Short Statement from Stern regarding the GSW/Dal Series

by jpgarfunkle on May 5, 2007 11:37 AM PDT Comment 20 comments

David Stern was asked while watching the Raptors and Nets game what his thoughts were on the 8 vs 1 matchup over in the west and the outcome.

http://www.realgm.com:80/src_wiretap_archives/45958/20070504/stern_says_best_of_seven_first_round_wa s_supposed_to_prevent_upsets/

"They were never supposed to," said Stern. "The four out of seven was supposed to make sure that the better team won."

My response to all of this.

I'm not just saying this as a lifetime GSW fan. But upsets and unforseen outcomes are great for TV audiences. If everything went 'according' to plan what fun would that be? What fun would it be to watch the games and go to the arenas(of course outside of the fans of the team(s) that are winning).

It makes it easier for a casual fan, or of a fan of NBA basketball in general to watch playoff games of teams that are not their own. You never know whats going to happen, you never know who is going to win and how. And well lets all face it. Society loves the underdog story, the out of nowhere team, or the out of nowhere player who put in dues and went through adversity and is making it.

If nothing else after this series the Dallas fan base will still be in full affect. The GSW fan base is now in full swing and everyone is talking about the crowd and how it will affect the games and what not. That has to be good for NBA basketball overall. Stern will atleast now have one other city or impactful fan base where he can make some money for himself and the league.

I have no idea about the ratings, or where to get them. But I am curious to see how this playoff series stacks up with the other first round playoff series this year.

I just think overall as a whole it is better for the NBA.

If say Orlando knocked off Detroit in the first round this year, I think the same general buzz would be happening over there.

Care to share yours?

Poll

Will David Stern try to make adjustments to playoffs next year?

Yes

11 votes

No

35 votes

46 votes | Poll has closed

This FanPost is a submission from a member of the mighty Golden State of Mind community. While we're all here to throw up that W, these words do not necessarily reflect the views of the GSoM Crew. Still, chances are the preceding post is Unstoppable Baby!

0 recs | Comment 20 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

agree

We were never supposed to make the playoffs anyway. ;)

If the "better" team won all the time, how predictable would the playoffs be?

by Caught Backcourt on May 5, 2007 12:00 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

the better team did win

even if its a 3 game series the better team wins. idc what anyone says if you lose a series, the other team is better

by travisl212 on May 5, 2007 12:03 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I agree

If a series is fair, then I agree that whichever team wins a series is by definition the better team. It is always harmful not to have the best team win, even if that team won 25 fewer regular season games than it's opponent, (and in the long run it will lead people in that league to make less money) . Fans can understand how injuries, mid-season trades, and some teams being better in the regular season than in the playoffs, can lead to the better team having the worse record. There is no need to alter reality in order to dumb things down for the fans Attempts to dumb down to people always lead to far more harm than any good they lead to. People can understand our world in all its complexity if they are given a chance to do so.
Stern, as he has shown often, is all about the money. What makes Stern dangerous though, is how short sighted he is. G-State beating Dallas means he will make less money this year, but over years to come, (especially if G-State wins the c-ship this year), the Dubs could easily make more money for him. Primarily because of Baron this Dubs team reminds me a lot of Magic's Lakers, and as a percentage of total league revenues I doubt that any team has ever made more money than those Lakers (at least not since the league went to 20 teams). When Magic's Lakers first beat defending champion Seattle though, would Stern as commissioner have moaned because he saw only the lost money. I wonder. This short sightedness leads Stern to do many dangerous things. Stern sees that in the short-term a dress code will make him more money, but he forgets that in the long term anything that lessens freedom will have negative affects that will outweigh any positive affects it has, (probably including the affect of him making less money in the long term). Stern sees that in the short term keeping player salaries down will help owners, but he keeps them down by restricting the freedom of players and owners to make the deals they want to make, and forgets that it is always harmful to restrict freedom.

by George on May 7, 2007 8:19 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

and another thing

i hate david stern's comments of how "they weren't supposed to" no1 is supposed to do anything except go out there and play basketball man. every team in the playoffs has an equal shot.

by travisl212 on May 5, 2007 12:05 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

the better team did win

by nfisch88 on May 5, 2007 12:10 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

If the best team was supposed to win every year then why even have the playoffs? Just give it to whoever has the best record. The playoffs are exciting and upsets are part of the fun. It gives hope to every mediocre team during the regular season.

And The Fat Man said on KNBR that like Game 5 or something was the highest rated round 1 game in TNT history so that must be a good sign. Surprising since most of the east coast is asleep by the time we finish playing.

by DaAzNJRiCh on May 5, 2007 12:30 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

indeed, the most basic point all these fools miss

is that the BETTER TEAM DID WIN! between two teams, any sport, isn't the better team, by definition, the one that beats the other over and over and over and over and over...

how do you continue to rationalize that the better team is the one consistently at the losing end? is stern just going to shift the paradigm and insist that the definition of champion in basketball will no longer be dictated by the outcome of head to head competition? these people continue to kill us. get over your damn selves NBA . the dallas mavericks face-of-the-NBA wet dream just was not true. you can not force an alternate reality just by ignoring the truth progressively more loudly and repetitiously.

67-wins don't mean sh$#. none of them were against us.

by 321 IN n OUT on May 5, 2007 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

i think

seems like this pretty much proves that the NBA wanted dallas to win that series. that would explain iffy fines, foul calls, ejections and so forth. CONSPIRACY!!!!!

by mydedgerbil555 on May 5, 2007 1:11 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

my thoughts exactly

it was pretty obvious the nba wanted the mavs to win the series. i mean jason terry didn't get sh!t done to him for slamming baron to the ground. if that doesn't scream conspiricy then nothing does

by AJC3317 on May 5, 2007 1:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

What everyone else said...

David Stern is so obsessed with the star power of the NBA. Anybody who watched the series knows that we are the more exciting team so us winning may even help tv ratings. It's just because Baron Davis isn't a household name yet. Like everyone else said... the better team DID win.

by bucsdork99 on May 5, 2007 2:00 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

He's right though.

The best of seven series are supposed to make sure the better team win, so we won.

by semarubaka on May 5, 2007 3:04 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I think...

In a best of 7 series, the best team does win. But it's the best team during the series.

Just like you can't argue that Dallas wasn't the best team during the regular season, there's no way to argue that the Warrior's weren't the best team in this series.

Everyone knew Dallas was the better team going into this series. Everyone who watched the games noticed that the Warriors were the better team in the series.

Ultimately, when the playoffs come, we're all 0-0.

by bradyk2 on May 5, 2007 3:42 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Wow....

David Stern got owned XD

by aznwarrior44 on May 5, 2007 3:44 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

like others have said

The better team did win. We blem them out in three games, and won one close one. They won one close one, a game in which they went from 20 up to 9 down. Then game 2 the ejection game, kind of a matter of opinion how close that game should be considered. We were down 2 at halftime, and down 10 at the end of the 3rd when Baron got ejected, but Baron had 5 fouls and wasn't playing well. This series wasn't particularly close.

I agree with Stern that there are no upsets in a 7 game series. You cannot win 4 times if you are a significantly worse team. What's obvious here is that the Warriors, at the time of the series, were a better team. Over the course of the season the Mavs were a better team, but we got hot at the right time, while the Mavs peaked at the wrong time.

More Hardware Coming!

by gsw4life on May 5, 2007 3:49 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

eeeeh,

seems like david's id just leaked out a little bit, doesn't it?
further evidence that a., the first round is too long for no damn reason, and that b., predictability is no damn fun, david. why isn't the football adage "any given sunday" good enough for the nba? why does it have to feel so engineered?

by justin on May 5, 2007 4:34 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I am disappointed

David Stern did not have the courage to admit that an underdog team played great and ousted what appeared to be an NBA finals bound team just a couple weeks ago. I am disappointed that the NBA commissioner could not treat all teams in the league as equal. I am disappointed that he could not admit that the Warriors were the better team during this series.

What a shame!

by Vash01 on May 5, 2007 5:24 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

f**k david stern

that man is a money-grubbing fool. he doesn't have a soul. why even listen to him?

by OaktownWarrior on May 5, 2007 7:38 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I think its called

a half-hearted attempt at a joke while being interviewed by ESPN while watching a game. I really hate ESPN/ABC because they interview with people when they're watching the game. And we miss like 2 minutes of action. It's just a rediculous sideshow.

With his past behind him, Adonal looks toward the future, wherever it may be....

by Zorgon on May 5, 2007 10:40 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Apparently so does Stern

forget what game it was (when Monta got his MIP award, game 3?) but TNT interviewed Stern during play and just wouldn't stop asking questions. He finally told them to get back to the game "for the fans" and the interviewer said something stupid like they can see it now, but they want to hear from you too.

by BingBluNT on May 6, 2007 10:44 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Short sighted money grubbing

Stern, as he has shown often, is all about the money. What makes Stern dangerous though, is how short sighted he is. G-State beating Dallas means he will make less money this year, but over years to come, (especially if G-State wins the c-ship this year), the Dubs could easily make more money for him. Primarily because of Baron this Dubs team reminds me a lot of Magic's Lakers, and as a percentage of total league revenues I doubt that any team has ever made more money than those Lakers (at least not since the league went to 20 teams). When Magic's Lakers first beat defending champion Seattle though, would Stern as commissioner have moaned because he saw only the lost money. I wonder. This short sightedness leads Stern to do many dangerous things. Stern sees that in the short-term a dress code will make him more money, but he forgets that in the long term anything that lessens freedom will have negative affects that will outweigh any positive affects it has, (probably including the affect of him making less money in the long term). Stern sees that in the short term keeping player salaries down will help owners, but he keeps them down by restricting the freedom of players and owners to make the deals they want to make, and forgets that it is always harmful to restrict freedom. Just as it is always harmful to restrict freedom, in a competitive league it is always harmful not to have the best team win, even if that team won 25 fewer regular season games than it's opponent, (and in the long run it will lead people in that league to make less money) . Fans can understand how injuries, mid-season trades, and some teams being better in the regular season than in the playoffs, can lead to the better team having the worse record. There is no need to alter reality in order to dumb things down for the fans Attempts to dumb down to people always lead to far more harm than any good they lead to. People can understand our world in all its complexity if they are given a chance to do so.

by George on May 7, 2007 8:16 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs