Lebron/Bulls gossip & rumors (merging)

[coldfish]

Huh? They are the second most followed, most successful, team in all of baseball. Cardinals (in baseball) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bulls (in basketball - let alone where Cleveland would rank). I think maybe baseball history just isn't your thing. Which is fine. But the Cardinals have a huge national following and have had forever. I'll spare you the history lesson on it though.

Globally, the Cardinals don't touch the Bulls. Do a google search on "most popular baseball team" and you will find oodles of articles, none of which put the Cardinals at #2. The Braves, Dodgers and Red Sox routinely out poll them.

Here is one:
TABLE 1
FAVORITE MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL TEAM: 1999 - 2005
"What is your favorite Major League Baseball team?"

Base: Follow Major League Baseball

Rank Rank Rank Rank
1999 2003 2004 2005
New York Yankees 2 1 1 1
Atlanta Braves 1 2 3 2
Chicago Cubs 3 7 2 3
Boston Red Sox 8 6 4 4
New York Mets 12 3 14 5
St. Louis Cardinals 4 14 13 6
Los Angeles Dodgers 7 8 =9 7
Cincinnati Reds 13 10 =19 =8
Pittsburgh Pirates 18 =18 =9 =8
Chicago White Sox 20 27 27 =10
San Francisco Giants 26 9 7 =10
Baltimore Orioles 9 =18 8 12
Minnesota Twins 11 5 =17 =13
Philadelphia Phillies 16 12 6 =13
Seattle Mariners 6 11 =15 =13
Arizona Diamondbacks NA =16 =17 16
Los Angeles Angels of
Anaheim* 23 =16 =25 =17
Houston Astros 22 =20 =9 =17
Cleveland Indians 5 4 =9 =19
Detroit Tigers 10 15 5 =19
Texas Rangers 15 13 =15 21
Kansas City Royals 24 =25 =19 =22
Washington Nationals NA NA NA =22
Milwaukee Brewers 21 23 23 24
San Diego Padres 17 22 =25 25
Colorado Rockies 14 24 24 26
Oakland Athletics 19 =20 22 27
Florida Marlins 25 =25 21 28
Tampa Bay Devil Rays NA 28 28 =29
Toronto Blue Jays** 28 29 29 =29
Montreal Expos 27 30 30 NA

http://www.satelliteguys.us/sports-sect ... eball.html

This is also a good point. Except that the Knicks do have a national and international following. David Stern himself has called it the "flagship" franchise of the NBA despite its lack of historic success.

http://thehoopdoctors.com/online2/2010/ ... book-fans/

Less stories about the NBA, but here is a somewhat objective poll.
Twitter Facebook Total
1 Los Angeles Lakers 1,415,871 657,007 2,072,878
2 Orlando Magic 983,232 85,265 1,068,497
3 Boston Celtics 25,605 481,879 507,484
4 Cleveland Cavaliers 33,445 166,021 199,466
5 Chicago Bulls 26,161 155,827 181,988
6 San Antonio Spurs 19,901 90,550 110,451
7 Denver Nuggets 15,188 87,300 102,488
8 Houston Rockets 20,195 81,535 101,730
9 Dallas Mavericks 15,817 72,015 87,832
10 Phoenix Suns 21,896 64,976 86,872
11 Portland Trail Blazers 14,684 65,801 80,485
12 New York Knicks 14,395 43,972 58,367
13 Utah Jazz 11,785 44,328 56,113
14 Toronto Raptors 5,605 41,611 47,216
15 Milwaukee Bucks 7,089 37,197 44,286
16 Sacramento Kings 10,798 19,855 30,653
17 Golden State Warriors 2,655 27,826 30,481
18 Philadelphia 76ers 12,048 17,877 29,925
19 Indiana Pacers 7,204 14,760 21,964
20 Los Angeles Clippers 13,531 7,291 20,822
21 Washington Wizards 6,787 13,579 20,366
22 Atlanta Hawks 8,170 11,893 20,063
23 Oklahoma City Thunder 8,911 10,981 19,892
24 Detroit Pistons 9,537 7,854 17,391
25 Minnesota Timberwolves 6,554 10,742 17,296
26 New Jersey Nets 4,945 10,361 15,306
27 Miami Heat 13,870 599 14,469
28 Memphis Grizzlies 7,062 6,793 13,855
29 Charlotte Bobcats 5,502 7,281 12,783
30 New Orleans Hornets 8,459 1,647 10,106

The Knicks are at #12. The guy writing the article even points out how unpopular they are. The Bulls, after a decade of mediocrity and worse are 5th.

[theanimal23]

I think the Yankees are the thing that confuses people about NY. They are hugely popular. When they go on the road, you will see massive numbers of people wearing Yankees gear and rooting for them in other people's parks. New Yorkers seem to think that has something to do with NY. It doesn't. Its because they have won a bazillion world series titles (Ok, 22) with very personable people, like Mantle, Dimaggio, Reggie Jackson, etc. You don't see people rooting for the Giants or Mets or Knicks on the road anything like this. Dallas Cowboys? Sure do, for the same reason why the Yankees are popular, not because Dallas is a major metropolitan area.

exhibit A: Lebron James - fan of - Yankees - Cowboys - Bulls



Yet another good post Coldfish...you've really been on a roll lately. What's the secret? Ginseng?

Exhibit B - theanimal23 - fan of the Cowboys and Bulls

[Sever82]

I disagree with the Jeter / Pujols comparison. If anything, you are making a case for Lebron going to Chicago. Jeter has 5 world series titles and plays for the most prestigious team in sports. Pujols has one for a team that has a nice, but nothing special history (sorry, no one really cares about the Cardinals).

Huh? They are the second most followed, most successful, team in all of baseball. Cardinals (in baseball) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bulls (in basketball - let alone where Cleveland would rank). I think maybe baseball history just isn't your thing. Which is fine. But the Cardinals have a huge national following and have had forever. I'll spare you the history lesson on it though.

I honestly think the Chicago Cubs and Boston Red Sox have a bigger following than the Cards.

[Sever82]

That makes sense to me, the Giants and Rangers don't get Yankee-like hype.

But the Knicks do. Not "Yankee like" hype, but huge hype. Even though they suck. Imagine what it will be like with LeBron James.

I dont know what Knick team you're following but the Knicks have zero hype at this point. If you ask the common fan who Derrick Rose is, they'll know, ask them who David Lee is and they'll think he's a character from Enter the Dragon.

[Ralphb07]

I own cell phone accessory stores and big sellers are sport team covers. NY Yankees and Boston Redsox sell the most and ones we keep in stock. When it comes to football they don't even make the Giants and Jets from the company I get them from and the Cowboys and Steelers are the most popular teams. I seel more of them than the Bucs and I live in Florida.

Coldfish is right, people look at the Yankees and they think it's all NY teams and that's not the case.

[DuckIII]

And he would have been even bigger had he played for the Knicks.

.

Pure conjecture

Of course. But I at least made a rational argument for why I think it would be so.

[DuckIII]

That makes sense to me, the Giants and Rangers don't get Yankee-like hype.

But the Knicks do. Not "Yankee like" hype, but huge hype. Even though they suck. Imagine what it will be like with LeBron James.

I dont know what Knick team you're following but the Knicks have zero hype at this point. If you ask the common fan who Derrick Rose is, they'll know, ask them who David Lee is and they'll think he's a character from Enter the Dragon.

The "Knicks team with zero hype" that I'm following is the one getting international media coverage because LeBron might sign there because of how hyped they are.

[DuckIII]

Huh? They are the second most followed, most successful, team in all of baseball. Cardinals (in baseball) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bulls (in basketball - let alone where Cleveland would rank). I think maybe baseball history just isn't your thing. Which is fine. But the Cardinals have a huge national following and have had forever. I'll spare you the history lesson on it though.

Globally, the Cardinals don't touch the Bulls. Do a google search on "most popular baseball team" and you will find oodles of articles, none of which put the Cardinals at #2. The Braves, Dodgers and Red Sox routinely out poll them.

Okay. So lets say they're 4th. Big deal. The point is still valid. Pujols plays for a historically storied franchise - the second most successful ever - with a major national following. And despite that, and despite being generally considered the best player in the game and arguably the greatest hitter ever (so far in his career), he isn't anywhere near as popular as he would be if he played in New York. Or Boston. Take your pick. The same principle applies to the Knicks.

[Sever82]

The "Knicks team with zero hype" that I'm following is the one getting international media coverage because LeBron might sign there because of how hyped they are.

ummmm no... Lebron is the story, not the knicks. Ever since the bulls have mentioned as a suitor, the bulls have been the topic of discussion when it comes to Lebron. The Knicks are still mentioned but the bulls are mentioned first now which tells you it has more to do with Lebron than the Knicks.

[Sever82]

Huh? They are the second most followed, most successful, team in all of baseball. Cardinals (in baseball) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bulls (in basketball - let alone where Cleveland would rank). I think maybe baseball history just isn't your thing. Which is fine. But the Cardinals have a huge national following and have had forever. I'll spare you the history lesson on it though.

Globally, the Cardinals don't touch the Bulls. Do a google search on "most popular baseball team" and you will find oodles of articles, none of which put the Cardinals at #2. The Braves, Dodgers and Red Sox routinely out poll them.

Okay. So lets say they're 4th. Big deal. The point is still valid. Pujols plays for a historically storied franchise - the second most successful ever - with a major national following. And despite that, and despite being generally considered the best player in the game and arguably the greatest hitter ever (so far in his career), he isn't anywhere near as popular as he would be if he played in New York. Or Boston. Take your pick. The same principle applies to the Knicks.

Love how you downplay how wrong you were

[DuckIII]

The "Knicks team with zero hype" that I'm following is the one getting international media coverage because LeBron might sign there because of how hyped they are.

ummmm no... Lebron is the story, not the knicks. Ever since the bulls have mentioned as a suitor, the bulls have been the topic of discussion when it comes to Lebron. The Knicks are still mentioned but the bulls are mentioned first now which tells you it has more to do with Lebron than the Knicks.

If LeBron were the story, and the Knicks weren't, the Knicks wouldn't be discussed as one of the three favorites to land LeBron.

(a) Cleveland is one becuase he is from northern Ohio and a 7 year cav.

(b) Chicago is one because the roster kicks ass as a potential immediate contender.

(c) The Knicks are the third team because they are the Knicks.

[JackFinn]

After 7 ringless years, LeBron likely won't take a risk on New York unless they get Bosh for a low price. Ewing's reputation does not eclipse Olajuwon's.

[DuckIII]

Love how you downplay how wrong you were

Even if I am wrong, its not by enough to displace the merits of the argument.

You guys sound like Knicks fans trying to downplay the allure of Chicago, frankly. This thread is starting to read like the Knicks board.

[kyrv]

The "Knicks team with zero hype" that I'm following is the one getting international media coverage because LeBron might sign there because of how hyped they are.

ummmm no... Lebron is the story, not the knicks. Ever since the bulls have mentioned as a suitor, the bulls have been the topic of discussion when it comes to Lebron. The Knicks are still mentioned but the bulls are mentioned first now which tells you it has more to do with Lebron than the Knicks.

If LeBron were the story, and the Knicks weren't, the Knicks wouldn't be discussed as one of the three favorites to land LeBron.

(a) Cleveland is one becuase he is from northern Ohio and a 7 year cav.

(b) Chicago is one because the roster kicks ass as a potential immediate contender.

(c) The Knicks are the third team because they are the Knicks.

Are the Knicks the third team though? Wouldn't Miami and the Clippers, even the Nets, be more attractive?

[DuckIII]

After 7 ringless years, LeBron likely won't take a risk on New York unless they get Bosh for a low price. Ewing's reputation does not eclipse Olajuwon's.

His ranking as a basketball player doesn't. His fame does. Its actually an excellent example of my whole point.

[kodo]

I find the idea that the Knicks are so popular globally hard to accept...or that NY is even the center of the sports universe. It's the center of the baseball universe but many of us couldn't care less about baseball, and it's not the center of the football universe or soccer universe or tennis universe.

It's anecdotal, but I have a lot of friends in Germany in Berlin and Frankfurt and they know who the Chicago Bulls are, because they were introduced to basketball via Michael Jordan. They know about 3 teams: Chicago (Jordan), Dallas (Dirk), and LA (Shaq & Kobe).

Basketball is not a team driven sport like basetball. Baskeball is about personalities, the stars. A lot of research supports that, but regardless Lebron proved it when he made the Cleveland Cavaliers famous globally.

In terms of basketball marketing & recognition, NY needs Lebron. Lebron doesn't need NY.

2009 Most Jerseys Sold in Europe:

1. Kobe Bryant, Los Angeles Lakers
2. Kevin Garnett, Boston Celtics
3. Pau Gasol, Los Angeles Lakers
4. LeBron James, Cleveland Cavaliers
5. Dwyane Wade, Miami Heat
6. Tony Parker, San Antonio Spurs
7. Dwight Howard, Orlando Magic
8. Andrea Bargnani, Toronto Raptors
9. Jose Calderon, Toronto Raptors
10. Paul Pierce, Boston Celtics
11. Dirk Nowitzki, Dallas Mavericks
12. Rudy Fernandez, Portland Trailblazers
13. Marco Belinelli, Golden State Warriors
14. Joakim Noah, Chicago Bulls
15. Gilbert Arenas, Washington Wizards

No Knicks.
If the Knicks are so powerful globally, you would at least expect a Gallinari jersey to outsell Joakim Noah or Marco Belinelli.

[coldfish]

One other thing that Bulls fans should be garner hope from is that LBJ, when he was 10 years old playing around in a gym, was pretending he was a Bull. Not a Cav. Not a Knick. Not a Laker. I am somewhat surprised that this isn't pimped more often.

I still would bet against Lebron being a Bull. There are simply too many factors involved to make it more than a 50/50 split. That being said, after virtually no talk about it during the season, fans and the media are starting to put 2 and 2 together than Lebron to Chicago makes a ton of sense. The only national media type talking about it 8 weeks ago was Bill Simmons.

[Sever82]

The "Knicks team with zero hype" that I'm following is the one getting international media coverage because LeBron might sign there because of how hyped they are.

ummmm no... Lebron is the story, not the knicks. Ever since the bulls have mentioned as a suitor, the bulls have been the topic of discussion when it comes to Lebron. The Knicks are still mentioned but the bulls are mentioned first now which tells you it has more to do with Lebron than the Knicks.

If LeBron were the story, and the Knicks weren't, the Knicks wouldn't be discussed as one of the three favorites to land LeBron.

(a) Cleveland is one becuase he is from northern Ohio and a 7 year cav.

(b) Chicago is one because the roster kicks ass as a potential immediate contender.

(c) The Knicks are the third team because they are the Knicks.

Actually no... The knicks are the third team because of how much Lebron has said he likes NY. Because of the fact that he has been seen at Yankee games wearing yankee caps, etc, etc. The Knicks aren't the team because they're "The Knicks"

[Magilla_Gorilla]

The only people talking about Lebron to the Knicks were NY newspaper reporters and the Yankees personal sports network (ESPN).

[red222]

One other thing that Bulls fans should be garner hope from is that LBJ, when he was 10 years old playing around in a gym, was pretending he was a Bull. Not a Cav. Not a Knick. Not a Laker. I am somewhat surprised that this isn't pimped more often.

I still would bet against Lebron being a Bull. There are simply too many factors involved to make it more than a 50/50 split. That being said, after virtually no talk about it during the season, fans and the media are starting to put 2 and 2 together than Lebron to Chicago makes a ton of sense. The only national media type talking about it 8 weeks ago was Bill Simmons.

actually in late 09 he predicted and brb would be bulls