OKC DESTROYS Spurs' "small market" excuse

[da_suns_fan]

1-Small Market

2-Stars aren't media friendly marketable intentionally.

3-Not American Born.

Don't agree? Let TP tell you himself. Tony Parker explains it best.

http://www.slamonline.com/online/nba...-that-respect/


http://blog.mysanantonio.com/spursna...-conversation/

1 - Yet you claimed that Jordan merely being in the conference finals (but not the NBA finals) was enough to get any small market team a good rating. Btw - this has to be the dumbest theory Ive ever read on this board. Dont believe me? Ask your Spurs fan buddies.

2. Stars are INTENTIONALLY non-marketable?!!! They CHOOSE to be boring?!! Well that explains the small rating then, huh? Dont have to use the "Small market excuse" when you say "our players are intentionally boring". This is complete bull as well, btw.

3. Tim Duncan is American. Dirk Nowitzki is not. Ive never heard Dirk called "Boring". He shreds the "international players cant be stars" argument. Sorry to bust your bubble, but its true.

btw - The Thunder have Serge Ibaka. They have international players too yet they have no trouble getting ratings.


Oh - And as for Tony Tunrover's quote, he sounds pretty butt hurt to me. Im pretty sure if the exact same Spurs team was in New York, folks across the country would continue to not watch.

Keep grasping at different straws. Keep bringing the different excuses (market size, Jordan's location, place of birth, boring by choice etc). Each one from you gets worse and worse. I thought the "Jordan was in the conference finals" excuse for why Orlando got a good rating was bizarre but the "we choose to be boring" is now number one in the "man in black bull excuses for low ratings".

[Man In Black]

1 - Yet you claimed that Jordan merely being in the conference finals (but not the NBA finals) was enough to get any small market team a good rating. Btw - this has to be the dumbest theory Ive ever read on this board. Dont believe me? Ask your Spurs fan buddies.

Sigh...can't believe you are THIS DUMB AS .
The 95 Finals benefited having Jordan back in the NBA. That is why a HOU-ORL finals drew more than the 94 Finals which had No Jordan at all. Did the graph and the facts not tell you that? I mean ...it's a fact, that's why it was analyzed and explained exactly that way. I didn't make that up...It happened like that. That's the way the author explained it did he not? You are DUMB AS . Did you not read the article?

You asked my Spursfan peers here. It's no wonder they haven't given you an answer because you're DUMB AS .

2. Stars are INTENTIONALLY non-marketable?!!! They CHOOSE to be boring?!! Well that explains the small rating then, huh? Dont have to use the "Small market excuse" when you say "our players are intentionally boring". This is complete bull as well, btw.

No...San Antonio's Stars are intentionally not media-friendly. While they may suffer from lost endorsements because of not being media friendly, they don't give a it that makes them non-marketable. Whatever becomes of anything after that, is made up bull by the media partners of the NBA. Call them boring all you want. It doesn't change the fact that they whupped the Suns asses multiple times on the way to multiple championships.

3. Tim Duncan is American. Dirk Nowitzki is not. Ive never heard Dirk called "Boring". He shreds the "international players cant be stars" argument. Sorry to bust your bubble, but its true.

Is Tim really an American? Yes, but is that how the NBA and the media partners see it? Well let's see. The NBA actually has a definition for what they term is an International Player.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...gn_NBA_players

The following is a list of foreign players in the National Basketball Association (NBA). The NBA defines an "international player" as a player who was born outside the United States. The "United States" is defined as solely the fifty U.S. states and the District of Columbia. Therefore, players who were born in U.S. overseas territories, such as Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands and Guam, are considered as international players, even though they are U.S. citizens

...there it is again. In black and white. Tim is listed as an International.

About Dirk...up until he finally got the chip, he was boring and had no ring. We called him NORINGSKI for that same reason. Last finals, the enemy was the MIAMI Heat and between either team, it was much easier for one to back Dallas than the hated Miami Heat.

btw - The Thunder have Serge Ibaka. They have international players too yet they have no trouble getting ratings.

So are you saying that Serge is now a bigger draw than Americans named Durant, Westbrook, and Harden? Is that what you're saying?

Oh - And as for Tony Tunrover's quote, he sounds pretty butt hurt to me. Im pretty sure if the exact same Spurs team was in New York, folks across the country would continue to not watch.

The guy said it not once, but twice. It got published and printed. He's the player, telling you, telling us, telling everybody...that he feels that him being an International AND playing in small market San Antonio is a principal reason that him and his team don't get respect. In black and white, he tells you...yet in a show of your full-on stupidity, you choose to disregard Tony Parker.

...you can't be this dumb. But the more we read your responses, all doubt is easily removed.

Keep grasping at different straws. Keep bringing the different excuses (market size, Jordan's location, place of birth, boring by choice etc). Each one from you gets worse and worse. I thought the "Jordan was in the conference finals" excuse for why Orlando got a good rating was bizarre but the "we choose to be boring" is now number one in the "man in black bull excuses for low ratings".

I can't believe you don't have any sort of reading comprehension. AZ Schools can be that bad. I mean I went to school in Arizona so it can't be the system there. It must be simply that YOU...YOU are truly this dumb. Your intelligence level matches a garbage pail. It's appropriate, because you're nothing but trash.

fuk you and yo team clown

[Man In Black]

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/201...l-data/137404/

Updated to include last year's stats. Disprove the author.

[temujin]

1 - Yet you claimed that Jordan merely being in the conference finals (but not the NBA finals) was enough to get any small market team a good rating. Btw - this has to be the dumbest theory Ive ever read on this board. Dont believe me? Ask your Spurs fan buddies.

2. Stars are INTENTIONALLY non-marketable?!!! They CHOOSE to be boring?!! Well that explains the small rating then, huh? Dont have to use the "Small market excuse" when you say "our players are intentionally boring". This is complete bull as well, btw.

3. Tim Duncan is American. Dirk Nowitzki is not. Ive never heard Dirk called "Boring". He shreds the "international players cant be stars" argument. Sorry to bust your bubble, but its true.

btw - The Thunder have Serge Ibaka. They have international players too yet they have no trouble getting ratings.


Oh - And as for Tony Tunrover's quote, he sounds pretty butt hurt to me. Im pretty sure if the exact same Spurs team was in New York, folks across the country would continue to not watch.

Keep grasping at different straws. Keep bringing the different excuses (market size, Jordan's location, place of birth, boring by choice etc). Each one from you gets worse and worse. I thought the "Jordan was in the conference finals" excuse for why Orlando got a good rating was bizarre but the "we choose to be boring" is now number one in the "man in black bull excuses for low ratings".

Please mention that the TV ratings in Congo are also WAY up.
And in Switzerland, for that matter. Chance is, they even have TVs, in Switzerland, and I am sure they will wake up in the middle of the night to watch this guy Sefaloscha.
So exciting to have OKC-Miami, not the boring Spurs with their small market stars in Argentina-France.

[da_suns_fan]

Sigh...can't believe you are THIS DUMB AS .
The 95 Finals benefited having Jordan back in the NBA. That is why a HOU-ORL finals drew more than the 94 Finals which had No Jordan at all. Did the graph and the facts not tell you that? I mean ...it's a fact, that's why it was analyzed and explained exactly that way. I didn't make that up...It happened like that. That's the way the author explained it did he not? You are DUMB AS . Did you not read the article?

Heres what you dont get: EVEN if that were true, that would mean market sizes dont matter.

You see, if Jordan's mere presence is enough to make that much difference, then market sizes are truly negligible. I know this because the market size difference between Orlando and New York is huge.

You are claiming is that market sizes matter and Orlando/New York WOULD have had a much, much, much lower rating than New York/Houston except that Jordan was in the playoffs that year and that compensated (and then some) for the small Orlando market size.


Show me in your link where is says THAT. It doesnt, because its the dumbest thing Ive ever read. The "Author" claims that both 94 AND 95 had low ratings because of NO JORDAN. Obviously, reading comprehension eludes you:

During Jordan's minor league baseball excursion years of 1994 & 1995, the Hakeem Olajuwon lead Houston Rockets didn't have nearly the star power and ratings crashed again.

Thats the only mention of 1995 in your entire article.

Now either show me where the author explains why 1995 was better than 1994 or admit that you are wrong.

You wont, but I thought I'd throw it out there. Youve already embarrassed the out of yourself.

[Frank Dux]

Five years later duh_suns_fan is still obsessing over the Spurs...and still talking about ratings.

[da_suns_fan]

Ranking of nba team market sizes
based on conglomerate urban area population of home cities

1. Knicks/Nets 22,232,000
3. Lakers/Clippers 17,820,000
5. Bulls 9,804,000
6. Celtics 7,609,000
7. Warriors 7,427,000
8. Mavericks 6,805,000
9. 76'ers 6,533,000
10. Rockets 5,968,000
11. Hawks 5,831,000
12. Heat 5,547,000
13. Raptors 5,500,000
14. Wizards 5,400,000
15. Pistons 5,327,000
16. Suns 4,364,000
17. Timberwolves 3,604,000
18. Nuggets 3,110,000
19. Cavs 2,891,000
20. Magic 2,747,000
21. Kings 2,436,000
22. Bobcats 2,389,000
23. Blazers 2,241,000
24. Spurs 2,072,000
25. Pacers 2,064,000
26. Bucks 1,760,000
27. Jazz 1,743,000
28. Grizzlies 1,304,000
29. Thunder 1,297,000
30. Hornets 1,235,000

Yet what Man in Black is claiming is that

A) Market sizes matter

B) Orlando got a bigger rating than New York (despite the fact that New York is TEN TIMES the size of Orlando) because Jordan played in the eastern conference finals.

Cant make this up.

[PublicOption]

I think we were the small market "token". OKC is that now and since they have Durant and Westbrook the "small market token" label has been passed. Not by OKC, but David Stern.

[rascal]

Star power over rides market size, but market size comes into play.

New teams with their first trip to the finals with super star players will draw interest.

[Man In Black]

Yet what Man in Black is claiming is that

A) Market sizes matter

B) Orlando got a bigger rating than New York (despite the fact that New York is TEN TIMES the size of Orlando) because Jordan played in the eastern conference finals.

Cant make this up.

You conveniently seem to leave out the A size attraction. Houston is where on this list?
Number 10 market plus they were going for a repeat. But again, it needs to be made clear that Jordan helped bring casual fan back.
Again... link provided for proof.
partners.nytimes.com/library/sports/basketball/011399bkn-jordan-tv.html

-- The finals with Jordan always beat the finals without him. The six
won by Chicago have ranged in ratings from a 14.2 to an 18.7. The
championships won by the Houston Rockets in 1994, when Jordan
retired to play baseball, and 1995, when Jordan played a partial
season, produced ratings of a 12.3 and a 13.9.
"I'd be crazy to say that there weren't a large number of people who
watched the finals just because of Michael," said Ebersol, who never
regretted showing Jordan as often as possible. "Did 'Wide World of
Sports' show Muhammad Ali too much in the 1960s? It's what the
public wants."

Having again proven my point, it behooves me yet again to point out that it just isn't the Jordan effect. Although there are many articles that OP could have simply googled to learn about it,he continues to say Jordan wasn't a factor for the 95 Finals. About market size, NY metro will always be the largest DMA aka Designated Market or Media Area. You saying that had Tim, Tony, Manu and the players who won 4 les were called the NY Knicks, that no one would watch then is laughable. Truthfully, other than your assanine opinions, What real proof have you provided?
Answer the question.

[da_suns_fan]

You conveniently seem to leave out the A size attraction. Houston is where on this list?
Number 10 market plus they were going for a repeat. But again, it needs to be made clear that Jordan helped bring casual fan back.
Again... link provided for proof.
partners.nytimes.com/library/sports/basketball/011399bkn-jordan-tv.html



Having again proven my point, it behooves me yet again to point out that it just isn't the Jordan effect. Although there are many articles that OP could have simply googled to learn about it,he continues to say Jordan wasn't a factor for the 95 Finals. About market size, NY metro will always be the largest DMA aka Designated Market or Media Area. You saying that had Tim, Tony, Manu and the players who won 4 les were called the NY Knicks, that no one would watch then is laughable. Truthfully, other than your assanine opinions, What real proof have you provided?
Answer the question.

Youve failed to prove anything. You dont even realize that what you need to prove is that the Orlando/Houston finals had a higher rating than the New York/Houston finals because Jordan played in the Eastern Conference finals.


THAT is the point I am challenging. All of your links have proved that Finals with Jordan did better with finals without Jordan. No one is disputing that. Its your bizzare "Jordan helped the 95 finals just by appearing in the playoffs" theory thats bull .

BTW - In 1995, Orlando was the "A attraction". You think people watched to see Hakeem and Drexler or Shaq and Penny?

If you think Houston, you must not have been around at the time.

[Man In Black]

Can't believe this needs to be explained to you yet again.

The finals with Jordan always beat the finals without him. The six
won by Chicago have ranged in ratings from a 14.2 to an 18.7. The
championships won by the Houston Rockets in 1994, when Jordan
retired to play baseball, and 1995, when Jordan played a partial
season, produced ratings of a 12.3 and a 13.9.

Okay...break this out. Lowest ratings for a final that Jordan actually participated in is a 14.2

In 1994, Houston-the #10 Market played the NY Knicks, the #1 Market. Market Size....No Jordan...they got a rating of 12.
For 1995, what was the draw that brought it up to 13.9? Jordan Effect.

Read that to understand how it's all calculated: It might be beyond you since it's a MIT study on Supertar Effects on the NBA but maybe you'll surprise us...I doubt it though.
http://18.7.29.232/bitstream/handle/...pdf?sequence=1

To estimate the effect of Jordan on TNT and NBC playoff revenues, we assume that the estimated econometric models can be used to consistently estimate the increase in playoff viewers due to Jordan. We then apply the same procedure as that discussed above for regular season TNT and NBC revenues.We estimate the incremental playoff revenue to other NBA teams to be $2.7 million and $1 1.2 million for TNT and NBC respectively. Finally, we consider the revenue teams receive from NBA Properties. NBA Properties is the part of the NBA which licenses NBA paraphenalia such as clothing and videos. Items associated with Bulls and Michael Jordan have accounted for almost half of NBA Properties revenue. We conservatively estimate the incremental NBA Properties revenue due to Michael Jordan by assuming that, without Jordan,the sales of Bulls items would be only as large as the sales of the second highest team. Under this assumption, we estimate the incremental revenue to other NBA teams to be $15.1 million.

Combining across the categories, we estimate Micahel Jordan's total value to other NBA teams to be $40.3 million.

So a guy, whose mere presence in the NBA, who can generate that kind of value to OTHER teams, is also capable of helping uptick an entire playoff season just by merely having a team in the playoffs. How you cannot comprehend that is asinine.

We both agree that his Finals appearances are the highest rated. Where we differ, is you feel that Orlando(the small market) was the bigger draw than Houston(the larger market) and that they didn't need any Jordan lead-in to get that 13.9 It wasn't Blue-Chips man...That movie sucked at the box office.

You already pointed out that NY is the Largest Market. Houston at #10 with NY at #1 could only get a 12.0 Largely due to Jordan retiring off to play baseball.

On the other end of the spectrum, a Large Market can certainly catapult an event simply because the media loves to create a story that large markets can follow.

Again...answer this question. If Jeremy Lin did exactly the same thing he did as Knick, but he did it as a Milwaukee Buck or Toronto Raptor or even a San Antonio Spur...would the ratings and the national coverage be EXACTLY AT THE SAME LEVEL?

Just answer the question dumbass.

[da_suns_fan]

Can't believe this needs to be explained to you yet again.

For 1995, what was the draw that brought it up to 13.9? Jordan Effect.

THIS is why you are an idiot. Or too proud to just admit that youre wrong.

The reason the ratings for 95 were higher than 94 was because the Shaq/Penny Magic were the most exciting/marketable team in the league and they were in the finals in 95 while as the 94 finals featured the Rockets and Knicks, two teams who werent nearly as popular.

Youre too dumb to even comprehend what the articles you keep posting are even saying. To say that Jordan helps ratings even after his team is eliminated is quite the stretch.

If thats true, I guess the SPURS should get some credit for the high ratings this year, yes?

[Man In Black]

Where is your verifiable proof that the Shaq/Penny Magic was the most exciting/markeatbale team at that time? ANSWER THE QUESTION? You got a link? Of course you don't. That's the diff between me and you. I gave you all the info need. You're just beyond dumb to recognize the facts. Again...where is your proof?

Nope...because the Spurs were never Jordan like. the closest to transcendental that they've ever had are David Robinson and George Gervin. But again...you're too dumb to know that.

Why is it you never answer the Jeremy Lin, small market vs large market question = same coverage yes or no? Answer that question too.

As of this season Lin's Jersey was #2 for the year only behind Derrick Rose. That means his sales were better than Bryant or LBJ. All that and he didn't even play a whole season for the Knicks. Jersey sales were powered for what he did for just a 3-week period.

Why is that? Is it because he's better than them, or is it because he plays for the largest media market in the L? Answer this one too dumbass.

Verifiable proof-Do you got any? Or do you just love making up?

[da_suns_fan]

Where is your verifiable proof that the Shaq/Penny Magic was the most exciting/markeatbale team at that time? ANSWER THE QUESTION? You got a link? Of course you don't. That's the diff between me and you. I gave you all the info need. You're just beyond dumb to recognize the facts. Again...where is your proof?

Where did you prove that the 95 finals rating went up because of Jordan's return?

You cant because that is IMPOSSIBLE. No one can measure Jordan's impact on games between teams he didnt play for.

Thats like measuring Kobe's impact on the current finals' rating. Or Dirk's or Duncan's. No different.

Not just admit that youre an idiot and lets be done with this, yes?

As for proving that Orlando was one of the most popular teams, how bout this: They scored a higher television rating against the Houston in the finals than the Knicks did the year before even though they were in a market size one tenth the size of New York. Theres your statistical PROOF. You block for Houston see that Orlando did better than New York in one tenth the city size!

Do you understand how "proofs" work now? Do you understand what "logic" is now?

My guess is you dont and you'll continue on making zero sense and embarrassing your fellow Spurs fans.

[da_suns_fan]

More proof the Orlando magic was popular in 1995:

Penny and Shaq were voted as starters in the all-star game by the fans:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_NBA_All-Star_Game

[da_suns_fan]

More on Penny's popularity:

Legacy

Hardaway's style of play was rare in the early 1990s. Players of his height were commonly told to play closer to the basket and oftentimes weren't ballhandlers. He was a pass first point guard who could score like a shooting guard. In fact he was the only player during the 1994-95 and 1995-96 seasons to average 20+ points 5+ assists and shoot above 50% on field goals. Hardaway's style of play was the closest thing the NBA had seen to Magic Johnson. Many NBA players such as LeBron James[3], Gilbert Arenas[4], Kobe Bryant, Joe Johnson, Tracy McGrady[5], Hakim Warrick, Rawle Marshall, Trevor Ariza [6], and Antonio Burks[7]have admitted to idolizing Hardaway when they were growing up.

Hardaway's popularity reached it's peak in the summer of 1996 as he was coming off of two consecutive All-NBA 1st team selections and a selection to the USA Olympic Team. In addition he had the most popular basketball shoe on the market complete with the "Lil Penny" commercial campaign voiced by Chris Rock. On a 1996 telecast of NBA on NBC Michael Jordan said that Hardaway was the player he felt comfortable passing the torch of greatness down to.


Many of the shoes in Hardaway's signature shoe line, "Air Max Penny", have been reissued over the years as a testament to his former popularity.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...t=52343&page=5

[da_suns_fan]

Oh..btw Man in Black, Penny and Shaq eliminated the Bulls in the second round, NOT THE EASTERN CONFERENCE FINALS!!!!


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_NBA_Playoffs

Put that in your pipe and smoke it!


Game. Set. Match. .

[Man In Black]

Where did you prove that the 95 finals rating went up because of Jordan's return?

You cant because that is IMPOSSIBLE. No one can measure Jordan's impact on games between teams he didnt play for.

Thats like measuring Kobe's impact on the current finals' rating. Or Dirk's or Duncan's. No different.

Not just admit that youre an idiot and lets be done with this, yes?

As for proving that Orlando was one of the most popular teams, how bout this: They scored a higher television rating against the Houston in the finals than the Knicks did the year before even though they were in a market size one tenth the size of New York. Theres your statistical PROOF. You block for Houston see that Orlando did better than New York in one tenth the city size!

Do you understand how "proofs" work now? Do you understand what "logic" is now?

My guess is you dont and you'll continue on making zero sense and embarrassing your fellow Spurs fans.

Damn you're beyond stupid.

You still haven't proven . Orlando didn't draw a higher rating alone. They had Houston's help PLUS they got the Jordan lead-in. I'll explain that once and for all later.
You can't just block for Houston. That's like Mayweather Fan saying Floyd is part of the largest PPV fight ever and that he's solely responsible for the draw. The guy he fought was Oscar De la Hoya. Doesn't his presence mean anything? Yeah it does. Oscar was the A-side draw. He was the champ. And before you try to say like Penny and Shaq were voted All-Star starters that season, that proves that Orlando was the most marketable team that year, what does it say when it says that same season, Charles Barkley and Dan Majerle were voted starters for the West. 2 guys same team. Doesn't that make them the most marketable team in the NBA at the time?
If you take that a step further, since Grant Hill got the most votes for All-Star that season, does that make him the most marketable player that season? The answer to all of that is simply no. But you probably won't understand that either. It's far too progressive for your feeble mind. I get that.

As for the Jordan lead-in argument. Here it is. You're about to get waxed..yet again. I'll provide a link to prove that it wasn't a theory that I made up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationa...ielsen_ratings

The 1993 Finals were Jordan's last before his first retirement. The Houston Rockets would take the next two les consecutively. The ratings for those next two Finals decreased, but still had above-average views, and the 1995 Finals even came to within .3 ratings points of the 1992 Finals and featured Superstar Shaquille O'Neal making the finals with the Orlando Magic, which were swept 4-0 by the Rockets.

After the two seasons, Jordan returned. Subsequently, and almost instantly, ratings greatly increased. Jordan's first game back, a March 19, 1995 game between the Bulls and the Indiana Pacers, scored a 10.9 rating for NBC, the highest rated regular-season NBA game of all time. Ratings for the Finals (which the Bulls played in the following three years) went up sharply as well.

Think about that. The season in question. The 94-95 Season where I tell you that MJ is the draw that brought the people back. Him just coming back resulted in what? Let's bold this so you understand

Jordan returned. Subsequently, and almost instantly, ratings greatly increased. Jordan's first game back, a March 19, 1995 game between the Bulls and the Indiana Pacers, scored a 10.9 rating for NBC, the highest rated regular-season NBA game of all time. Ratings for the Finals (which the Bulls played in the following three years) went up sharply as well.

Did it just say that ratings for the finals went up sharply as well? Was it preceded by a lead-in that said Orlando's team was the only reason that the ratings went up? Nope, that's not what it says. Need I remind you that Orlando got curb-stomped 4-0 by Olajuwon's Rockets.

It says...Jordan returned that season. His 1st game back was the highest rated regular season game of all time and then...ratingsfor the Finals went up sharply as well.

Is it still a bogus theory as you state or is it, as I've maintained...factual? Eliminated or not...him simply being back in the NBA raised ratings. If it didn't then why is it stated as such?

Despite your ability to prematurely ejaculate, I can tell you now that this conversation should be completely over. Except for the questions you still need to answer and even more so, provide verifiable proof to validate the answers.

I can't teach the unteachable garbage pail. So you're good at trash. What else ya got?

[Man In Black]

Still waiting for those verifiable links...I see you ain't provided any. Which means you're just making up .

Per usual.

Carry on dumb -

Jordan Effect....Recognize sun. Never mind...you've just been eclipsed

Ratings for the finals went up sharply as well.

[Man In Black]

Can't make this up...Can only say that you're too stupid to realize how it all works.

Market Size
Media Friendly Stars
Americans Not International Need to be primary.

2 of 3 is all that's needed.
Spurs don't have any of that.

[da_suns_fan]

Can't make this up...Can only say that you're too stupid to realize how it all works.

Market Size
Media Friendly Stars
Americans Not International Need to be primary.

2 of 3 is all that's needed.
Spurs don't have any of that.

Ive already won this argument.

Not even your fellow Spurs fans are agreeing with you.

[da_suns_fan]

Oh, btw Man In Black:

Your wikipedia quote doesnt claim Jordan helped the 95 finals. Your reading comprehension skills are beyond belief.

[da_suns_fan]

The 1993 Finals were Jordan's last before his first retirement. The Houston Rockets would take the next two les consecutively. The ratings for those next two Finals decreased, but still had above-average views, and the 1995 Finals even came to within .3 ratings points of the 1992 Finals and featured Superstar Shaquille O'Neal making the finals with the Orlando Magic, which were swept 4-0 by the Rockets.

After the two seasons, Jordan returned. Subsequently, and almost instantly, ratings greatly increased. Jordan's first game back, a March 19, 1995 game between the Bulls and the Indiana Pacers, scored a 10.9 rating for NBC, the highest rated regular-season NBA game of all time. Ratings for the Finals (which the Bulls played in the following three years) went up sharply as well.

This Wikipedia quote says that the three finals post Jordan return had a sharp increase in ratings.

That doesnt mean the 95 finals had an increase in ratings because of Jordan.

You dont understand the links you post. Was English a second language for you?

[da_suns_fan]

I started a new thread on this topic in the general forum. Lets get other people's take since you think IM the one being weird.