Basketball

LooseCannon said:
Does it, though? I mean, I'm thinking more of hockey than I am of basketball, but the optics of watching the hardcore fans cheer their home team for losing, rather than winning, doesn't seem designed to allow more buy-in from non-fans.
Click to expand...

Does it matter what non-fans think? From my experience, hardcore fans actually get pissed when their team wins when they're supposed to tank, because it hurts their future prospects.

There's always a lot of good, competitive teams in the league. I don't think tanking hurts the league. You always have the option not to watch the games. Besides, it's the team management that's tanking, the coaches and players are always going hard at it.
 
The Flash said:
Does it matter what non-fans think? From my experience, hardcore fans actually get pissed when their team wins when they're supposed to tank, because it hurts their future prospects.
Click to expand...
I would say it does if you want someone to become a fan of a franchise - I would also say it hurts the income, because you do want to put butts in seat.
 
LooseCannon said:
I would say it does if you want someone to become a fan of a franchise - I would also say it hurts the income, because you do want to put butts in seat.
Click to expand...

This is a misconception, at least in basketball's case.

Tanking teams usually play their younger players extended minutes. Fans are interested in their development, so they keep attending games even when the team is losing. For example, the Kings, who were in the Playoff hunt, recently traded their All-Star centerpiece DeMarcus Cousins for trade picks and a rookie in order to hit the reset button. They're now giving extended minutes to their rookies that received next to none playing time, and the arena is still packed and I actually see more enthusiasm from the fanbase.

In line with this, the young prospects bad teams acquire in the draft draws a lot of interest in them. Especially in a era where being "bandwagon fans" or "glory hunters" is frowned upon, a lot of new basketball fans jump at teams that suck now, but could be very good in the future. Suns, for example. They're actively tanking, their 20 year old shooting guard dropped 70 against the Celtics in a losing effort. And having freedom to just jack up shot after shot plays a big part in that. You can bet Suns are going to receive a huge fan boost.

Also financially, being a treadmill team doesn't really get you a bigger cash flow than being a terrible team. Being a contender does, which goes to the "greater good" point.
 
I remember having a love/hate relationship with the Suns in the 90s for this reason. They were a perennial 'B+' team that, aside from a couple of years where they had a legitimate chance, were always good enough to have a great record and make the playoffs, but they never seemed to have all of the pieces to really compete...so we had 13 consecutive playoff runs, but never had a championship. I think I'd rather see Flash's strategy employed back then.

The Flash said:
This is a misconception, at least in basketball's case.

Tanking teams usually play their younger players extended minutes. Fans are interested in their development, so they keep attending games even when the team is losing. For example, the Kings, who were in the Playoff hunt, recently traded their All-Star centerpiece DeMarcus Cousins for trade picks and a rookie in order to hit the reset button. They're now giving extended minutes to their rookies that received next to none playing time, and the arena is still packed and I actually see more enthusiasm from the fanbase.
Click to expand...

In fairness though, the Kings have always had enthusiastic crowds stretching back to the late 80s when they were as bad as they are now. Sacramento crowds have always been loyal to their losing teams - probably because this is the only 'big 4 sport' we have.
 
C8Nx1nDVoAA0KbL.jpg

C8NnQwlU0AA1Q8W.jpg
 
Barring injuries or a sudden drop off, LeBron will finish at least 3rd on that list. Would take some effort to pass Malone and Kareem though, they had incredible longevity.
 
Forostar said:
Malone was awesome to watch back in the day. That concentration and those impeccable free throws.
Click to expand...

I think you must have terms confused here Foro, because Malone's inaccuracy at the free throw line in critical situations in the Playoffs is probably considered the biggest taint on his legacy.

You might mean his mid-range jump shots, which were very solid indeed.
 
The Flash said:
Barring injuries or a sudden drop off, LeBron will finish at least 3rd on that list. Would take some effort to pass Malone and Kareem though, they had incredible longevity.
Click to expand...
Let's say he plays 8 more seasons and 70 games on average in those seasons: he would need to average 18 points to beat Malone and Kareem. Like you said, unless he has a major drop off or lots of injuries, it's doable.
 
Forostar said:
What about his nickname The Mailman then? I thought it had to do with his free throws. But indeed, he does not have a very great percentage.

Still he tops this list (the records for most free throws attempted and made) in absolute numbers. By far! :notworthy: And his routine was memorable!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_...Association_career_free_throw_scoring_leaders
Click to expand...

That has to do with his ability to draw fouls. If you go to the line often and can shoot at least decently from there, you're bound to get a lot of free throws made. Because of his longevity, he was able to pile up a lot of free throw attempts, he's actually the all-time leader in free throw attempts as well. He was no more than decent as a free throw shooter and notably fell off in the Playoffs there.

He got the nickname Mailman for his consistency from game to game, being able to deliver consistently.

Night Prowler said:
Let's say he plays 8 more seasons and 70 games on average in those seasons: he would need to average 18 points to beat Malone and Kareem. Like you said, unless he has a major drop off or lots of injuries, it's doable.
Click to expand...

I highly doubt we'll see LeBron play 8 more seasons. He's already 32. That'd give him Malone-Kareem type longevity as I said. Would be really difficult to pull off with the amount of mileage he has on his body.
 
Last edited:
Russell Westbrook will now finish the season averaging a triple-double. The only other time that happened was Oscar Robertson in 1961-62.

I think it's safe to say he's a lock for the MVP.
 
It's unreal. I remember when Jason Kidd's 13 triple-doubles in 2008 were considered a big deal...Westbrook is simply amazing.

Though OKC suffers from 'no supporting cast' syndrome. RW is brilliant, but he can't win a title by himself.
 
Lampwick 43 said:
Russell Westbrook will now finish the season averaging a triple-double. The only other time that happened was Oscar Robertson in 1961-62.

I think it's safe to say he's a lock for the MVP.
Click to expand...

Not a lock, but he should be the MVP. James Harden also has had an amazing season. Posting 29-11-8 and his team is 3rd in the West.

Westbrook has been my favorite player in the game for years, basically has been ever since Dwyane Wade's prime ended. His relentless energy is not just fun to watch but inspiring.
 
For the few people here who are interested in the NBA, I have a blog where I write some stuff about the league, thinkpieces, previews etc. Do check it out, I'd say it's pretty decent.

I have a main basketball blog that I work on way more extensively, but it's in Turkish, so I created this English one in February.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top