NBA Finals: OKC v Indiana | Page 2 | The Boneyard

NBA Finals: OKC v Indiana

RuffRuff said:
3 of the top 15 players in NBA in this one - markets ain’t great but plenty of star power. SAG, Hali, Siakim, Green.

I’ll be watching just to see how Pacers match up and if they have a chance. If it’s clear OKC is gonna roll them then will get boring quick.
Expand ...
who is green


Also SAG a pretty uninspiring nickname
 
Last edited:
Pascal Siakam is the key for Indiana. OKC has the defenders to bother Haliburton (21PPG in the ECF) and Nesmith (13 PPG on 53% 3P)

OKC likely lives and dies with SGA. He had 30+ points in 4 of 5 games vs. the Wolves. 5 of 7 vs. Denver. 2 of 4 vs. Memphis (but they didn't really need it against the Grizzlies)

Fun fact - There were only 9 times this season where SGA scored less than 30 points in consecutive games. 5 of those times were in the beginning of the season (through mid November)

Meaning in the last 6.5 months, SGA has only scored under 30 in consecutive games 4 times
 
Indiana is fun to watch and a very cool story but okc is GREAT. I think they win 2 championships in the next 3 years.
 
Funny thing is this finals will probably get more attention from Pittsburgh media that any recent finals because of TJ McConnell.

Pittsburgh is not known for raising kids who get to the NBA. I cannot think of a single kid born in the Pittsburgh Metro who's made it to an NBA finals as an actual contributor.
 
.-.
navery12 said:
They have some nice rotation pieces they've developed, but Haliburton and Siakam are the reason they're in the Finals and they're both trade acquisitions, same with Nesmith
Expand ...
I had assumed Haliburton was drafted by the Pacers. Learned that he was on the Kings for two years and that Jeremy Lamb was part of the trade.
 
storrsroars said:
Funny thing is this finals will probably get more attention from Pittsburgh media that any recent finals because of TJ McConnell.

Pittsburgh is not known for raising kids who get to the NBA. I cannot think of a single kid born in the Pittsburgh Metro who's made it to an NBA finals as an actual contributor.
Expand ...
Maurice Lucas, Jack Twyman, Cam Johnson... there's been a few.
 
Matrim55 said:
Maurice Lucas, Jack Twyman, Cam Johnson... there's been a few.
Expand ...
Lucas was in the finals 50 years ago. Twyman never was and it's so long ago his photos are in b/w. Oddly I recall Cam from his time at Pitt but didn't realize he was in the Assn and don't recall anyone mentioning his name on any sports show, even when he was in the finals a few years ago.

McConnell is a legend around here. Maybe because he's city proper. Maybe because he's white.
 
HooperScooper said:
Since I don't share in any of the money from the contract my only interest is whether NBA fans would rather watch this final or say one that has the Celtics or Lakers or the Knicks. Indianapolis and Oklahoma City are probably 2 of the smaller markets in the NBA so I'm just curious how interesting the series is to the average NBA fan. You have an issue with that?
Expand ...
I'm not a big NBA fan, but am a big C's fan, growing up in Greater Boston. With that said, I hated the iso hero ball the C's played way too often. They're fun to watch when they move the ball around, but IMO, they become a boring product to watch when it's create a miss match, one on one while the other 4 stand around.

But, strangely enough, I'm excited to see these 2 run-the-floor, move the ball and play tough D teams go at it at 90 MPH. We're getting the two most exciting teams go at it. If people don't watch, well they're going to miss some fast paced exciting games and two teams that have some exciting shot makers.

I digress, but I hated watching the Knicks. As good as Brunson is as a closer, great shotmaker, I hate his flopping antics, along with the other teammates that were flopping all over the place. And I can't stand watching Towns who commits the stupidest fouls I've ever seen. I though his coach's head was going to explode. If I were his coach or teammate, I'd want him shipped out of town. His demeanor is almost as irritating as his stupid mindless fouls. As good as that series with with Pacers was, his stupid fouls and the Knicks constant grabbing and flopping...well let me put it this way. I'm glad I don't have to watch any more of it.

I'd like to think that teams will begin to see that good player and ball movement can win you a lot of games, but the big NBA egos where the stars say give me the ball and get out of my way isn't going to go away any time soon. Though I'd be remiss to not admit the shot making ability inside and beyond the arc displayed in the NBA is remarkable. I just enjoy good ball movement, passing and shots off of great team offense over hero ball, but maybe most NBA fans like seeing the stars light it up all by themselves.

I think the upcoming finals is going to be very entertaining with high flying offenses and great defensive intensity. It probably won't garner the viewership of the big market teams even though this matchup likely provides the best basketball being played this season.
 
Last edited:
JB75 said:
Have no interest. Might first nba finals I don’t watch since I was 8 yrs old. Two tuff markers with minimal star power. Told my wife last night after Knicks lost that I won’t be moving my schedule around for a sporting event now until football starts. Lollll. Also sucks that nba on tnt is now over after all these years. Those guys were great.
Expand ...
Well I love watching OKC and they were my favorite team with the Celtics. The best team this year. OKC really grew up this year especially beating Denver in a fantastic series. I will be watching of course and could care less to see big city teams playing. These are clearly the best 2 teams left and it should be a fun playoffs to watch. Defense vs. Offense. Go OKC!
 
Last edited:
storrsroars said:
Lucas was in the finals 50 years ago. Twyman never was and it's so long ago his photos are in b/w. Oddly I recall Cam from his time at Pitt but didn't realize he was in the Assn and don't recall anyone mentioning his name on any sports show, even when he was in the finals a few years ago.

McConnell is a legend around here. Maybe because he's city proper. Maybe because he's white.
Expand ...
DeJuan Blair. He's one of the most popular players ever from Pittsburgh.
 
.-.
superjohn said:
DeJuan Blair. He's one of the most popular players ever from Pittsburgh.
Expand ...
By the time he got to the finals, he was basically a cripple playing 5 mins a game. He'd long been an afterthought.

Note my original statement - someone born in Pittsburgh who made it to the finals and was an actual contributor.
 
Last edited:
storrsroars said:
By the time he got to the finals, he was basically a cripple playing 5 mins a game. He'd long been an afterthought.

Note my original statement - someone born in Pittsburgh who made it to the finals and was an actual contributor.
Expand ...
Cam Johnson is your answer then, he was a contributor in the finals only 4 years ago.
 
Deepster said:
Well. It sure ain’t Magic vs Bird.
Expand ...
I don't know, Halliburton is the best passing PG in the league in the long time and SGA is a guy who can score and create for others any way possible like Bird (even if not playing the same position).

I get the bias against OKC, as a KC guy I have no idea why they didn't get that team. OKC is a small market for a pro franchise, but Memphis and New Orleans are even smaller and Utah isn't much bigger. Indianapolis is small too but it's a basketball hotbed that has an NFL team as well. Milwaukee market is smaller than Indianapolis.
 
Looked up media markets. This doesn't include NHL but if you do include NHL that includes Raleigh and Columbus so then the largest market without a pro team in the four majors sports is Hartford/New Haven. I also like the way UConn shows up in Boston's list of teams.

www.sportsmediawatch.com

Major pro and college sports teams ranked by market size

See which pro sports cities rank as the biggest TV markets, according to Nielsen. New York, Los Angeles and Chicago are the top three.
www.sportsmediawatch.com www.sportsmediawatch.com
 
Waquoit said:
That's why he sucked.
Expand ...

Stern was the right guy for a time, but I think he also really hurt the NBA in the 90's. Too much superstar ball, too much ISO, and Stern wasn't aggressive enough in getting Europeans to the NBA.

Stern knew that zone defenses were inevitable, but Jordan was such a big moneymaker for the league that Stern didn't allow them until after Jordan retired. Watching clear outs and Craig Ehlo have to defend Jordan 1 on 1 was ridiculous. The irony of allowing zone defenses is that it made the game much more free-flowing, and actually helped offenses because there were more transition opportunities.

Also, Portland would have won at least two titles if Arvydas Sabonis comes to the NBA in 1988 or 1989. I think Stern did not want a powerhouse in Portland, and also didn't want a drunken partier who couldn't speak English as the co-star of the top team in the league, and that is why he did not push harder for Sabonis in the late 80's. Replace Kevin Duckworth with Sabonis in his prime, and the early 90's Trail Blazer teams would have won 70 games a year. When Stern did finally try to help recruit Europeans, it was to bring the best player in Europe at that point, Toni Kukoc, to play with Jordan.

Ultimately, I think Stern tried too hard to control the outcomes rather than focus on making the NBA the most fan-friendly product it could be.
 
HuskyHawk said:
Looked up media markets. This doesn't include NHL but if you do include NHL that includes Raleigh and Columbus so then the largest market without a pro team in the four majors sports is Hartford/New Haven. I also like the way UConn shows up in Boston's list of teams.

www.sportsmediawatch.com

Major pro and college sports teams ranked by market size

See which pro sports cities rank as the biggest TV markets, according to Nielsen. New York, Los Angeles and Chicago are the top three.
www.sportsmediawatch.com www.sportsmediawatch.com
Expand ...

Two of the decisions I will never understand is why two franchises left the Pacific Northwest to move to two small, poor, inland cities like Oklahoma City and Memphis.

Hartford metro has the 8th highest per capita GDP at $87,884 among metro areas with over 1 million people (Hartford has 1.2 million). Memphis (1.3MM people) is $64,735 and Oklahoma City (1.4MM) is $60,113. This does not even include New Haven or Fairfield counties, which would push the population way up and are a lot closer to Hartford than the next closest metro is to OKC or Memphis. Per capita incomes are Hartford ($34,310), Memphis ($20,327) and OKC ($19,366). Those two places have teams and Hartford did not even get a look despite the metro areas being approximately the same size.
 
.-.
I think a legit appeal of a team in OKC, which by most measures has no business with a major sports team, is that it's the only thing comparable for hundreds of miles around. If a theoretical team moved to Hartford, they'd have major competition just a few hours in either direction. OKC puts "only game in town" on a whole different level.
 
Inyatkin said:
I think a legit appeal of a team in OKC, which by most measures has no business with a major sports team, is that it's the only thing comparable for hundreds of miles around. If a theoretical team moved to Hartford, they'd have major competition just a few hours in either direction. OKC puts "only game in town" on a whole different level.
Expand ...
Both St Louis and Kansas City are larger media markets than OKC. Both supported NBA teams into the 80s. I'm not sure why neither appears to be a viable market for the NBA at this point.

Interesting that Greenville SC is a larger media market than either OKC or Memphis. Greenville's media market size is slightly less than Fairfield County's population.
 
storrsroars said:
Both St Louis and Kansas City are larger media markets than OKC. Both supported NBA teams into the 80s. I'm not sure why neither appears to be a viable market for the NBA at this point.

Interesting that Greenville SC is a larger media market than either OKC or Memphis. Greenville's media market size is slightly less than Fairfield County's population.
Expand ...
Also, too, Seattle
 
Inyatkin said:
I think a legit appeal of a team in OKC, which by most measures has no business with a major sports team, is that it's the only thing comparable for hundreds of miles around. If a theoretical team moved to Hartford, they'd have major competition just a few hours in either direction. OKC puts "only game in town" on a whole different level.
Expand ...
Well this is why I thought it was weird not to put it in KC (which had the Kings originally). KC has no NBA competition anywhere close, but OKC is generally a Dallas market city for sports. It's a 3 hour drive.
 
Disappointed that the Knicks lost (blowing Game 1 killed them - flipped the whole series into an uphill battle they couldn't overcome and their weaknesses were continuously exposed in this series), but they had a good playoff run and the Pacers deserved to win. I think they'll give OKC a tougher series than many people think. Should be an interesting contrast of Indy's offense against OKC's defense.
 
.-.
HooperScooper said:
Two markets that aren’t going to interest the average NBA fan. OKC is a nice story and has the league MVP but are people going to watch? I’ll be curious to see what the ratings are.
Expand ...
No doubt the TV folks are wanting to slit there throats! These 2 teams may not do great with NBA fans but they will not draw any casual fans for sure. I suspect the NBA media woes will continue.
 
aceboon said:
Expand ...

I agree and tbh, I like it. The second apron makes it really difficult to stack and maintain super teams. It is unfair for teams because it “punishes” them for investing in and developing their own players (see: Nuggets after their championship, GSW breaking up Klay, Milwaukee trading Middleton for Kuzma), but it seems to be clearly designed to spread talent across the league so successful teams have to have more well balanced rosters

Even the Thunder and Pacers, young high potential teams, have a limited window. They have key guys locked up for a few years, but a few deep playoff runs will increase their price tag and they’ll have to eventually swap them with new guys to keep salaries down
 
nelsonmuntz said:
Two of the decisions I will never understand is why two franchises left the Pacific Northwest to move to two small, poor, inland cities like Oklahoma City and Memphis.

Hartford metro has the 8th highest per capita GDP at $87,884 among metro areas with over 1 million people (Hartford has 1.2 million). Memphis (1.3MM people) is $64,735 and Oklahoma City (1.4MM) is $60,113. This does not even include New Haven or Fairfield counties, which would push the population way up and are a lot closer to Hartford than the next closest metro is to OKC or Memphis. Per capita incomes are Hartford ($34,310), Memphis ($20,327) and OKC ($19,366). Those two places have teams and Hartford did not even get a look despite the metro areas being approximately the same size.
Expand ...
Good argument. Hard to argue. However, I'm pretty happy now that UConn ball is the only game in town. What we do have we are the best at. I want every nutmeggers eyes to adore the Dogs and the Dogs alone.
 
REB1094 said:
I agree and tbh, I like it. The second apron makes it really difficult to stack and maintain super teams. It is unfair for teams because it “punishes” them for investing in and developing their own players (see: Nuggets after their championship, GSW breaking up Klay, Milwaukee trading Middleton for Kuzma), but it seems to be clearly designed to spread talent across the league so successful teams have to have more well balanced rosters

Even the Thunder and Pacers, young high potential teams, have a limited window. They have key guys locked up for a few years, but a few deep playoff runs will increase their price tag and they’ll have to eventually swap them with new guys to keep salaries down
Expand ...
CBA needs to be tweaked a bit for teams to be able to retain their own drafted/scouted players imo. I get it for teams not being able to just sign whoever and stack the deck but if you have a great front office and coaching staff that is able to nail their dfraft picks and develop them you shouldn't be punished trying to retain them. Thunder should be able to retain their big 3(Shai/Jdub/Chet) but they're going to have to keep cycling in and out of their surrounding parts because they're not going to be able to keep them.
 
aceboon said:
CBA needs to be tweaked a bit for teams to be able to retain their own drafted/scouted players imo. I get it for teams not being able to just sign whoever and stack the deck but if you have a great front office and coaching staff that is able to nail their dfraft picks and develop them you shouldn't be punished trying to retain them. Thunder should be able to retain their big 3(Shai/Jdub/Chet) but they're going to have to keep cycling in and out of their surrounding parts because they're not going to be able to keep them.
Expand ...
The answer is probably a salary cap and/or a change to the max contract so that it’s less as a % of the Apron levels. But the players would never go for it. There’s no other pro sport where 3 guys can take up 80% of your roster expense.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,149
Messages
4,554,900
Members
10,438
Latest member
UConnheart


Top Bottom