Is the NBA on its way to a collapse?

[bow to royalty]

ur talking go ask the middle age ladies.... bruh who gives a fuckin fuck if a 50 year old lady knows certain players are u got damn kidding me? i kno an older female who knew enough to cheer for boston during they run because of rondo, and now is a "thunder fan" cuz of KD and stressbrook and is currently cheering for "that curry boy" cuz "lebron ugly", them women bless they heart they damn watch basketball based on looks just as much as to see a good game

ur talking business but asking if the nba is about to fail when its thriving right now. playoff ratings are high, cap goin up, and two franchises that have been stuck in oblivion at least since ive been alive have the finals ratings as high as they've ever been

KD is a superstar by whatever silly superstar definition u wanna have, u not really messing with basketball is why u dont know that and dont even know who some star players are

and u talkin about kd not reaching a level of team success like hes fuckin 40, that nigga 26 years old, entering his prime years. bruh please just ask a mod to erase this stupid ass thread. for the betterment of the cheap seats.

Those old ass ladies were just an example of people who know superstars. KD isn't a superstar. Shaq, Kobe, and Lebron were the last big superstars. Now with STAR POWER, you think KD is on the same level as those 3? Hell naw.

Someone needs to teach reading comprehension on here. I said the NBA is doing really well right now with the formula it's using. My question was for the future. Guess what...every successful company that failed was doing well at some point. So doing well now, doesn't mean you do well forever. I say the long term plan may not be a good one, and the reply is "What are you talking about? Everything's fine right now."

Again reading comprehension. I said KD "Hasn't yet" reached the level of team success. Meaning there's still time for it to happen. How is that talking about him like he's 40, and his time us up? But for comparison, at this point in their careers Kobe had 3 rings, Shaq had the first championship in the 3-peat, and Lebron was finishing up his first year in Miami. KD isn't the superstar Shaq/Kobe were with the Lakers, or Bron was by the end of his first year in Miami.

I feel like if you would focus on what you read, it may help you a lot.

 

[bow to royalty]

There will always be some new player that will emerge.

After Jordan's second retirement after the '98 season nobody envisioned a Kobe Bryant, Lebron James, or even an Allen Iverson type player when he was running things 10-15 years ago for a few years.

Remember cats were saying we might not even see a talent close to Jordans in our lifetimes; I don't think Kobe or Lebron are better than he was up to this point in their respective careers but they're as close to him as you can get without being better and one of which still has plenty of time left in the league.

Before Jordan there was Dr. J, Magic, and Bird many say those were the Golden Years of the league, then there was Jordan, after Jordan there was Kobe and LeBron.

Eventually when Lebron decides to hang it up there will be some new guy that's either already in the league or in college coming into the league that will be the next big thing and arguably nearly as good as or better than the aforementioned players.

It's the cycle of life; the NBA will be fine.

I hear you, but just the strategy of thinking someone'll pop up seems risky. Like if there wasn't a Lebron now, there wouldn't be another Lebron. Dominant centers use to keep emerging, but after Shaq who's that been? Dwight Howard is no Shaq.

Kobe and Lebron are beasts, but the fact that you're only thinking of 2 people in the past 17 years, kinda shows that you're constantly teetering on the edge of not having the superstar you need.

And you're right. It definitely could happen. The league didn't have Lebron, until it did. But the fact that we're looking at the NBA and college right now and don't see the replacement, at least makes it a valid question to wonder if the replacement is out there.

 

[silverfoxx]

Two words. Anthony. Davis.

 

[bow to royalty]

Nigga basketball is international fuck you talking about

So is golf...tennis...swimming...track...baseball...hockey...soccer...cricket...gymnastics...boxing...volleyball...racing. That's not the question, and it doesn't address the reasoning behind the question. Reading comprehension....

 

[Beta]

If Kevin Durant goes to china nobody gonna know who he is?

 

[Chi-Town Bully]

What is your definition of a superstar player

 

[bow to royalty]

What is your definition of a superstar player

I'm looking mostly at popularity. Although, you do need to have the talent to back it up (popularity drops quickly when you're a loser), and most superstars are a very rare talent. People who's popularity is kinda bigger than the sport they play, are the level of superstar I mean. People like Jordan, Kobe, Shaq, and Lebron. Going further back you have guys like Jabar, Magic, and Bird. They've been out the game for damn near 30 years, and still everyone knows them. So with all due respect to KD, I'm not super confident that in 2050, his name will be as popular as those 3 guy's names are today. But Jordan, Shaq, Kobe, and Lebron's names will live on and be familiar to the masses (not just true basketball fans) long, long, after they retire. That's the type of player basketball has had for decade, after decade now. I haven't seen that next player out there, so I asked this question. People are acting like it's the most insane shit to wonder about.

There's only been 1 finals in the past 12 years without Shaq, Kobe, or Lebron in them. To have that kind of person missing every year could be a blow.

 

[bow to royalty]

And for people that think it's more about talent than star power. Here are the least watched finals from 1981 - 2008. Notice anything extremely obvious? The Spurs, the second most talented and successful franchises of the past 15 years are in EVERY SINGLE GAME. But Lebron surrounded by scrubs, playing against younger less established (but talented) players are getting double the viewers.

If you disagree with me...cool, I understand. But if you think I'm just pulling this question out of my ass based on nothing, you're trippin.

5.2: New Jersey at San Antonio, 2003 Game 2

5.6: Cleveland at San Antonio, 2007 Game 2

6.2: San Antonio at New Jersey, 2003 Game 5

6.3: Cleveland at San Antonio, 2007 Game 1

6.4: New Jersey at San Antonio, 2003 Game 1

6.4: San Antonio at Cleveland, 2007 Game 3

6.5: San Antonio at Cleveland, 2007 Game 4

6.6: San Antonio at New Jersey, 2003 Game 4

6.9: Detroit at San Antonio, 2005 Game 2

7.0: San Antonio at New Jersey, 2003 Game 3

7.2: Three tied

Detroit at San Antonio, 2005 Game 1

San Antonio at Detroit, 2005 Game 3

San Antonio at Detroit, 2005 Game 4

7.5: New Jersey at San Antonio, 2003 Game 6

 

[Peezy_Jenkins]

ur talking go ask the middle age ladies.... bruh who gives a fuckin fuck if a 50 year old lady knows certain players are u got damn kidding me? i kno an older female who knew enough to cheer for boston during they run because of rondo, and now is a "thunder fan" cuz of KD and stressbrook and is currently cheering for "that curry boy" cuz "lebron ugly", them women bless they heart they damn watch basketball based on looks just as much as to see a good game

ur talking business but asking if the nba is about to fail when its thriving right now. playoff ratings are high, cap goin up, and two franchises that have been stuck in oblivion at least since ive been alive have the finals ratings as high as they've ever been

KD is a superstar by whatever silly superstar definition u wanna have, u not really messing with basketball is why u dont know that and dont even know who some star players are

and u talkin about kd not reaching a level of team success like hes fuckin 40, that nigga 26 years old, entering his prime years. bruh please just ask a mod to erase this stupid ass thread. for the betterment of the cheap seats.

Those old ass ladies were just an example of people who know superstars. KD isn't a superstar. Shaq, Kobe, and Lebron were the last big superstars. Now with STAR POWER, you think KD is on the same level as those 3? Hell naw.

Someone needs to teach reading comprehension on here. I said the NBA is doing really well right now with the formula it's using. My question was for the future. Guess what...every successful company that failed was doing well at some point. So doing well now, doesn't mean you do well forever. I say the long term plan may not be a good one, and the reply is "What are you talking about? Everything's fine right now."

Again reading comprehension. I said KD "Hasn't yet" reached the level of team success. Meaning there's still time for it to happen. How is that talking about him like he's 40, and his time us up? But for comparison, at this point in their careers Kobe had 3 rings, Shaq had the first championship in the 3-peat, and Lebron was finishing up his first year in Miami. KD isn't the superstar Shaq/Kobe were with the Lakers, or Bron was by the end of his first year in Miami.

I feel like if you would focus on what you read, it may help you a lot.

u can claim no one is comprehending all u want.

one thing i do comprehend, is this is a dumbass thread.

 

[nujerz84]

i see what he trying to say.. but they will always be superstars after Jordan retired u had kobe, shaq, Ai, Vince, Tmac then Lebron, Wade, Anthony etc etc.. Spurs were great teams but casual fans, hell even some true basketball fans find Spurs boring times.

What brings in the casuals is wanting to see great players and hope they win or lose..

 

[bow to royalty]

i see what he trying to say.. but they will always be superstars after Jordan retired u had kobe, shaq, Ai, Vince, Tmac then Lebron, Wade, Anthony etc etc.. Spurs were great teams but casual fans, hell even some true basketball fans find Spurs boring times.

What brings in the casuals is wanting to see great players and hope they win or lose..

^^ See Peezy? A different opinion, but the ability to understand. This is the level we're trying to get you to.

And there have been stars, but do they have the power to draw the masses like Kobe and Bron have been able to do? You make a really good point with the love/hate thing bringing people in. Superstars have lots of people interested in seeing them lose. Look at Bron, Kobe...hell Mayweather, Manning, and Brady. Melo gonna bring in an extra million+ people because they want him to lose? Chris Paul? James Harden? Dwight Howard?

I get what you're saying about the Spurs, but if true basketball fans have trouble wanting to watch greatness, and future HOF'ers...how much can we expect casual fans to feel a high interest in Derrick Rose or KD? Again, I'm not questioning talent necessarily. I'm questioning how the NBA will be without the presence of a true superstar (based on popularity). If Bron retired after this season do you think KD could fill the void he left? Household name, face of the NBA, millions tune in wanting him to lose, and millions more tune in to see him win, called the best athlete on the planet? I don't, but some may.

 

[Peezy_Jenkins]

dont ever fix ur fingers to type like im the dunce here again bro.

 

[bow to royalty]

dont ever fix ur fingers to type like im the dunce here again bro.

It's just your reading comprehension that I'm concerned about.

 

[bow to royalty]

And for people that think it's more about talent than star power. Here are the least watched finals from 1981 - 2008. Notice anything extremely obvious? The Spurs, the second most talented and successful franchises of the past 15 years are in EVERY SINGLE GAME. But Lebron surrounded by scrubs, playing against younger less established (but talented) players are getting double the viewers.

If you disagree with me...cool, I understand. But if you think I'm just pulling this question out of my ass based on nothing, you're trippin.

5.2: New Jersey at San Antonio, 2003 Game 2

5.6: Cleveland at San Antonio, 2007 Game 2

6.2: San Antonio at New Jersey, 2003 Game 5

6.3: Cleveland at San Antonio, 2007 Game 1

6.4: New Jersey at San Antonio, 2003 Game 1

6.4: San Antonio at Cleveland, 2007 Game 3

6.5: San Antonio at Cleveland, 2007 Game 4

6.6: San Antonio at New Jersey, 2003 Game 4

6.9: Detroit at San Antonio, 2005 Game 2

7.0: San Antonio at New Jersey, 2003 Game 3

7.2: Three tied

Detroit at San Antonio, 2005 Game 1

San Antonio at Detroit, 2005 Game 3

San Antonio at Detroit, 2005 Game 4

7.5: New Jersey at San Antonio, 2003 Game 6

I see people acting like they didn't see this

 

[luke1733]

This thread is a spinoff from the thread about NBA lacking superstars.

The NBA is doing really well now. The ratings for these finals are through the roof. The league is pulling in international players. The global market is growing. All's well...now the other side.

The NBA doesn't have much in the way of superstars (It has 2. Kobe Bryant...Lebron James). Say what you want about whoever else you want. Then go ask the middle aged ladies at work about Chris Paul, Blake Griffin, Kevin Durant, etc. Your grandma recognizes the names Lebron and Kobe. The problem with this is the NBA is a league VERY dependent on superstars, Lebron is 30, and the next guy to reach his level of stardom hasn't emerged yet. So with the decline of Lebron, so goes the decline of the NBA. The impact? Look at what the NBA Finals ratings would have been like with the Hawks in instead of the Cavs.

Is the NBA's dependence on superstars about to come back and bite it in the ass?

Side note NFL>>>NBA

Ur logic is flawed in this sense.

If I ask a middle aged woman 45 who John Stockton was she wouldn't know.

If I asked my 80 year old grandmother who Pete Malkovich was she wouldn't know.

You ask me about most NFL superstars playing today, I don't know.

Now, go back to the world, which is bigger than America:

ask Japan, China, South America, Russia in the 80's who Isiah was, Dominique, Charles Barkley, Dr.J

you would get crickets.

Now in 2015 ask Japanese, Chinese, South Americans, or anybody around the world who watches the NBA (whereas in the 80's they couldn't watch the NBA) who: Stephen Curry is, Kevin Durant, Ginobili, Tony Parker is and you'll get a response.

Now go around the world and ask about NFL superstars from 2010-2015 and see what you hear compared to NBA.

Sidenote Globally NBA 1000x>>>>>>>>>NFL

Add up all the people that watched the superbowl for one day and compare that with the entire international viewership of the 6 games watching the NBA FINALS

 

[bow to royalty]

This thread is a spinoff from the thread about NBA lacking superstars.

The NBA is doing really well now. The ratings for these finals are through the roof. The league is pulling in international players. The global market is growing. All's well...now the other side.

The NBA doesn't have much in the way of superstars (It has 2. Kobe Bryant...Lebron James). Say what you want about whoever else you want. Then go ask the middle aged ladies at work about Chris Paul, Blake Griffin, Kevin Durant, etc. Your grandma recognizes the names Lebron and Kobe. The problem with this is the NBA is a league VERY dependent on superstars, Lebron is 30, and the next guy to reach his level of stardom hasn't emerged yet. So with the decline of Lebron, so goes the decline of the NBA. The impact? Look at what the NBA Finals ratings would have been like with the Hawks in instead of the Cavs.

Is the NBA's dependence on superstars about to come back and bite it in the ass?

Side note NFL>>>NBA

Ur logic is flawed in this sense.

If I ask a middle aged woman 45 who John Stockton was she wouldn't know.

If I asked my 80 year old grandmother who Pete Malkovich was she wouldn't know.

You ask me about most NFL superstars playing today, I don't know.

Now, go back to the world, which is bigger than America:

ask Japan, China, South America, Russia in the 80's who Isiah was, Dominique, Charles Barkley, Dr.J

you would get crickets.

Now in 2015 ask Japanese, Chinese, South Americans, or anybody around the world who watches the NBA (whereas in the 80's they couldn't watch the NBA) who: Stephen Curry is, Kevin Durant, Ginobili, Tony Parker is and you'll get a response.

Now go around the world and ask about NFL superstars from 2010-2015 and see what you hear compared to NBA.

Sidenote Globally NBA 1000x>>>>>>>>>NFL

Add up all the people that watched the superbowl for one day and compare that with the entire international viewership of the 6 games watching the NBA FINALS

You're missing my point. I didn't say the NBA is doing poorly right now. My question is basically how will the NBA handle being without a major superstar if someone can't step up and fill Lebron's shoes once he's declining/retired? The high ratings for this most recent finals makes my point...it doesn't dismiss it. I put up the numbers of recent finals ratings with the Spurs in them...the lowest in the past 30 years. And they're an accomplished, talented team. So without a Lebron to push the ratings (like he did this year), how will the NBA do? If my question is essentially how will the league do without Lebron, you can't say "They'll do great...look at how well they're doing WITH Lebron." For example, if I asked you a couple years ago how will the Heat do without Lebron, it would sound silly to answer that with "They're in the finals every year, and winning championships...they'll do great once he's gone"

 

[luke1733]

I see your the point your making on the major superstar, but to people who don't follow the sport it always looks that way. I'm no NFL fan, the only dude who was a major NFL star to me over the past 10 years was Tom Brady and he could walk in front of me now and I wouldn't recognize who the fuck he was or care. I just know the name.

Besides that I know of other football players but I don't really know shit about them or care too.

I can name more NFL stars in the 80's (Joe Montana, Jerry Rice, Bo Jackson, Deion Sanders, Refrigerator, Tecmo Superbowl, Walter Payton) than in the 90's or 2000's and I was like one-years old then.

In Hockey it was Wayne Gretzky.

Baseball is even harder to think on beyond A-Rod, and he ain't really on a Tiger Woods, MJ, Kobe, Lebron status in superstardom.

America has a "The ONE" complex where in sports and society there isn't room for truly promoting a TEAM (that would be communism according to stupid US marketers) to all the world so it's always One.

So basically, again, unless you're someone who somewhat consistently watches that NBA/NFL/NHL sport and will know the abundance of good players who will make the Hall of Fame in it then really there isn't more than one.

The 80's for the NBA were different because the ABA was finally ruled out and all the marketers focused in on one league and pushed and promoted, but don't get confused tying 90's superstars or 70's NBA superstars with the 80's superstars just because they were unknown rookies in the 80's or 70's superstars well out of their primes but hanging around.

In the 80's NBA you had 2 superstars for what YOUR definition of it is. Magic and Bird

Everybody else according to your definition was NOT a superstar.

I understand your definition, I just don't agree with having to state that just because one superstar is more popular than another and had a longer legacy makes the other lesser superstar not a superstar.

Prince will never be Michael Jackson, but he's pretty fucking big.

Kevin Durant still can't just freelly walk into a McDonald's and nobody recognizes him.

He's known throughout all America.

 

[bow to royalty]

I see your the point your making on the major superstar, but to people who don't follow the sport it always looks that way. I'm no NFL fan, the only dude who was a major NFL star to me over the past 10 years was Tom Brady and he could walk in front of me now and I wouldn't recognize who the fuck he was or care. I just know the name.

Besides that I know of other football players but I don't really know shit about them or care too.

I can name more NFL stars in the 80's (Joe Montana, Jerry Rice, Bo Jackson, Deion Sanders, Refrigerator, Tecmo Superbowl, Walter Payton) than in the 90's or 2000's and I was like one-years old then.

In Hockey it was Wayne Gretzky.

Baseball is even harder to think on beyond A-Rod, and he ain't really on a Tiger Woods, MJ, Kobe, Lebron status in superstardom.

America has a "The ONE" complex where in sports and society there isn't room for truly promoting a TEAM (that would be communism according to stupid US marketers) to all the world so it's always One.

So basically, again, unless you're someone who somewhat consistently watches that NBA/NFL/NHL sport and will know the abundance of good players who will make the Hall of Fame in it then really there isn't more than one.

The 80's for the NBA were different because the ABA was finally ruled out and all the marketers focused in on one league and pushed and promoted, but don't get confused tying 90's superstars or 70's NBA superstars with the 80's superstars just because they were unknown rookies in the 80's or 70's superstars well out of their primes but hanging around.

In the 80's NBA you had 2 superstars for what YOUR definition of it is. Magic and Bird

Everybody else according to your definition was NOT a superstar.

I understand your definition, I just don't agree with having to state that just because one superstar is more popular than another and had a longer legacy makes the other lesser superstar not a superstar.

Prince will never be Michael Jackson, but he's pretty fucking big.

Kevin Durant still can't just freelly walk into a McDonald's and nobody recognizes him.

He's known throughout all America.

A lot of people won't recognize NFL players just by seeing them. But it's not an issue, because the NFL has team loyalty/interest that helps push the league. They're not NEARLY as superstar dependent as the NBA.

And there can be more than one superstar at a time. Kobe, Lebron, Shaq, Jordan have shared superstardom. But what I'm saying is these current NBA players are stars, but not superstars. Look at what Tiger Woods, the Williams Sisters, Usain Bolt, and Michael Phelps did for their sports. Me and most people don't give a shit about golf, women's tennis, track, or swimming. But the WORLD tunes in to watch these people even though they don't really care about the sport...superstars.

Kevin Durant's a star (and insanely tall), so ya he will definitely get recognized a lot. But being recognized in the streets, and being able to put a league on your back are 2 very different things. He's not successful enough to be a superstar yet.

 

[bow to royalty]

And I'm not hating on Durant or anything. He's really talented and deserves to be a star. But Phelps put swimming on his back, Bolt put track on his back, Tiger put golf on his back, the Williams Sisters put women's tennis on their back. Jordan, Kobe, Shaq, and Bron put basketball on their backs.

I'm just saying after looking at those athletes, and what they did, Durant is clearly not on that level right now, despite his ability to be recognized at Mcdonalds.

 

[bow to royalty]

The state of the NBA I was describing with this thread may be coming sooner than I expected. If Bron doesn't turn this series around, it's a bad look. He's going to lose some of his appeal if things stay this ugly.

The league won't crumble, but it'll take steps back