane and that Bruce Lee movie.

People always say that destructive off the court activity by the likes of players such as Stephen Jackson turns away fans from the league. Yet, I swear the Warriors playoff run was probably the highlight of last year’s playoffs. Who was one of the major highlights of that Warriors run? That’s right, none other than Stephen Jackson.

The lack of excitement NBA fans have for the Spurs and Duncan is part of the reason I always laugh whenever someone says that David Stern rigged this year’s playoffs. If David Stern was going to rig the playoffs, the last team he’d want in the Finals is the San Antonio Spurs. He can deny this all he wants, but Duncan and the Spurs are BAD for the league. Worse than Isiah and his alleged sexual harassment. Worse than the brawl in MSG last year. Worse than the Tim Donaghy scandal. And you know why? None of that stuff has to actually do with the game on the court. For the most part, what draws fans to the league is what happens on the court. And it’s obvious fans don’t enjoy what they see from the Spurs and Tim Duncan on the court.

The Spurs aren’t going to be bad anytime soon, so you might as well get used to them being around for at least the next few seasons. They haven’t ever made the Finals in two straight seasons, so there is still hope for the league in that regard this season. But what if they do make the Finals? What can the league do to mitigate some of their damages?

Well the NBA could start encouraging Tim Duncan to expose more of himself to fans. Duncan in turn could learn to let lose a little bit on the court. As well, the league could follow the lead of Henry Abbott and expose the world to what Tim Duncan is all about.

Before hitting us with that post, Henry made this very on point statement:

Perhaps the greatest problem facing the NBA today is the reality that the best player of the current day, Tim Duncan, is almost entirely unknowable. He can laugh, smile, and tell funny stories. If somehow he could do that for the TV cameras, I suspect America would find a way to adore him. Instead he insists on being "the guy nobody knows all that well" which is something you can't sustain forever. Eventually, people want to know if you're a good guy or a bad guy, and this could be the year people just decide, in the absence of evidence to the contrary (and with a little shove from his teammate, Robert Horry), that he's a bad guy.

It’s up to Duncan to understand this. He needs to understand that as the best player on the league’s best team has to open up a bit. He owes it to the league that has made him a very rich man to expose himself to the world and make himself more marketable.

Duncan is very capable of doing this. I can’t find the video on YouTube, but I recall TNT’s camera’s catching him playing a game of one on one with Tony Parker before the All-Star game a couple of years ago. Duncan had a huge smile on his face and was talking major trash and totally joking around with Tony Parker during the contest. Just think, if Duncan showed more of the world that side of his personality, David Stern and the rest of the league execs probably wouldn’t have the all out heart attack they usually have whenever Duncan and his Spurs make the Finals.

[duncan228]

This thing about Tim Duncan being unknowable strikes me as rather bizarre. Tim shows his personality with great regularity in talking with the media. What nobody seems to get is that in being genuinely modest and humble, in supporting his teammates, and in offering bits of dry humor here and there, Tim has shown himself and has let the world in at least a little bit. There are those who want to believe, apparently, that Tim must be something else and can't understand the reality that Tim's persona isn't bigger-than-life. That Tim doesn't need the spotlight as a form of validation is all the more indicative of his personality. It's that personality that so many apparently dislike; the dislike will change only when Tim chooses to change his personality -- to stray from genuine -- I guess.

The notion that Tim Duncan shows no emotion on the floor strikes me as laughable as well. It's there for those who choose to see it -- this forum is routinely filled with photographs of Tim Duncan showing great emotions on the basketball court. Sometimes (too often, I think) that emotion is frustration with officials, but more frequently than many will realize, it's shown in that face of determination, the look of focus, and the laughs of success. It's also shown in the way that he reacts to his teammates and the way that they react to him -- Tim spends many moments on the floor applauding teammates for their effort or supporting them if something has gone wrong. Those are emotions, too; they're just not the sorts of phony emotions or smack talk that more popular players offer, but they're nonetheless valid emotions.

I think the biggest problem with Tim's detractors is that they don't take the time to see what he offers; that or they've chosen to just dislike what he offers. In any event, the dislike, it seems to me, is on them and not on Timmy. Sustained excellence and an apparent unwillingness to be anything other than genuine have never before been the subject of such ridicule.

First, I had to take a deep breath after I read the blog.
Then I read FWD's post and I immediately felt better.
As always, FWD has put into words so gracefully what I could have only stuttered out due to my reaction to the blog.
Thank you FWD. :toast

The NBA is a business. I get that.
The "average fan" wants entertainment. I get that.

Duncan isn't about business. He's not about entertainment.
He's about the game. And he's about playing and winning the game the right way.

I don't want my kids to emulate Iverson, or the countless others, and think it's cool to have a thug attitude.
I don't want my kids to think that chest thumping is an appropriate response when something goes your way.

I want my kids to understand that being true to yourself and doing whatever it is you do the right way, and the best you can, is what's important.

It's pretty obvious to anyone who's read any of my posts that I think Duncan is the best thing this league has.

It's a shame the NBA can't figure out how to market this man and make the money they want off of a decent role model.

It's on them. Not on Duncan.

[Spurminator]

Unfortunately, the casual fans power the bottom line much more than the die-hards do.


I don't care about the NBA's bottom line any more than I care about NBC's or Arista's or Miramax's.

This is like a music reviewer writing about how Bob Dylan should let Timbaland mix his next album because it would be better for his label.

[Spurminator]

J.D. Salinger should have done more interviews, it would have benefited his publishers a lot more.

[ChumpDumper]

The average fan doesn't realize that the NBA doesn't give as much of a shit about the domestic television market as they do.

Myopic.

[Summers]

It’s up to Duncan to understand this. He needs to understand that as the best player on the league’s best team has to open up a bit. He owes it to the league that has made him a very rich man to expose himself to the world and make himself more marketable.



The irony of this statement cracks me up. Tim should fix what ain't broke.

[SRJ]

I don't care about the NBA's bottom line any more than I care about NBC's or Arista's or Miramax's.

This is like a music reviewer writing about how Bob Dylan should let Timbaland mix his next album because it would be better for his label.

Hey, I'm with you. And if W/L didn't exist, the Phoenix Suns would be the champions, or possibly the Lakers.

[ambchang]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_-JyLBJc-s

[Summers]

This is like a music reviewer writing about how Bob Dylan should let Timbaland mix his next album because it would be better for his label.

That's funny; that's nearly exactly the analogy I was thinking.

[hater]

I stopped reading right here: "When you get down to it, pro basketball--just like all other professional sports--is all about entertainment."

It's not only about entertainment, it is to assemble as good team as possible and to see which of those is the best. So it's a lot more than entertainment.

And1 league is all about entertainment, that dude should be watching that league.

[Summers]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_-JyLBJc-s


:sleep







:lol

[VaSpursFan]

The average fan doesn't realize that the NBA doesn't give as much of a shit about the domestic television market as they do.

Myopic.

agree...the nba gets paid regardless. they have their network deals and i have yet to hear of any sponsors pulling their ads because of shitty ratings. so this argument about bad ratings and the average fan doesn't like boring means nothing to the nba. furthermore, because of the international composition of the team, low domestic ratings are offset by the rabid interest of international fans of each foreign player's home country.

when bad ratings impact the bottom line, that's when you will see some concern from the NBA. until then, bullshit articles like this are moot.

[thispego]

As well, check out the road attendance rankings for the Spurs the last few years. They ranked number 22 this past season, number eight in 2006, number nine in 2005, number ten in 2004, and number eleven in 2003. Along with the Lakers, the Spurs have pretty much been the team of the decade. How is it that a team that has won four titles since 1999 has trouble cracking the top five in road attendance? It’s obvious that people aren't entertained by watching Tim Duncan play.
Hmm, maybe it's because people don't want to pay to see their time trounced by the best team in the league. he's right, that's not entertaining, that's excruciating.

[Galileo]

http://jonesonthenba.blogspot.com/2007/10/tim-duncans-neutrality-more-devastating.html

This article is the biggest pile of bullshit I've ever seen!

The LEAGUE and the MEDIA decide who to promote; they have chosen to promote Shaq, Kobe and Lebron.

Casual fans think the most exciting players are the ones they see promoted on TV, they are like a flock to be fleeced.

Now who is a better role model, Tim Duncan or these characters above?

This is no different than in politics where everybodu knows Ron Paul is the best, but the media rams Obama, Hillary, and Ghouliani down our throats.

Tim Duncan is easy to market; he's great, he wins, he shoots cool banks shots, he rejects opponents shots, he dunks, he's go a COOL last name, he's very intelligent, he's got very interesting hobbies, he's a good interview, etc.

The NBA could also market Tim Duncan to every high school basketball coach in the country, every player, including girls basketball, as the model for fundamentals.

But NO! We get Shaq, Kobe, and Lebron rammed down our throats!

[SRJ]

The Argument that Tim Duncan is bad for the NBA...

...is one of the biggest piece of crap arguments that I've ever heard.

[Demo Dick Marcinko]

I just don't get it and I've never been able to comprehend this ever since the boring label came out for the Spurs, but the Men In Black play some exciting basketball. I just marvel as Tim deftly kisses a shot off the glass and when Tony dances in the lane amongst the trees and makes an impossible shot among the tangle of arms, swinging hands. And then there's the magic that is Manu, doing what only Manu can do. What about Bruce's timely daggers from the corner? Don't some of those just leave you high fiving and chest bumping your grandma?

When Tim, Tony, Manu and Bruce are in the zone they absolutely have me shaking my head in amazement and utter awe and I know that every one of you that watch the Spurs with any regularly will agree with me. So I just don't get it? Explain it to me like I'm stupid.

[Scola Trade]

Pure BS...

[duncan228]

Explain it to me like I'm stupid.

I wish I could.
But I don't get it either.

[SRJ]

I just don't get it and I've never been able to comprehend this ever since the boring label came out for the Spurs, but the Men In Black play some exciting basketball.

I also love it when the Spurs get their passing game going - no team moves it in the half court the way the Spurs do. The way they picked Utah apart in the UCF was jaw-dropping.

[Whisky Dog]

When you become great you get irrational hate. It's a given. People hate Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, and many other players simply because of their success. Some people hate Parker because he's had the single greatest year of anyone alive, and people are starting the irrational hate on Tony Romo because he's proving to be a great diamond in the rough. Is it jealousy? Probably, at least a good part of it.

[Vingianx]

I don't care about the NBA's bottom line any more than I care about NBC's or Arista's or Miramax's.

This is like a music reviewer writing about how Bob Dylan should let Timbaland mix his next album because it would be better for his label.
:clap :clap :clap :clap :clap :clap :clap
fuck the average fan
fuck ESPN because it only wants to attract the average fan with high flying dunks/rough tackles/ball diving plays that are only just a small part of the whole game

because ESPN breeds morons like this ahole who wrote the blog

[bdictjames]

The way they picked Utah apart in the UCF was jaw-dropping.

[SRJ]

Obviously I meant WCF.

[duncan228]

An amusing blog to counteract the ridiculous one.
It asks the question: Who Is Your Favorite Athlete Of All Time?

http://www.epiccarnival.com/2007/10/house-of-mirrors-who-is-your-favorite.html

My favorite athlete of all time is Jesus Christ. He was/will be a stud (again). Now, I know that we don't have any actual proof that Jesus played any sports (Is getting crucified a sport?), but could anybody conceivably be better at anything, let alone sports, than the Son of God? Maybe Tim Duncan, but that's about it. Come to think of it, yes, Tim Duncan is probably better than Jesus at everything. I mean, he's Timothy-frigg'n-Duncan! He's won like, a thousand championship and scored about a billion points! I've changed my mind. Forget Jesus, my favorite athlete of all time is Tim Duncan.

[Walter Craparita]

And paris hilton is good for America.....Wait, IS America.

Duncan 08'

[Dex]

"Don't be who you are. Be who we want you to be."

Yeah, great lesson for the kiddies.

[duncan228]

"Don't be who you are. Be who we want you to be."

Yeah, great lesson for the kiddies.

I can't stand it. :bang

[flipcritic]

Tim Duncan doesn't have to do jack shit but win. And he does it.

[K-State Spur]

i agree with some of his points (not that it's right that people think that way, but they do think that way) - until he says that KG would make the spurs a bigger draw. Does anybody even know anyone who got real excited for a wolves game because KG was playing?

"Man, I can't wait for KG to defer to his teammates in clutch situations!" - is that a common thought around the basketball world?

[ShoogarBear]

1. Somebody remind me what was so fascinating and wonderful about Larry Bird's personality again?

2. If Tim Duncan didn't exist, the same dipshits who complain about how boring Tim's fundamentals are would be complaining just as loudly about the lack of fundamentals in today's stars. They just need something to write about to justify themselves.

[carina_gino20]

blah blah blah :dramaquee

The question isn't whether Tim should show more of his personality. It's whether people are paying attention to him.

If they do, they'd see his personality from the way he works with his teammates and the way he conducts interviews. Laid back, hard worker, has wry sense of humor, etc. The problem is that most probably, people already have this preconceived mold of what an NBA player's personality is. Because Tim doesn't fit that mold, they immediately write him off as boring.

In any case, Tim would probably find this article retarded.

[Obstructed_View]

I have a hard time believing that a Lakers fan wore number 21 in honor of Tim Duncan, particularly during a time where the Lakers and Spurs were contending for championships.

[Holt's Cat]

1. Somebody remind me what was so fascinating and wonderful about Larry Bird's personality again?

He had an illegitimate kid whom he has ignored for just about her entire life:


After his return home from Indiana University and his parents' divorce, Bird married his high-school girlfriend, Janet Condra. The marriage lasted only 11 months, but produced a daughter, Corrie. In 1998, Corrie Bird appeared on The Oprah Winfrey Show and revealed that she was Bird's daughter from his first marriage though Larry had denied paternity until the mid 80's. She discussed her longing to connect with her father, who she hadn't seen in 17 years. Corrie's story was also shown on 20/20 and was run as an article in the September 4, 1998 issue of Sports Illustrated. Corrie, like her father, played basketball in high school and attended Indiana State University, graduating with a degree in elementary education. Corrie invited her father to her college and high school graduation, however, Larry did not attend either. Corrie has not seen her father since he retired from the Celtics. Corrie celebrated her 30th birthday in August 2007 with no card from her father.

Bird met his current wife, Dinah Mattingly, while attending Indiana State. They married in September of 1989 and have two children, an adopted son (Connor)and an adopted daughter (Mariah), though they have never met their half sister Corrie.

wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Bird)



2. If Tim Duncan didn't exist, the same dipshits who complain about how boring Tim's fundamentals are would be complaining just as loudly about the lack of fundamentals in today's stars. They just need something to write about to justify themselves.


http://www.sptimes.com/2003/04/10/photos/nhl-obrientrophy.jpghttp://www.sptimes.com/2003/04/10/photos/nhl-obrientrophy.jpghttp://www.sptimes.com/2003/04/10/photos/nhl-obrientrophy.jpghttp://www.sptimes.com/2003/04/10/photos/nhl-obrientrophy.jpg

These never get boring, even if Mike Lupica says they are so.

[spursfan09]

My definition for somebody being bad for the NBA would be just a tad different. Ok like when one of its main superstars gets accused of raping a girl. Thats bad. Or like an on court fight breaks out in to the stands against the fans. That says bad for the NBA to me. Or what about a player flipping off the crowd after he gets thrown out? Oh but Tim is the problem with today's NBA becuase he's low key. That makes total sense

[Spurminator]

What Fox needs is for The Simpsons to create a new lead character voiced by Dane Cook. That would help increase the ratings and Fox would see more ad revenue.

[ChumpDumper]

The only reason Duncan is bad for the NBA is that he chose to play his entire career in a small market.

[howbouthemspurs]

Tim Duncan is the best thing to happen for the NBA since Micheal Jordan!

[bdubya]

here's the blogger's view:

Wednesday, October 03, 2007
Tim Duncan’s Neutrality: More Devastating to the NBA than Tim Donaghy?


..................The statistics don’t lie. Every year Duncan has been in the Finals, the ratings for the event have fallen from the previous year. However in seasons without Duncan and the Spurs in the Finals, the ratings have always managed to bounce back a bit............ .

So? Switch to topless cheerleaders, and quit whining about "boring" MVPs and teams that win with dominating defense.

[da_suns_fan__]

The only reason Duncan is bad for the NBA is that he chose to play his entire career in a small market.


Yeah...Peyton Manning is having the same problem.

OH WAIT!

[ChumpDumper]

Peyton Manning is great for the NBA.

[da_suns_fan__]

Peyton Manning is great for the NBA.

Ive killed that "small market" excuse numerous times, yet its still always fun to do it again.

:lol

[ChumpDumper]

Except you didn't.

[da_suns_fan__]

Except you didn't.

Really? Well, here here it is AGAIN:

Shaq and Penny were the NBA's biggest stars in the mid-ninetees even though they played in one of the leagues smallest markets (MUCH smaller than San Antonio).

The Rockets/Magic finals four game series drew a much larger rating than the Rockets/Knicks SEVEN game series the year before.

Is Orlando a larger market than New York?

Peyton Manning is the biggest star in the NFL even though he plays in a small market. The NFL just had its second largest viewing of the Superbowl.

Small market is half-ass excuse as to why Duncan and the Spurs are boring. It doesn't hold up to the slightest bit of scrutiny.

[K-State Spur]

Shaq and Penny were the NBA's biggest stars in the mid-ninetees even though they played in one of the leagues smallest markets (MUCH smaller than San Antonio).

Peyton Manning is the biggest star in the NFL even though he plays in a small market. The NFL just had its second largest viewing of the Superbowl.


a) Between 1986-1998 [prime of the jordan era], the Magic-Rockets was still the 3rd LOWEST rated finals series.

b) The NFL is such a completely different animal for TV compared to baseball or basketball that is moronic to bring it even into the debate.

[Mister Sinister]

a) Between 1986-1998 [prime of the jordan era], the Magic-Rockets was still the 3rd LOWEST rated finals series.

b) The NFL is such a completely different animal for TV compared to baseball or basketball that ismoronic to bring it even into the debate.
And that's why da_stupid_fuck brought it in.

[ChumpDumper]

Shaq and Penny were the NBA's biggest stars in the mid-ninetees even though they played in one of the leagues smallest markets (MUCH smaller than San Antonio).Except it's not smaller. The Orlando designated market area is the 19th largest in the US. San Antonio's ranks 37th. So you're either an idiot or a liar or both.

Trying to pass off Peyton Manning as an NBA player is further evidence.

[da_suns_fan__]

a) Between 1986-1998 [prime of the jordan era], the Magic-Rockets was still the 3rd LOWEST rated finals series.

b) The NFL is such a completely different animal for TV compared to baseball or basketball that is moronic to bring it even into the debate.


Who's debating NBA vs NFL? I said Peyton Manning vs. Tim Duncan.

Indianapolis isn't a top 20 market, yet Peyton Manning is far and away its biggest superstar.

It can happen in the NBA as well. See Shaq/Penny.

Does Chris Paul get the "boring" label for playing in the NBA's SMALLEST market?

More garbage from my favorite Texans! :lol

[da_suns_fan__]

And that's why da_stupid_fuck brought it in.


Nice insight, kid.

Go to college.

[Mister Sinister]

Nice insight, kid.

Go to college.
Ooh, ouch. You've burned me good and proper, you have. How *shall* I recover from *such* a biting, wounding statement?

And this coming from the guy who posts on a Spurs board solely for the purpose of trolling and flame-baiting? Ha. That's funny.

[spurs_fan_in_exile]

For being so unmarketable he's certainly got a few Suns fans attention. Who says you can't market this guy outside of San Antonio?

Another thing worth noting is that while Orlando might not be a big market, Houston, the fourth largest city in America, is a big market. This city might be full of band wagon fans but when a team is winning they are certainly all on there.

As far as Tim Duncan goes, I really don't give a fuck what the league needs from him. He plays for the Spurs. He does what the Spurs need him to do. Where this guy really loses me is the KG argument. I've never really found Garnett to be much of a dynamic personality. Barring his bizarre statements about going to war with the Lakers that got so much play I really can't think of anything that really demands a lot of attention. Then again, I also find Kobe and Shaq to be assholes. Maybe I'm the rare case of marketing success for the Duncan camp.

[da_suns_fan__]

For being so unmarketable he's certainly got a few Suns fans attention. Who says you can't market this guy outside of San Antonio?

Another thing worth noting is that while Orlando might not be a big market, Houston, the fourth largest city in America, is a big market. This city might be full of band wagon fans but when a team is winning they are certainly all on there.

As far as Tim Duncan goes, I really don't give a fuck what the league needs from him. He plays for the Spurs. He does what the Spurs need him to do. Where this guy really loses me is the KG argument. I've never really found Garnett to be much of a dynamic personality. Barring his bizarre statements about going to war with the Lakers that got so much play I really can't think of anything that really demands a lot of attention. Then again, I also find Kobe and Shaq to be assholes. Maybe I'm the rare case of marketing success for the Duncan camp.

ONCE AGAIN, how do you explain that Houston/Orlando had a larger rating than Houston/New York in a shorter series where Orlando got swept? Does New York just not CARE about its sports franchises? :lol

[Mister Sinister]

ONCE AGAIN, how do you explain that Houston/Orlando had a larger rating than Houston/New York? Does New York just not CARE about its sports franchises? :lol
Well, they do have the Knicks....Christ, if I lived in NYC and I was an NBA fan, I'd slip into apathy AQAP.

[da_suns_fan__]

Ooh, ouch. You've burned me good and proper, you have. How *shall* I recover from *such* a biting, wounding statement?

And this coming from the guy who posts on a Spurs board solely for the purpose of trolling and flame-baiting? Ha. That's funny.

Im not aware of any centers for higher learning in San Antonio.

How far away is El Paso? I hear U-Tep is a good school.

[Mister Sinister]

Im not aware of any centers for higher learning in San Antonio.

How far away is El Paso? I hear U-Tep is a good school.
Oh, I see what you did there. You think that just because I'm a Spurs fan, I live in SA. I live in Chicago, dipshit.

[da_suns_fan__]

Well, they do have the Knicks....Christ, if I lived in NYC and I was an NBA fan, I'd slip into apathy AQAP.


Can't blame you for being so ignorant...you were, what? SEVEN when this series was happening?

You should educate yourself on Patrick Ewing, John Starks, Charles Oakley, Greg Anthony etc.

[Mister Sinister]

Can't blame you for being so ignorant...you were, what? SEVEN when this series was happening?

You should educate yourself on Patrick Ewing, John Starks, Charles Oakley, Greg Anthony etc.
<Headdesk> I was referring to a slightly more current Knicks roster. I know who the aforementioned players are.

[da_suns_fan__]

Oh, I see what you did there. You think that just because I'm a Spurs fan, I live in SA. I live in Chicago, dipshit.

Chicago, huh?

Then you are the most clueless poster on this forum. You can't hide behind the fact that you live in S.A. and HAVE to cheer for the Spurs or that you only watch because of you allegiance to players from your home country of Argentina.

[ChumpDumper]

Who's debating NBA vs NFL? I said Peyton Manning vs. Tim Duncan.

Indianapolis isn't a top 20 market, yet Peyton Manning is far and away its biggest superstar.In the NFL.


It can happen in the NBA as well. See Shaq/Penny. Orlando is a top 20 market.


Does Chris Paul get the "boring" label for playing in the NBA's SMALLEST market?Nobody watches him on TV enough to know if he's exciting.


More garbage from my favorite Texans! :lolYour obsession continues.

[spurs_fan_in_exile]

ONCE AGAIN, how do you explain that Houston/Orlando had a larger rating than Houston/New York in a shorter series where Orlando got swept? Does New York just not CARE about its sports franchises? :lol
Actually I would attribute it more to the idea of the Rockets bandwagon picking up steam than Orlando's drawing power.

The most marketable thing about Orlando back then was that Penny had a commercial with a puppet voiced by Chris Rock. I suppose if we can get Duncan to shoot some Lil' Fundamental promos the Spurs will top the ratings.

[Mister Sinister]

Chicago, huh?

Then you are the most clueless poster on this forum. You can't hide behind the fact that you live in S.A. and HAVE to cheer for the Spurs or you only watch because of you allegiance to players from your home country of Argentina.
Your stupidity is astounding.

[da_suns_fan__]

In the NFL.

Orlando is a top 20 market.

19. Close enough! :lol


Nobody watches him on TV enough to know if he's exciting.

Ive seen him only four or five times on national tv and I could tell you that he is a VERY exciting player.

[FromWayDowntown]

Tim Duncan is a 4-time champion, a 2-time MVP, a 9-time All-Star, and is considered the dominant player in the game today. All of that is true whether some pinhead blogger (or da_suns_fan__) thinks he's boring.

Scoreboard.

[ChumpDumper]

19. Close enough! :lolWhich is much larger than the #37 market.




Ive seen him only four or five times on national tv and I could tell you that he is a VERY exciting player.But he obviously draws shitty ratings, because he's not on TV much. Therefore, he is boring.

[da_suns_fan__]

Actually I would attribute it more to the idea of the Rockets bandwagon picking up steam than Orlando's drawing power.

The most marketable thing about Orlando back then was that Penny had a commercial with a puppet voiced by Chris Rock. I suppose if we can get Duncan to shoot some Lil' Fundamental promos the Spurs will top the ratings.


So the Houston bandwagon existed in 94 but not in 95?

Shouldn't it be the other way around?

And Houston's "bandwagon" of 95 was enough to draw more viewers than the number one market in the nation? A market three times the size of Houston?

[duncan228]

Tim Duncan is a 4-time champion, a 2-time MVP, a 9-time All-Star, and is considered the dominant player in the game today. All of that is true whether some pinhead blogger (or da_suns_fan__) thinks he's boring.

Scoreboard.

:toast

[ChumpDumper]

sunfan can be obsessed about the Spurs all he wants. We are obviously very exciting to him because he can't stay away from the Spurs message board.

[Spurminator]

Hakeem Olajuwan was unmarketable too. I don't remember that being a problem in 94-95, but I just watched the games back then.

[da_suns_fan__]

Which is much larger than the #37 market.



But he obviously draws shitty ratings, because he's not on TV much. Therefore, he is boring.

Orlando has 700 thousand more television homes than San Antonio.

Orlando/Houston drew over 7 MILLION more television homes than San Antonio/New Jersey.

Market size? Give me a break.

[da_suns_fan__]

Tim Duncan is a 4-time champion, a 2-time MVP, a 9-time All-Star, and is considered the dominant player in the game today. All of that is true whether some pinhead blogger (or da_suns_fan__) thinks he's boring.

Scoreboard.

Don't you mean "the entire nation"?

So EVERYONE else is wrong?

[ChumpDumper]

:lol Thanks for admitting you lied earlier, idiot.

It's obvious the Spurs are very popular with you, so I don't get your argument.

[ChumpDumper]

Orlando has 700 thousand more television homes than San Antonio.So Orlando's market is almost twice the size of San Antonio's.

Thanks for proving my argument.

You've been a great help!

[spurs_fan_in_exile]

So the Houston bandwagon existed in 94 but not in 95?

Shouldn't it be the other way around?

And Houston's "bandwagon" of 95 was enough to draw more viewers than the number one market in the nation? A market three times the size of Houston?
I'm saying that the bandwagon existed in 94, and was bigger in 95. That's typically how bandwagons go. The whole of Houston was likely on board in 94, by 95 you would have had bandwagon fans from across the state of Texas.

Besides, did anyone expect the first finals without Jordan to do big numbers? The league lost an army of front running fans when he stepped out. In 95 the league managed to get some of those fans back through the incredible drawing power of a puppet voiced by Chris Rock.

[da_suns_fan__]

So Orlando's market is almost twice the size of San Antonio's.

Thanks for proving my argument.

You've been a great help!

The real kicker is when you look at the most watched series OF ALL TIME.

Was it Chicago (#3) vs. Lakers (#2)?

NOPE!

Chicago vs Phoenix (#12)?

Nope.

Chicago vs. Seattle (#14)?

Nope.

Chicago vs. Portland (#23)?

Nope.

The most watched series of all time was Chicago vs. Utah (#35.....S.A. is 37).

Just PROVES that America doesn't care about market sizes..they only care about good basketball.


Game over. I win.

[FromWayDowntown]

Don't you mean "the entire nation"?

So EVERYONE else is wrong?

"Everyone else" is irrelevant. Think what they want, but Tim's accomplishments are irrefutable -- and they make him the greatest basketball player of this era.

I'm also surprised, though, that you would claim the "entire nation" is somehow against Tim Duncan when he's been elected by fans to start the All-Star game for the last 8 years (playing in a conference with "popular" forwards) and when his jersey -- which hasn't appreciably changed in at least 5 years -- is still in the top 20 of all jersey sales among all-NBA players. That hardly seems like hatred, dislike, or indifference.

[ChumpDumper]

So the most watched series of all time included the #3 media market's team that just happened to be one of the greatest dynasties in pro sports?

Wow! You really got me there!

:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao

[Spurminator]

I was on a Beyonce Knowles website and this John Mayer fan was whining about how Beyonce should marry Jay-Z because the publicity would be good for Columbia Records.

[ChumpDumper]

sunfan, you prove the popularity of the Spurs with every post.

Thank you for your slavish attention to our team!

[da_suns_fan__]

"Everyone else" is irrelevant. Think what they want, but Tim's accomplishments are irrefutable -- and they make him the greatest basketball player of this era.

I'm also surprised, though, that you would claim the "entire nation" is somehow against Tim Duncan when he's been elected by fans to start the All-Star game for the last 8 years (playing in a conference with "popular" forwards) and when his jersey -- which hasn't appreciably changed in at least 5 years -- is still in the top 20 of all jersey sales among all-NBA players. That hardly seems like hatred, dislike, or indifference.

Your confusing whether or not a player is boring with whether or not a player is "good".

Ive marked Tim Duncan on an all-star ballot. I still find his game boring. No one is questioning whether or not Duncan is a good player.

Im just proving that "market sizes" have absolutely NOTHING to do with his "boring" label.

[ChumpDumper]

Im just proving that "market sizes" have absolutely NOTHING to do with his "boring" label.Except you didn't.

But thanks for all the attention you give our team. You'll be hitting 1000 posts in a week!

[da_suns_fan__]

So the most watched series of all time included the #3 media market's team that just happened to be one of the greatest dynasties in pro sports?

Wow! You really got me there!

:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao


You really are a dumbass.

My point is the greatest dynasty in pro sports drew the most interest when they were playing against their smallest opponent in terms of market sizes.

According to Spurs fans, the only time market sizes matter is when the Spurs are playing.

There is no pattern in terms of viewership and market sizes in any era of the game.

Houston/Orlando drew more viewers than Houston/New York.

Chicago/Utah (same market size as San Antonio) drew more viewers than Chicago/L.A.

The only constant is that when the Spurs are playing, no one watches.

[anakha]

Good Lord. :lol

d_s_f, stick to haikus. At least those somewhat make sense.

[da_suns_fan__]

Good Lord. :lol

d_s_f, stick to haikus. At least those somewhat make sense.

I guess BASIC logic is too tough for the good people of San Antonio.

At least this one.

[Walter Craparita]

Why?

Why does the nation not give a shit about the Spurs?
Parker is exciting to watch, Ginobili is exciting to watch, a TRUE fan of basketball would LOVE watching the defense the Spurs display.

I don't understand it. Don't really care, but I just don't understand it.

[ChumpDumper]

Post Count: 930

[FromWayDowntown]

Your confusing whether or not a player is boring with whether or not a player is "good".

Ive marked Tim Duncan on an all-star ballot. I still find his game boring. No one is question whether or not Duncan is a good player.

Im just proving that "market sizes" have absolutely NOTHING to do with his "boring" label.

And all my original post said is that you can't dispute that Tim Duncan is great. You seem hellbent on conflating greatness with mass appeal.

[Walter Craparita]

Im not aware of any centers for higher learning in San Antonio.

How far away is El Paso? I hear U-Tep is a good school.

Trinity?

[anakha]

I guess BASIC logic is too tough for the good people of San Antonio.

At least this one.

Better than your logic that haikus and Bill Simmons jocking = ownage. :lol

[da_suns_fan__]

Why?

Why does the nation not give a shit about the Spurs?
Parker is exciting to watch, Ginobili is exciting to watch, a TRUE fan of basketball would LOVE watching the defense the Spurs display.

I don't understand it. Don't really care, but I just don't understand it.

http://www.nba.com/games/20070612/SASCLE/boxscore.html

:rolleyes

[ChumpDumper]

Post Count: 932

[Walter Craparita]

http://www.nba.com/games/20070612/SASCLE/boxscore.html

:rolleyes

When they play PHX, Dallas, and ANY OTHER GOOD TEAM they play at a higher level though.

PHX 120 Cavs 70 would be a BORING game to watch I would think.

[da_suns_fan__]

Better than your logic that haikus and Bill Simmons jocking = ownage. :lol


Did someone say Bill Simmons?


Common sense vs. the NBA rulebook
By Bill Simmons
Page 2

As much as I'd love to condemn the NBA higher-ups for ruining the Spurs-Suns series, I can't jeopardize the chances of them fixing the 2007 lottery for my beloved Celtics. We desperately need one of the top two picks or I'm going to develop a serious drinking problem. Those are the stakes. Now, you could argue that a serious drinking problem would inject some much-needed life into my column, and you might even be right. But I'd rather avoid this scenario.

So here's my defense on the NBA's behalf ...

You can't blame them for the Stoudemire-Diaw suspensions because they correctly interpreted a stupid, idiotic, foolish, moronic, brainless, unintelligent, foolhardy, imprudent, thoughtless, obtuse and thickheaded rule. Can you blame them for having that rule in the first place? Yes. But you can't blame them for the actual interpretation -- after all, Stoudemire and Diaw did leave their bench during an altercation, just like Tom Brady's right arm was still coming down as Charles Woodson popped him in the Tuck Rule Game. Everyone knows about the leaving-the-bench rule. It's been around for more than a decade. It's the reason assistant coaches spin around during potential fights and hold their arms out like bouncers at a nightclub. It's the reason a really good Knicks team got bounced from the '97 playoffs (robbing everyone of a much-anticipated Bulls-Knicks Eastern Conference finals). It's also the reason why we haven't had a bench-clearing brawl since the rule was invented.

Here's the problem with that stupid, idiotic, foolish, moronic, brainless, unintelligent, foolhardy, imprudent, thoughtless, obtuse and thickheaded rule: It's currently designed as a black-or-white law that leaves no room for interpretation. As Barkley pointed out on TNT, Stoudemire and Diaw stopped after a few steps and never escalated the situation. In a way, it played out as poorly as the tuck rule did. In that playoff game against the Raiders, Brady pumped the football, brought it back down, got popped by Woodson and coughed up the ball. It should have been a fumble, but because of the stupid, idiotic, foolish, moronic, brainless, unwise unintelligent, foolhardy, imprudent, thoughtless, obtuse and thickheaded way that the tuck rule was designed, the play was interpreted correctly, the Patriots kept the ball and ended up winning in overtime.

The bothersome thing is that both rules should have been changed. After the Pats-Raiders game, the NFL should have softened that rule to leave some degree of interpretation depending on the game and the situation. Same with the NBA after the Knicks-Heat debacle in '97. Why didn't that happen? Because both leagues were so freaking stubborn and took so much heat for those two games, they obstinately kept the exact language of those rules in place. After all, a change of the rules would have been an admission that they failed. And as the old saying goes, those who forget the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them.

Sadly, regretfully, unfortunately, the Stoudemire-Diaw suspensions tainted a successful playoffs and inspired a record-setting number of fans to exhale in disgust, "That's it, I'm finally done with the NBA."

But there's a larger issue that everyone seems to be missing, an issue that keeps popping up during these playoffs in various forms and might be fixable: Namely, that the NBA turned the competitive sport of basketball into something else. It's still basketball, only it's a bastardized version of it. A certain amount of instinct and competitiveness has been compromised. Why? Because of the league's misguided attempt to create a fairy-tale universe in which world-class athletes can play basketball without ever raising their voices, trash-talking, bumping bodies, exulting after a great play or rubbing each other the wrong way.

(You know what? Screw it, I can't defend the NBA. I just can't. If everything you're about to read ends up costing the Celtics a top-two pick, I apologize. Now hold on to your seats ... the pilot just turned off the "Don't hold back" sign.)

Three incidents/story lines from this year's playoffs inadvertently illustrated the deeper dilemma here:

1. Let's say you're one of the best seven players on the Phoenix Suns. You love Nash -- he's your emotional leader, your meal ticket to the Finals, the ideal teammate and someone who makes you happy to play basketball every day for a living. He's killing himself to win a championship. His nose was split open in Game 1. His back bothers him to the point that he has to lie down on the sidelines during breaks. He's battling a real cheap-shot artist (Bruce Bowen) who's trying to shove and trip him on every play. But he keeps coming and coming, and eventually everyone follows suit. Just as things were falling apart in Game 4 and you were staring at the end of your season, he willed you back into the game and saved the day.

Suddenly, he gets body-checked into a press table for no real reason on an especially cheap play. You're standing 20 feet away. Instinctively, you run a few steps toward the guy who did it -- after all, your meal ticket is lying on the court in a crumpled heap -- before remembering that you can't leave your bench. So you go back and watch everything else unfold from there. Twenty-four hours later, you get suspended for Game 5 because your instincts as a teammate kicked in for 1.7 seconds.

Think about how dumb this is. What kind of league penalizes someone for reacting like a good teammate after his franchise player just got decked? Imagine you're playing pickup at a park, you're leading a game 10-3, your buddy is driving for the winning layup, and some stranger clotheslines your buddy from behind and knocks him into the metal pole. Do you react? Do you take a couple of steps toward him? I bet you do. For the NBA to pretend it can create a fairy-tale league in which these reactions can be removed from somebody's DNA -- almost like a chemical castration -- I mean, how stupid is that?

2. One of the running debates of these playoffs: Is Bruce Bowen a cheap player? I love the fact that anyone's actually debating this -- if your answer is "no" or your answer is "I'm not sure," then you've obviously never played basketball in your life. Bruce Bowen is a cheap player. There's no debate. He's not some clumsy power forward who can't stay out of his own way (like Mark Madsen), or even some uncoordinated center who can't remember to keep his elbows near his body (like Shawn Bradley). He's a world-class athlete who has complete control over every inch of his body at all times.

As anyone who's ever played basketball knows, with the exception of clumsy people who probably shouldn't be playing in the first place, there are no accidents on a basketball court. Your feet just don't coincidentally land under someone else's feet as he's shooting a jump shot, and you don't just coincidentally kick someone in the calf as he's going up for a layup or dunk. These things don't just happen. They don't. The only room for error happens when someone's trying to block a fast-break layup or dunk, takes a roundhouse swipe and inadvertently ends up hitting his opponent's head instead of the ball (like we saw with Matt Barnes when he clocked Matt Harpring Tuesday night). When Jason Richardson nails Memo Okur at the end of Game 4 because he's pissed that Okur was driving at the tail end of a guaranteed win, or Baron Davis elbows Derek Fisher in the same game because he's ticked that the Warriors blew a winnable game ... those aren't accidents.

Anyway, for a world-class athlete with exceptional coordination, Bruce Bowen sure seems to have a lot of "accidents." They happen because of his style -- best described as "organized, physical chaos" -- and because he deliberately bends the rules for a competitive advantage. When he was breaking into the league, Bowen played for the Celtics from 1997-99, back when I was living in Boston and attending nearly every game. He was just as good defensively back then -- quicker, even -- but couldn't shoot to save his life (41 percent his first season, 28 percent his second season), and more importantly, he was a soft player. Opponents pushed him around, refs didn't give him any respect, even his own coach (Rick Pitino) screamed at him constantly. Since Bowen seemed like such a nice guy, and he tried so freaking hard, everyone who attended those games found themselves feeling sorry for him. As gifted as he was defensively, I never imagined him making it because of his dreadful shooting and beaten-down, little-kid-getting-picked-on-in-class demeanor. He just needed one person to believe in him ... and Rick Pitino wasn't it.

When he finally made it in San Antonio a few years later, I wasn't shocked because there's always a place in the NBA for someone with a specific skill (whether it's long-range shooting, rebounding, defense or whatever), but I was shocked by his much-improved 3-point shooting (44 percent in 2003?????) and newfound intensity. Watching him hound offensive players was like watching Beecher torment Schillinger after he finally snapped in "Oz." Where did this come from??? Suddenly, Bowen was willing to bend the rules, trip guys as they landed after jump shots, bump them when they weren't looking and basically do anything to get into their heads, all while doing the whole "Wait, I'm in trouble??? What????" routine and pretending to be shocked anytime anyone threatened to kick his ass. Which happens every couple of months. There's no doubt in my mind -- absolutely none -- that at some point between Boston and San Antonio, Bruce Bowen decided to do whatever it took to remain in the NBA. Even if it meant becoming a dirty player.

Now here's where the NBA failed: For a league that professes to be concerned about dirty play and any situation that could lead to a brawl, the league has curiously looked the other way with the single dirtiest player in the league. If he pulled this crap on a pickup court, or even in college intramurals, somebody would have punched Bowen in the face and broken his jaw. In the NBA? He gets to keep doing his thing and putting other players in danger. In the Phoenix series alone, he tripped Stoudemire from behind on a dunk in Game 2, kneed Nash in the groin in Game 3 and tried to knock Nash off balance in Game 4 as they were running back upcourt (causing a frustrated Nash to elbow him in the chops). The league penalizes two Phoenix stars for instinctively running toward an injured teammate, but they don't penalize a perpetually dirty player who's eventually going to trigger an ugly brawl before the end of his career?

How the hell does that make sense?

In the current NBA, you can't commit a hard foul, you can't trash-talk another player, you can't pull your shirt up after a roof-raising dunk, you can't protect a teammate who just got knocked into a press table. We have these rules -- I'm guessing -- because any of those actions can lead to an ugly fight. Ever since the Bad Boys Pistons and Riley's Knicks tried to turn the NBA into the WWF in the late '80s and early '90s, nearly every rule change was created to prevent ugly incidents, even if some of those rule changes compromised the competitiveness of the league in the process. Well, if that's the case, how could the league allow Bruce Bowen to keep running amok with no repercussions? Can you think of a better candidate to trigger an ugly fight some day than Bruce Bowen? Why do they allow him to keep doing what he's doing? Seriously, does the NBA have a clue?

(On second thought, don't answer that.)

3. The single most disgusting NBA development of the past few years? The flopping. Slowly, regretfully, inexplicably, the sport is morphing into soccer -- as exemplified by Kirilenko's swan dive near the end of Tuesday's Jazz-Warriors game that fouled out Matt Barnes, or Kirk Hinrich's perfectly designed flopparoo to draw Chauncey Billups' fourth foul in Detroit Tuesday. I blame the influx of European players for this trend because flopping has always been an acceptable part of soccer; they grew up watching that crap and understood that it could work in basketball as well, especially if you have a group of largely incompetent referees calling the action. So it started a few years ago, it's gotten worse and worse, and now, it's affecting the overall competitiveness of these games.

Here's the problem: Because we don't have any anti-flopping rules, it behooves defenders to fall backward every time a low-post player lowers his shoulder, and it behooves them to slide under airborne players and plant their feet for a charge (even if they might end up breaking the guy's neck in the process). Not to keep bringing up the pickup basketball analogy, but geez ... can you imagine if somebody pulled this crap during a game among friends? The prevailing reactions would be, "What the hell are you doing?" and "If you do that again, I'm gonna sock you." But because the NBA refuses to do anything about the flopping, it's evolved into a savvy defensive maneuver. For instance, if you're Barnes and you're giving up 50 pounds to Boozer on the low post, there's only two ways you're stopping him: Go for a strip if he puts the ball on the ground, or jump backward if he's dumb enough to lower his shoulder as he's turning around. Those are your two options.

Is that basketball? Hell, no! In fact, when I was a little kid -- and I swear to God, this happened -- a guard named Mike Newlin flopped to draw a charge from the great Dave Cowens, a fiery Hall of Famer who played with a remarkable level of passion and fury, to the degree that he burned himself out after 7-8 years. Completely and utterly outraged that Newlin committed such a phony act of sportsmanship, Cowens berated the ref who made the call, yelled at him some more, then started running back on defense when he noticed Newlin dribbling up the court. Now, our seats were at midcourt, so this happened right in front of us and nearly caused me to pee my pants -- as Cowens was running, he snapped and suddenly charged Newlin like a free safety, bodychecked him at full speed (much, MUCH harder than Horry's foul on Nash) and sent poor Newlin careening into the press table at about 35 mph. Then he turned to the same ref and screamed ...

"NOW THAT'S A F------- FOUL!"

Did Cowens get kicked out of the game? Of course. But there's a moral to the story. Once upon a time, these guys had a code of honor. They played hard, respected the game, defended their teammates, and if anyone stepped out of line, there was always someone that would take care of them -- whether it was another player, a referee, a coach or whatever. When fights or altercations happened, they were considered natural side effects of a physical sport. When two players talked smack, it was considered a good thing, a sign that the game was heating up, that we were potentially headed for a more competitive place.

In fact, during the golden era of the NBA (1984-1993), three of the most inspired/famous/memorable moments, in retrospect, were McHale's clothesline of Rambis in the '84 Finals, MJ standing over Ewing after a hard foul and swearing at him in the '92 playoffs, and Parish getting fed up with Bill Laimbeer's crap, taking justice into his own hands and clocking him in Game 5 of the '87 playoffs. Why do those moments still resonate? Because there was a level of competitiveness back then that doesn't exist anymore -- it's been beaten out of these guys, partly because the league has been terrified of another Kermit Washington moment for 30 years, partly because the "SportsCenter" era (where we show the same highlight six million times and pretend to be appalled) made the decision-makers too skittish (to the degree that Carmelo Anthony was suspended for 15 games for slapping another player).

Personally, I don't believe Kermit's punch could happen again -- it was the perfect storm of an NBA brawl, a powerful 6-foot-9 guy whirling around during a fight, then delivering a perfect straight right (seriously, that was like the right that Tommy Hearns threw to drop Roberto Duran) to the face of a peacemaker (Rudy Tomjanovich) who was running toward him at full speed and forgot to protect himself. Kermit's punch was a complete fluke. Repeat: a complete fluke. And yet, every decision made in the past 30 years keeps coming back to that one punch; it's the equivalent of a NASCAR driver dying after an accident that started because of one driver bumping another jumper from behind, followed by NASCAR banning bumping and completely removing that element from the sport.

In other words, it would be a complete overreaction. You know, kind of like the Stoudemire/Diaw suspension.

So don't blame the NBA higher-ups for the way they interpreted that stupid, idiotic, foolish, moronic, brainless, unintelligent, foolhardy, imprudent, thoughtless, obtuse and thickheaded rule. Blame them for having the rule itself. Blame them for allowing the league to morph into something that doesn't quite resemble basketball anymore. Blame them for a league in which basketball players aren't totally allowed to think and act like basketball players and teammates aren't totally allowed to think and act like teammates. Blame them for an ongoing double standard in which the Bruce Bowens of the league can willfully endanger other players, but a roundhouse swipe on an attempted block can get someone ejected if they miss by a scant 10 inches while moving at full speed. Blame them for dubious officiating that's compromised the playoffs to the degree that an increasing number of fans are wondering where the WWE ends and the NBA begins.

And speaking of blame ... if you want to skip tonight's Game 5 between the Suns and Spurs, I can't blame you.

[ChumpDumper]

Simmons is still bitter the Celtics tank job didn't get them Duncan.

[anakha]

Why?

Why does the nation not give a shit about the Spurs?
Parker is exciting to watch, Ginobili is exciting to watch, a TRUE fan of basketball would LOVE watching the defense the Spurs display.

I don't understand it. Don't really care, but I just don't understand it.


http://www.nba.com/games/20070612/SASCLE/boxscore.html

:rolleyes

Rhetorical Question

Definition:
A question asked merely for effect with no answer expected.

Yeesh, I guess reading comprehension eludes you. Actually, comprehension in general eludes you. :lol

[anakha]

Did someone say Bill Simmons?

*watches the point go sailing completely over dumbass_suns_fan's head*

[Spurminator]

Man I think James Taylor is incredibly boring, but you don't see me sitting outside of James Taylor concerts going "BOOOOOOORING."

[da_suns_fan__]

Anakha.......youre embarrassing Spurs fans right now. Everyone else wants to say it, but they feel bad for you.

I got some more of Bill's best suff if youre interested!
:lol

[anakha]

Man I think James Taylor is incredibly boring, but you don't see me sitting outside of James Taylor concerts going "BOOOOOOORING."

I think that's a little subtle for d_s_f to understand. You might want to spell it out for him. :lol

[ChumpDumper]

http://music.yahoo.com/ar-266172-messages--James-Taylor

[anakha]

Anakha.......youre embarrassing Spurs fans right now. Everyone else wants to say it, but they feel bad for you.

I got some more of Bill's best suff if youre interested!
:lol

No more an embarrassment than you are to actual logic users everywhere. :lol

[spurs_fan_in_exile]

Man I think James Taylor is incredibly boring, but you don't see me sitting outside of James Taylor concerts going "BOOOOOOORING."
No, that sounds like a job for da_peter_paul_and_mary_fan.

[da_suns_fan__]

http://music.yahoo.com/ar-266172-messages--James-Taylor

Here's where anakha claims "the point went right over your head", chumpdumper.

[ChumpDumper]

Here's where anakha claims "the point went right over your head", chumpdumper.Quite possible.

[anakha]

Here's where anakha claims "the point went right over your head", chumpdumper.

d_s_f in a battle of comprehension and wit?

Exercise in futility. :lol

[ChumpDumper]

I was just giving Spurminator an opportunity to make his feelings known.

I certainly don't expect him to post there 1000 times. Only true fans would stick around that long and post that much.

[Spurminator]

http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/2212/jtaylorsiteak5.jpg

[ChumpDumper]

:lmao

[Holt's Cat]

If you are worried about a player being "unmarketable" you probably like dick in your ass.

[SRJ]

Who's debating NBA vs NFL? I said Peyton Manning vs. Tim Duncan.

Logic, da_suns_fan__ style.

[TheAuthority]

Let's not kid ourselves, Duncan the person isn't half as great as Duncan the player. People say Kobe is aloof and might be correct to assume that, I believe Duncan is a lot worse than he is, just judging by what I've seen from the 2.

[K-State Spur]

The most watched series of all time was Chicago vs. Utah (#35.....S.A. is 37).

Just PROVES that America doesn't care about market sizes..they only care about good basketball.


Or...they just cared about Jordan when - at the time - it looked like it would be his final basketball.

It also helps that 1998 was right before cable TV started scavenging the ratings of every network.

That people still use the Nielsens today to compare to shows back in the 80s and up to the late 90s makes about as much sense as comparing a P-51 to an F-15.

[duncan228]

Let's not kid ourselves, Duncan the person isn't half as great as Duncan the player. People say Kobe is aloof and might be correct to assume that, I believe Duncan is a lot worse than he is, just judging by what I've seen from the 2.

Duncan aloof?

I watch Duncan like a hawk, I have for years.
Aloof is not a word I would use for him.

If you pay any attention to him, both on and off the court (interviews, press conferences, etc.), you'll find Duncan warm, articulate, funny and quite approachable.
I've rarely seen him be curt with reporters, even when they cross a line with him.

The expected retort: Because Duncan prefers to live his personal life off court out of the spotlight, people assume he's boring, and now aloof.
Because he doesn't chest thump, or have a police record, people assume there's nothing there worth knowing. Or that he has an attitude.

Look closer.

For as much as you can "know" a pro athlete, or any public person living in a fishbowl, Duncan the person seems to me to be just as great as Duncan the player.
He's personally involved in his Foundation, gives his time as well as his money, to bereaved children, breast and prostrate cancer patients, and has a Character Program for school kids. I don't live in SA and I can see how involved he is in the community. (His Foundation also has programs where he grew up and where he went to college.)

What you see is what you get with Duncan. No pretenses, no showmanship.
Down to earth, "over himself" as Pop says.

Is that aloof?

[da_suns_fan__]

Or...they just cared about Jordan when - at the time - it looked like it would be his final basketball.

It also helps that 1998 was right before cable TV started scavenging the ratings of every network.

That people still use the Nielsens today to compare to shows back in the 80s and up to the late 90s makes about as much sense as comparing a P-51 to an F-15.


Dumbass......what does cable have to do with the fact that the Bulls/Jazz out-drew the Bulls/Lakers? Neither were after your suppposed cable tv "epidemic". Although everyone I know had cable tv before 98.

My point was, AGAIN, the market sizes have absolutely no effect on the ratings. Smaller market teams have CONSISTENTLY outdrew their larger market counterparts.

[Mister Sinister]

Dumbass......what does cable have to do with the fact that the Bulls/Jazz out-drew the Bulls/Lakers? Neither were after your suppposed cable tv "epidemic". Although everyone I know had cable tv before 98.

My point was, AGAIN, the market sizes have absolutely no effect on the ratings. Smaller market teams have CONSISTENTLY outdrew their larger market counterparts.
http://masklinnscans.free.fr/4chan/Demotivators/failure_2.jpg
Keep this up and you'll be getting the SOEF.

[ChumpDumper]

Smaller market teams have CONSISTENTLY outdrew their larger market counterparts.:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao

This gets better and better.

[da_suns_fan__]

:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao

This gets better and better.


The Numbers don't lie bro.

[Ronaldo McDonald]

lets face it. he's boring.

[shelshor]

**YAWN** Training camp opens and we get a Duncan-Is-Boring story
What's the o/u on how long 'til the next one? 12 days?

[ChumpDumper]

So you compare two finals series where one of the teams in both is the third largest market in the US and claim it as evidence that small market teams consistently outdraw large ones.

:lmao again.

It gets funnier every time I think about it!

[ChumpDumper]

Since Chicago is a constant in both series, your brilliant theory is that the Utah Jazz consistently outdraws the Los Angeles Lakers on national TV.

This is what you are saying.

This is your solemn belief.

:shootme

[Ronaldo McDonald]

The big market small market argument is retarded. people want emotion and controversy surrounding the players and teams and spurs are just lacking in thhat aspect.

They stand for the exact things that sports in general is against - intelligence and self-control.

[nfg3]

FWD and Duncan228 - excellant points made. As a Spurs fan I could care less what the average fan wants and/or needs. But it's pretty sad to see that the game and how to play it the "right way" is secondary to the average fan. Once again we are back to the style over substance issue. And we all know how that one plays out across this country.

[ChumpDumper]

2007-08 national appearances for the teams sunfan used in his example:

LA Lakers (first round loser and completely unimproved in the offseason) -- 36

Utah Jazz (young Western Conference finalist that seemingly can only get better) -- 14


The Numbers don't lie bro.Indeed, they do not.

[ShoogarBear]

Bowen = "dirty"

Cowens = "fiery, passionate"

Simmons = "complete full of Boston shit"

[Mister Sinister]

Ratings = "important"

[Obstructed_View]

Sunsfan = "reaching" + "unoriginal"

[da_suns_fan__]

2007-08 national appearances for the teams sunfan used in his example:

LA Lakers (first round loser and completely unimproved in the offseason) -- 36

Utah Jazz (young Western Conference finalist that seemingly can only get better) -- 14

Indeed, they do not.


Unbelievable. You want to talk about national tv appearances for the upcoming season now?

What the hell are you even talking about?

How many time are the Knicks on national TV this year? They're the largest market so they should get the most appearances according to you.

And what the hell does the popularity of the current Jazz team have to with the Stockton and Malone team from 1998?!! The current Jazz team has almost as big of a boring rep as the Spurs!

If the Bulls played the Jazz in the finals next year, would you expect the same ratings numbers from 1998? Why not? Its the exact same MARKET SIZES! People didn't watch because Chicago is a large market, they watched because Jordan vs Stockton/Malone was good basketball.

The fact remains that the ONLY times the NBA has had to make excuses for lackluster viewing has been when the Spurs were in the finals. And as I have shown, market sizes don't affect the ratings. Other smaller market teams like the Jazz and the Magic have proven it. The nation just finds the Spurs boring.

Game. Set. Match. :lol

[duncan228]

da_suns_fan_=ignore feature

[ChumpDumper]

Unbelievable. You want to talk about national tv appearances for the upcoming season now?

What the hell are you even talking about?37 > 14. Numbers don't lie.


How many time are the Knicks on national TV this year? They're the largest market so they should get the most appearances according to you.11, which is obviously wildly out of proportion to any success they have had or could have this season. Why? Because you're an idiot.


And what the hell does the popularity of the current Jazz team have to with the Stockton and Malone team from 1998?!! The current Jazz team has almost as big of a boring rep as the Spurs!Except they don't.
Same system they've had for 20 years.


da_suns_fan__

Post Count: 939You own yourself with every post.

:lmao :lmao :lmao

The Spurs are obviously very popular with you!

Thank you for your continued support!

[ChumpDumper]

And why is the network television popularity of some other team so vitally important to you personally?

Why are you so obsessed with the Spurs that you have to post here 1000 times?

[Dex]

I think the reason Tim Duncan gets this label is because outside of the Spurs fanbase, people generally aren't rooting for him. Sure, they may appreciate what he brings to the game and agree he's one of the best players on the court, but there are still 29 other teams people are out there rooting for. And if that team isn't the San Antonio Spurs, then I'm sure Tim Duncan probably bugs the fuck out of some people.

I guess the best comparison I can draw is with Shaq. Albeit for different reasons altogether, Shaq has that quality to his game that makes it look ridiculously easy for him. He just bangs inside, bobbles up some ridiculous fling, and scores more often than not. Back when the Lakers were out taking numbers, it used to downright piss me off sometimes to watch Shaq just have his way inside, even though it looks like he isn't even trying.

Tim Duncan has the same quality, but with finesse instead of force. Everything he does looks completely simplified, and it's why he is one of the best power forwards to ever play. At the same time though, all of those drop steps and hooks and bank shots we've come to love and count on...Those are the bane of fans for twenty-nine other teams who have been stuck on the outside looking in every other year for the past decade. This guy just goes out there, cleans up his 20-10, and usually goes home a winner.

Sure, we all admire and appreciate the true Tim Duncan, because he's leading our team. And time will appreciate him well, because history doesn't pick favorites. As for everybody else, I don't expect them to give him the benefit of the doubt when it comes to his personality. And he shouldn't have to mold it to fit their perspective.

To them, he can just keep on being that guy burying them 2-11 times a year.

[duncan228]

And he shouldn't have to mold it to fit their perspective.


Your entire post was great.

This is the bottom line.

[toosmallshoes]

I tend to agree with the writer. The Spurs are boring. they fill ME with excitement, but I think the rest of the country just yawns. Tim would do the NBA a great service if he made himself a little more personable. Did a few commercials. Maybe even make fun of himself and dress up as Spock. Why not? If he doesn't want the money, he could donate it to charity.

[RussN]

Unbelievable. You want to talk about national tv appearances for the upcoming season now?

What the hell are you even talking about?

How many time are the Knicks on national TV this year? They're the largest market so they should get the most appearances according to you.

And what the hell does the popularity of the current Jazz team have to with the Stockton and Malone team from 1998?!! The current Jazz team has almost as big of a boring rep as the Spurs!

If the Bulls played the Jazz in the finals next year, would you expect the same ratings numbers from 1998? Why not? Its the exact same MARKET SIZES! People didn't watch because Chicago is a large market, they watched because Jordan vs Stockton/Malone was good basketball.

The fact remains that the ONLY times the NBA has had to make excuses for lackluster viewing has been when the Spurs were in the finals. And as I have shown, market sizes don't affect the ratings. Other smaller market teams like the Jazz and the Magic have proven it. The nation just finds the Spurs boring.

Game. Set. Match. :lol

I wish u would write more, then people might read it, da suns fan sucks! has NOTHING insightful to say since I have been here (a year or so) thanks for coming out

[=RTM=]

=Wilt Chamberland was no stand up comedian, and Larry Bird was about as entertaining as watching coach pop take a shower. Are they not both in the Hall of fame?=

[duncan228]

I tend to agree with the writer. The Spurs are boring. they fill ME with excitement, but I think the rest of the country just yawns. Tim would do the NBA a great service if he made himself a little more personable. Did a few commercials. Maybe even make fun of himself and dress up as Spock. Why not? If he doesn't want the money, he could donate it to charity.

Duncan does commercials...locally in SA. For his community. HEB, Gunn (I'm not sure if he's done Gunn lately.) I believe the $ does go into his Foundation.

He dressed up as a cruixan shaman at the Spurs tip-off luncheon last year.

He does adidas commercials and sometimes print ads.

It's not on Duncan to "do the NBA a great service."

It's on the NBA to figure out how to market a great player who generally lets his game speak for him.

[Borosai]

Timmay is fine doing what he's doing now, but I think it would be hilarious to see him doing Peyton Manning style commercials.

[Roxsfan]

This is typical kind of bullshit that Tim Duncan doesnt have to respond to. It is not Tim Duncan's Fault that the average fan thinks he is boring. It is the NBA's and the medias fault for their constant glamouration of flashy players and dunks. That is the only thing they show in sportcenter and NBA.com. They stuff all this irrelevent crap down our throats that when a player like Tim Duncan is the regular on the TV screens like he was in all his Finals apperances, the expectations for high flying theatrics is quickly subsided and the channels are changed. Tim Duncan doesnt care about what everybody thinks and he shouldnt have too. I think his game is pure and is really entertaining to watch. It is funny how people these days are so easily mongered by the perceptions of the media.


+1

Duncan is a badazz and anyone who disagrees is just jealous, fans of other teams or media alike.
http://www.memoram.com/Tim_Duncan.jpg

[duncan228]

The YouTube link of Duncan's Cruxian Shaman:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcgLtc7deY4

He does have and does show a great personality.

[Walter Craparita]

I love how DSF thinks we care about the rest of the country and ratings.

Hmmm TD or Black jesus...yeah that's a real fucking hard decision lmfao.

[inconvertible]

He's good for the San Antonio Spurs and that's all I care about.


the best stament I have ever heard about this shit......

right on :toast

[phyzik]

And why is the network television popularity of some other team so vitally important to you personally?

Why are you so obsessed with the Spurs that you have to post here 1000 times?

[phyzik]

Old article but a good one.

By Mike Lopresti, Gannett News Service
SAN ANTONIO — First, the list of grievances so many grumble about the modern NBA, wishing it could still be yesterday.
There should be more character and more defense. Players with a stronger sense of family and team. Professionals who win professionally, without the grating noise of me-first egotists.

"All of those things," Brent Barry said, "are happening every day in San Antonio."

So why isn't everyone head-over-sneakers in love with the Spurs, of which Barry is one?

A few more good nights against the Cleveland Cavaliers, and they will have their fourth title in nine years. This dignified dynasty, without the trappings. "A different beast," LeBron James called them.

They are nobody's darlings outside their own domain. You get the feeling that the networks and league still miss the old Lakers and Celtics and Bulls. The public at large feels so strangely distant from San Antonio, it does not even hate the Spurs (except maybe in Phoenix), which our talk-show society tends to do when a team wins too much.

Is it as simple as market size and sports stature? This is the largest city in the country without a major league or Class AAA baseball team. Among the championship banners hanging in AT&T Center are two celebrating 2005 and 2006. Rodeos of the year.

Is this what the epicenter of the basketball universe is supposed to look like? Would the players be national immortals if this were Los Angeles or New York?

The Spurs don't know. The Spurs don't care. Offer sympathy for their lack of renown, and you find they do not want it.

"The fly-under-the-radar question," Tim Duncan all but sighed when the issue was brought forth the other day. "It doesn't matter to us."

"They sort of relish the fact it's all happening right here in this small little market," Barry said. "There's maybe a little smirk on the coach's face and the organization's face that we're doing it quietly and we're enjoying it, and that's all that counts."

But to simply dismiss the phenomenon is to miss how unconventional and special this is — San Antonio as capital of a dynasty, the Spurs as its unassuming creators.

"When I first came here, as a city, we had a lot of growing up to do," retired Spur David Robinson said the other night, standing outside the locker room before Game 1. "Now when you say San Antonio in Russia, people have heard of it. The Spurs have had a little to do with it."

Without basketball, San Antonio's claims to fame are an amazingly small landmark of a lost battle ("That's it?" is not an uncommon tourist response at first sight of the Alamo), and a swath of river through downtown bordered by sidewalks and dozens of restaurants, eager to contribute to a recent Men's Fitness magazine study that proclaimed this the second fattest city in America.

Destiny, however, gave San Antonio these Spurs.

The franchise was not only lucky to get top lottery picks to draft Robinson and Duncan, but was blessed that both not only happened to be great, but were of the personality that would make them so comfortable here.

Try to imagine Kobe Bryant a San Antonio lifer. Can't be done.

"It's irrelevant how people hold us up or don't hold us up, or talk about us or don't talk about us," coach Gregg Popovich said. "It's got nothing to do with real life."

For real life, turn right out of the AT&T Center parking lot, go past the Rio Grande Cafi and D's tattoos and the funeral parlor on the way toward downtown. A mile or so, and there it is at 217 Robinson Place.

The Carver Academy. A school to inspire city children to academic achievement. David and Valerie Robinson contributed $11 million to build it. He has stayed after retirement to watch over it. Plus, "be a father and a husband."

That, too, is a legacy of the Spurs. Just like the rings and the trophies.

Must aura come from being flashy or controversial or a statistical machine or big city? Can it not come from Duncan's airtight fundamentals or Bruce Bowen's willingness to do the dirty work of defense? "I came up old school," Bowen was saying Friday. "If you didn't play D, you didn't get on the floor."

Can it not come from unified purpose? "It feels like a little family here," Tony Parker said.

That is what must be decided about the Spurs, even if they themselves want no part of the debate. They do not count Nielsen ratings, endorsement deals, network appearances or popularity polls. They count titles.