The Celtics Just Won By 54 Points

[tjforce]

Originally Posted by RKH916

June 7, 1998
NBA Finals, Game 3

Never forget.

Suddenly, "We Done With the 90's" makes sense for basketball

[RKH916]

Originally Posted by tjforce

Suddenly, "We Done With the 90's" makes sense for basketball

I'd still prefer the late 90's grind to today's form but yes, there's a reason the league had to move on.

[Bosoxfan5990]

There is still something broken with today's NBA.

[tjforce]

Originally Posted by RKH916

I'd still prefer the late 90's grind to today's form but yes, there's a reason the league had to move on.

Haha. I was mostly just messing around. The 90s style worked great when you have MJ, the year he was retired, and the year he rolled back out of bed and the Rockets won again.

But the problem was that once he left the Bulls again the league got gross. IMO, it really took until LeBron became an MVP level guy and Kobe started winning on his own that it really got going. Then the '10s were the best decade of my lifetime. Cavs/Warriors was the best rivalries since the 80s Lakers/Celtics.

I think that's part of what's missing right now. No total boogeyman team that everyone either loves or loves to root against.

[Scottish Punk]

We are in a transition period. Curry and Lebron has been the faces of the league and drove everything. We are waiting for the next player to define the era. It will come, it always does. Somebody will rise up and win multiple championships and be in the mix every year. Once that happens, NBA ratings will go back up.

[mc1]

Originally Posted by tjforce

But the problem was that once he left the Bulls again the league got gross. IMO, it really took until LeBron became an MVP level guy and Kobe started winning on his own that it really got going. Then the '10s were the best decade of my lifetime. Cavs/Warriors was the best rivalries since the 80s Lakers/Celtics.

I think that's part of what's missing right now. No total boogeyman team that everyone either loves or loves to root against.

Ratings for the Finals were much better during the Super Team era and for Cavs/Warriors rivalry than the past 4-5 seasons. There were many complaints about it when it was happening but now nobody really cares about the new superstars or the new “Super Teams”. I only put that in quotations because I’ve seen some call the Celtics a Super Team.

[ninjacookies]

Dead ball era was the worst. Mid 201x's was peak. Then Curry emerged and everything became hyper focused on perimeter shooting.


I think most of this relies on optics. Obviously nearly half the shots or more a night are coming from beyond the arc. And at a passing low 30% clip, you're seeing a LOT more misses than makes. Whereas prior to the moneyball algorithm, you were witnessing natural fg percentages nearing on one shot made for every 2 possessions.

So now teams are scoring more, but taking lower percentage shots, just at a higher points-per-possession clip. It's not great for optics, but it is great for variance and EOY offensive totals. It's what based Gollum wants, and it's working...at the expense of viewership.

[tjforce]

Originally Posted by ninjacookies

Dead ball era was the worst. Mid 201x's was peak. Then Curry emerged and everything became hyper focused on perimeter shooting.


I think most of this relies on optics. Obviously nearly half the shots or more a night are coming from beyond the arc. And at a passing low 30% clip, you're seeing a LOT more misses than makes. Whereas prior to the moneyball algorithm, you were witnessing natural fg percentages nearing on one shot made for every 2 possessions.

So now teams are scoring more, but taking lower percentage shots, just at a higher points-per-possession clip. It's not great for optics, but it is great for variance and EOY offensive totals. It's what based Gollum wants, and it's working...at the expense of viewership.

This kind of basketball is fun to watch if your team is good at it. Shooting 40 3s per game and hitting 41% of them makes for exciting basketball.

On the other hand, you have teams like the Hornets firing up 42 3s per game and makin only making 34% its awful. But then again, when you are also shooting a league low 50% from 2, I guess it becomes pretty indifferent which one you do.


Also, Curry emerged in that 10's peak era you mentioned... but he was still too new for lesser skilled teams to start copying yet. I don't know exactly when the switch over happened, but the last championship I remember being really intrigued by was the Bucks/Suns series.

[ninjacookies]

Originally Posted by tjforce

This kind of basketball is fun to watch if your team is good at it. Shooting 40 3s per game and hitting 41% of them makes for exciting basketball.

On the other hand, you have teams like the Hornets firing up 42 3s per game and makin only making 34% its awful. But then again, when you are also shooting a league low 50% from 2, I guess it becomes pretty indifferent which one you do.

That's the disconnect. Is that there's over 20 nba teams in the league not equipped to shoot 3's at that high a clip. But they still do it. It's painful to watch, especially knowing that they 'probably' could have kept games a lot more competitive if they actually played to their strengths vs. being force fed a chatgpt playbook.