Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="champs99and04, post: 2225934, member: 488"] No doubt your historical perspective is accurate, which I think in a way proves everybody right. Theoretically, in 2017, the league should be better than it was one, two, three decades ago, no? The ratings would prove me wrong, but I don't clamor for Jordan's Bulls the way some do. I think the influx of international stars circa '03/'04 elevated the sport to heights it had never seen, even if it would take a little while for it to be reflected in the quality of the product. For those equating what we're seeing currently to LeBron joining the Heat, though, I would vehemently disagree. Just look at the landscape of the league in 2011 - the period where I believe it peaked as a union between the old guard and the new wave of talent - when people first began to question the competitive balance. These were your second round match-ups: Grizzlies-Thunder - Memphis, just having shocked the top seeded Spurs, took Oklahoma City seven. Game four - with the Thunder trailing the series 2-1 - went 3 overtimes. Celtics-Heat - Separated by only two games during the regular season, this one ends in five but was much closer and more dramatic than that would indicate. Game four went to overtime and the Heat came back in the fourth quarter to win game five with LeBron going on an epic 11-0 run and then kneeling to the floor in emotion at the buzzer. Akin here to Jordan finally beating the Pistons. Hawks-Bulls - Fairly forgettable series, over in six. This was the Hawks team with Jeff Teague, Joe Johnson, Jamal Crawford, Horford, and Josh Smith. Lakers-Mavs - Two time defending champs going against a Dallas team that was presumed to be soft based on reputation. Ends in a sweep with Dallas storming back to win game one and then barely surviving game three. Next round you get Thunder-Mavs and Bulls-Heat. Both ended in five but featured more than enough drama. The Mavs overcame a 15 point deficit in the final 15 minutes of game four to swing the series from 2-2- to 3-1 and then made another fourth quarter comeback in game five. Game four of Heat-Bulls went to overtime and game five ended with Chicago blowing an eight point lead in the final three minutes. Everybody remembers Heat-Mavs. You had your epic game two comeback, games three and four being decided by one possession, and then Dallas pulling away late in games five and six. I won't bother calculating the point differentials, but I imagine there's a demonstrable difference there in the general competitiveness of games. You had a ton of up-and-coming stars like Westbrook, Durant, Harden, Marc Gasol, Conley, and Rondo merged with the old guard like Garnett, Pierce, Allen, Kobe, Gasol, Dirk, Kidd, Odom, etc. It felt conceivable that five or six of them could win the championship, and no matter how the match-ups worked out, the finals would be loaded with stars and compelling story lines. So I don't necessarily agree - not that you said this - that the NBA has never had parity because it has. It had parity last year when there were at least four teams (Cleveland, Golden State, San Antonio, and Oklahoma City) capable of winning a championship and it had drama when ever series from the second round on had the potential to flip the trajectory of the league. I think it's a cop out - both on the part of fans and the commissioner - to settle for good when there are enough great players in the world for it to be great. The NBA should be seizing this opportunity in an era where baseball has lost its appeal and the downfall of football looms. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach

Forum statistics

Threads: 164,700

Messages: 4,406,835

Members: 10,224

Latest member: Obsidian13