Parity is not binary, there are degrees to it.
Right now, the Warriors are winning the title. That's it. So current discussions about needing more parity are a little different than scenarios like last year when Cleveland, GS, OKC, and SAS all had legitimate sots. Current discussions are different than the early 80's when the Celtics, Sixers, Lakers, Rockets, or others had a legit shot.
Todays discussion shouldn't be treated the same as past arguments where folks wanted 10 teams with a shot rather than 4. We're talking about 1 team having a shot at the title right now. One!
What was your favorite NBA Era? Was Parity Important
Moderators: Domejandro, infinite11285, Harry Garris, ken6199, Dirk, bisme37, KingDavid, bwgood77, zimpy27, cupcakesnake
Re: What was your favorite NBA Era? Was Parity Important
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 9,404
- And1: 3,061
- Joined: Jun 12, 2009
What was your favorite NBA Era? Was Parity Important
-
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 31,642
- And1: 28,754
- Joined: Jun 26, 2002
What was your favorite NBA Era? Was Parity Important
My take on parity vs super teams is that kids and casual fans like super teams and adult die hard fans crave parity when they've tired of the predictability of the league and the likelihood of one of 4 teams to win it all known before training camps even begin each year.
I also think the Internet has given adult die hards a voice via boards like this and on social media to voice frustrations on the league and the new commish (the first commish since Jordan) is open-minded and willing to listen to fans like us. We are all recognizing, sharing and voicing concerns over the direction of the league and realizing we are not alone. That wouldn't have been possible prior to the Internet obviously.
For me personally, like a lot of kids in the 90s I loved the Bulls. The Jordan run was incredible specifically because as a kid in Canada all that mattered to me was greatness and I'd only be able to watch the playoffs anyway. When the NBA expanded into Canada and the Raptors became my team the novelty of just being part of the NBA was enough and being able to see these players I admired up close. For a time. But eventually as I aged I became frustrated by how challenging it is for most teams outside of the top markets to attract and retain talent. This and other problems (including the rise of tanking to counter the star dillema) rose in prominence for me. It's obvious the same has happened in other fans who were raised in the Jordan or Bird/Magic eras. Many of us have expanded our horizons in sport and have come to envy the less predictable nature of other leagues and sports and tournaments. It makes for more compelling drama when, well, there is drama.
The NBA has never had an issue with the kid to17 demographic or even the 18-35 demographics. Not for decades. They've dominated those. What Silver seems interested in figuring out is how to keep the 36-55 crowd as die hard and excited about the league as they were as kids. This is a problem the NFL doesn't have and Silver lately has been throwing bones more and more to the older die hards. From tanking reform talks to the ref complaints. These things aren't being done for the casuals or the kids. They're for people like me (and some of you)... And they're working. Silver's vision seems promising so far. Not every idea of his will work but I appreciate the effort so far.
I also think the Internet has given adult die hards a voice via boards like this and on social media to voice frustrations on the league and the new commish (the first commish since Jordan) is open-minded and willing to listen to fans like us. We are all recognizing, sharing and voicing concerns over the direction of the league and realizing we are not alone. That wouldn't have been possible prior to the Internet obviously.
For me personally, like a lot of kids in the 90s I loved the Bulls. The Jordan run was incredible specifically because as a kid in Canada all that mattered to me was greatness and I'd only be able to watch the playoffs anyway. When the NBA expanded into Canada and the Raptors became my team the novelty of just being part of the NBA was enough and being able to see these players I admired up close. For a time. But eventually as I aged I became frustrated by how challenging it is for most teams outside of the top markets to attract and retain talent. This and other problems (including the rise of tanking to counter the star dillema) rose in prominence for me. It's obvious the same has happened in other fans who were raised in the Jordan or Bird/Magic eras. Many of us have expanded our horizons in sport and have come to envy the less predictable nature of other leagues and sports and tournaments. It makes for more compelling drama when, well, there is drama.
The NBA has never had an issue with the kid to17 demographic or even the 18-35 demographics. Not for decades. They've dominated those. What Silver seems interested in figuring out is how to keep the 36-55 crowd as die hard and excited about the league as they were as kids. This is a problem the NFL doesn't have and Silver lately has been throwing bones more and more to the older die hards. From tanking reform talks to the ref complaints. These things aren't being done for the casuals or the kids. They're for people like me (and some of you)... And they're working. Silver's vision seems promising so far. Not every idea of his will work but I appreciate the effort so far.
Re: What was your favorite NBA Era? Was Parity Important
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 9,847
- And1: 461
- Joined: Jun 29, 2008
Re: What was your favorite NBA Era? Was Parity Important
I picked the 90s. The thing is, I probably would have enjoyed it more had the Bulls not been so dominant.
The big thing for me is that the 90s era was loaded with skilled big men. We don't have players like Hakeem or Robinson anymore.
The big thing for me is that the 90s era was loaded with skilled big men. We don't have players like Hakeem or Robinson anymore.
Re: What was your favorite NBA Era? Was Parity Important
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 9,847
- And1: 461
- Joined: Jun 29, 2008
Re: What was your favorite NBA Era? Was Parity Important
tidho wrote:Todays discussion shouldn't be treated the same as past arguments where folks wanted 10 teams with a shot rather than 4. We're talking about 1 team having a shot at the title right now. One!
I don't think it's only a one team show.
I do think the likelihood of another Warriors-Cavs finals is quite high, and this annoys me. Even the 12 team league of the 1960s never had three finals in a row with the same matchup.
Re: What was your favorite NBA Era? Was Parity Important
-
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 4,640
- And1: 5,714
- Joined: Jun 13, 2014
Re: What was your favorite NBA Era? Was Parity Important
I don't care about parity. It's not like the NBA is a government institution. It's a private association. If they want only a small handful of teams to continually win championships (which is not the case in the last 9 seasons, as stated earlier), then all the power to the association. If they want to rig games, then all the power to them. The NBA has no obligation to "improve" its product.
We, as fans, have a choice if we don't like the product the NBA puts on the floor (e.g., superteams, BS refereeing, internal politicking, losing a franchise, or other issues). We don't have to watch the NBA. There are literally dozens of other professional basketball leagues in the US and around the world for us fans.
We, as fans, have a choice if we don't like the product the NBA puts on the floor (e.g., superteams, BS refereeing, internal politicking, losing a franchise, or other issues). We don't have to watch the NBA. There are literally dozens of other professional basketball leagues in the US and around the world for us fans.
I acknowledge and thank the lək̓ʷəŋən peoples of the Songhees, Esquimalt and W̱SÁNEĆ First Nations for allowing me to live, work and play on their unceded traditional territories. I also acknowledge the Métis Charter Community of Victoria.
Re: What was your favorite NBA Era? Was Parity Important
-
- Veteran
- Posts: 2,613
- And1: 733
- Joined: Apr 10, 2013
Re: What was your favorite NBA Era? Was Parity Important
Big Mac Biyombo wrote:Austincys21 wrote:When it was
Kobe and Shaq
Tmac
VC
Iverson
Duncan, Parker, Manu
KG, Spreewell, Cassell, Wally
Kidd, Martin, Kittles, Van Horn
Dirk, Van Exel, Finley, Bradley
Yao and Francis
Marbury
Allen, Lewis, Ridnour
Pierce And Walker
Names Bradley and not Nash for a reason the Mavs were exciting. Gets an and1.......
I actually totally forgot Nash was a maverick then. Most my memories of him are from the Suns.
Re: What was your favorite NBA Era? Was Parity Important
-
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,506
- And1: 3,034
- Joined: Mar 21, 2011
Re: What was your favorite NBA Era? Was Parity Important
90's until Shaq left the Lakers in my opinion.
Re: What was your favorite NBA Era? Was Parity Important
-
- Rookie
- Posts: 1,223
- And1: 406
- Joined: Jan 11, 2008
Re: What was your favorite NBA Era? Was Parity Important
I wouldn't say there's been any parity really ever. Duncan, Shaq, Kobe, or Lebron have been the main title guys for the past 14 of the past 17 years? Four freaking guys! Crazy. Even with Manning, Brady, Rothlisberger strangleholding the NFL they've only won combined 8 of past 16 I believe.