PDA

View Full Version : Finals conspiracy theories prove to be as durable as tinfoil



JordansBulls
05-28-2009, 12:28 PM
Source: NBA.com (http://www.nba.com/2009/news/features/david_aldridge/05/28/daily.dose/index.html)




Every year, every nutbag with a computer and a complete lack of imagination writes some version of the following: David Stern wants the Lakers and (fill in the blank team here) in the Finals. You know the refs are gonna make that happen. The NBA is rigged. It's no better than pro wrestling.
...

But over 25 or so years in this profession, I like to deal in things that us fancy-pants reporters call "facts." Here are some:

The San Antonio Spurs have won four NBA titles since 1999.

The Spurs are ratings death.

They are ratings death because you all, in the main, are rank hypocrites. More on that later.

The longer a playoff series goes, the more people watch. (You can look this up, or you can trust me. It's true.) So a seven-game series is ratings gold.

In the last 10 Finals series, there have been two 4-0 sweeps (in 2002 and '07), three five-game series ('99, '01 and '04) and four six-game series ('00, '03, '06 and '08). Only one series has gone the full, ratings-exploding seven -- San Antonio's 4-3 victory over Detroit in '05. Which, again, you didn't watch, 'cause the Spurs were in it. If the league is rigging the Finals for maximum viewership, it's doing a lousy job. (By the way, do you know how many times Michael Jordan's Bulls played a seven-game Finals series? Zero. Out of six.)


...
Now, there's no question that Kobe and LeBron in the Finals would be good for business. That's why Nike's doing commercials featuring Kobe and LeBron puppets. It's why that vitamin water company has the whole "24 vs. 23" thing going, and why ESPN and NBA TV showed that special featuring the two of them. They are the two most popular guys in the game. But it's always been that way. The Playoffs are when the shoe companies and other high-end companies roll out the new ads featuring the game's superstars. They did it for Vince Carter; they did it for Tracy McGrady; they'll do it for Ricky Rubio or whoever the next flavor of the month is. Kevin Garnett didn't play a second in the Playoffs, but his new Gatorade spot has been in heavy rotation for weeks.

How, then, do the crazies explain away Orlando's 3-1 series lead over The Chosen One, and the Nuggets giving the Lakers all they can handle?







New York, the largest TV media market in the United States according to a 2004 Nielsen Media ranking, hasn't made the Finals since 1999, and hasn't won a championship in 36 years.

Los Angeles, No. 2 in that Nielsen study, has lost its last two Finals appearances since its threepeat from 2001-03.

Chicago, No. 3, didn't make a single Finals from 1966-'91, when Jordan, Scottie Pippen and company reached full maturity. And since The Last Dance in '98, the Bulls haven't been back.

Philadelphia, fourth, has been to one Finals (2001) since '83.

Boston, fifth, won the title last season -- its first championship series appearance since '86.

San Francisco (the Warriors), No. 6, has been in three Finals series since the franchise moved from Philadelphia in '62. None of those appearances has come since '75.

Dallas, seventh, has made one Finals in the Mavericks' 29-year history.

Washington, eighth, has not only not made the Finals since '79, but hasn't been to a conference final since '79.

Detroit, 11th, has been in two Finals since the Pistons' back-to-back titles in '89 and '90.

And Miami, No. 17, has made one Finals since the franchise's inception in '88.

You would think someone as all-powerful as Stern -- who can, apparantly, control the tides -- would have a better batting average. How is it that a city like Portland (the 23rd-largest TV market) has been in as many Finals over the last 35 years (two) as New York City? How has Indianapolis (number 25) been in the Finals more recently than 'Frisco? Orlando (No. 20) with as many title cuts as Dallas? Salt Lake City's Jazz (ranked 36th) having been to more Finals over the last three decades than D.C.?

Which brings us to media market No. 37: San Antonio, Texas.

The Spurs are everything you say you want in a championship team. They are quiet and non-controversial, to the point of inducing sleep. They have no controversies in their locker room. They play a team game, though they have great one-on-one players like Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili. They don't preen or point, they play defense, they listen to their coach -- who is smart and crusty and profane and worldly. They play hard, are almost tattoo-free (Tim Duncan has a panther on his shoulder blade, I think) and their superstar, Duncan, took less money a few years ago so that the team could sign some other guys.

They have been in four Finals in the last 10 years.

Three of those were the lowest-rated of all time, in audience share, overall rating and average viewers.

"If we were in New York," Parker told me a couple of years ago, "they would love us."

So, why didn't you watch?

I'm not sure anyone did a poll, but anecdotally, you hear that the Spurs are (were?) "boring." No stars. No compelling personalities. No buzz.

LAKERMANIA
05-28-2009, 12:33 PM
Great Article, I hate those conspiracy theories as well.. Im glad people are realizing the league is for real and (almost) nothing is rigged for ratings..

theuuord
05-28-2009, 12:36 PM
thank you so much.

IBleedPurple
05-28-2009, 01:00 PM
Of course, it is from NBA.com.....Stern recruited somebody.

And about the Spurs, they were helped very slightly by a referee with a gambling problem, and who is to say that the league doesn't favor some teams? Not taking anything away from the Spurs great play, but just making a point that there is more to a game than what we see. Lebron gets the most ridiculous superstar treatment I've ever seen

IndyRealist
05-28-2009, 01:15 PM
Hrm, a TNT/NBA paid reporter stating that there is absolutely NO rigging in NBA games. I'm sure he's unbiased.

I'm not one for conspiracy theories, I think anything that seems like "rigging" is more than likely just the influence of player reputations and whatnot. But I don't consider David Aldridge an objective reporter when it comes to the NBA.

Bring The Heat
05-28-2009, 01:18 PM
Good to see this article...really tired and sick of hearing these little conspiracy nerds all the time thinking the nba is always rigged...seriously that article says it all and these playoffs say something too...

IndyRealist
05-28-2009, 01:24 PM
But...if there was rigging...then it would make sense that the NBA would do it in a way that is hard to trace. There's only so much a ref can do before it becomes patently obvious that they're giving the game away (Lebron's 3 on Dwight, anyone?).

More likely, Stern would "inform" refs about certain calls on say, Lebron, which are NOT violations. He would also "encourage" certain teams to trade players to bigger market teams for future considerations (read: Pau to the Lakers for Marc Gasol and "a favor" which turned to be forcing Minnisota to trade OJ Mayo for Kevin Love, and Minnisota will get future considerations).

I'm not saying any of this happens, simply because the larger a conspiracy is, the harder it is to hide, and most likely -someone- would have blown the whistle by now, if for nothing more than the book deal.

Ilir
05-28-2009, 01:31 PM
great article i doubt the nba has anything to do with rigging games. If anything i think its the refs themselves who favor certain players just because they expect certain things from certain players

BTownTeamsRKing
05-28-2009, 01:31 PM
I hope its real. all of these points are great, except for the fact we had one ref caught red handed gambling and screwing the Kings in a conference finals. Along with that, we got refs still working games who were on the other end of 100s of phone calls before and after the games that *** donaghly worked. And on top of that, all we get from stern is this narrowminded answer; "It was a rogue referree, that is all."

If u guys want to play the numbers game, I can do that.

Did u know the NFL playoffs TRIPLED the ratings of the NBA Finals the year it was spurs vs. cavs? Next year, we got Celtics vs. Lakers in a trully traditional and hyped up heavy weight battle.

My point is this: Is it not possible the awful rating the Spurs finals produced could have sparked the league to tilt the match ups to have a better product in the playoffs and championships?

I think it is possible.

BTownTeamsRKing
05-28-2009, 01:33 PM
But...if there was rigging...then it would make sense that the NBA would do it in a way that is hard to trace. There's only so much a ref can do before it becomes patently obvious that they're giving the game away (Lebron's 3 on Dwight, anyone?).

More likely, Stern would "inform" refs about certain calls on say, Lebron, which are NOT violations. He would also "encourage" certain teams to trade players to bigger market teams for future considerations (read: Pau to the Lakers for Marc Gasol and "a favor" which turned to be forcing Minnisota to trade OJ Mayo for Kevin Love, and Minnisota will get future considerations).

I'm not saying any of this happens, simply because the larger a conspiracy is, the harder it is to hide, and most likely -someone- would have blown the whistle by now, if for nothing more than the book deal.

Anything is a possibilty when we have a ref who is in prison for fixing games. The way people turn a blind eye toward that amazes me. That is a great point as well, if they are fixing any games, I dont think they would make it obvious for obvious reasons.

BTownTeamsRKing
05-28-2009, 01:34 PM
great article i doubt the nba has anything to do with rigging games. If anything i think its the refs themselves who favor certain players just because they expect certain things from certain players

This is also a very good point and very true. I think this is the case with Lebron more often than not.

Edit: I want to add this. Don't misunderstand me. I want everything to be legit and real. I want every achievement by Lebron, Kobe, Celtics, Magic etc... to be authentic and not manaufactured. I hope the NBA is honest and the games are called fairly. However, there are so many factors pointing in the direction of favoritism, money, and rating and to turn to a blind eye to the hints and sometimes hard evidence that not everything is straight is denial.

theuuord
05-28-2009, 01:44 PM
Of course, it is from NBA.com.....Stern recruited somebody.

And about the Spurs, they were helped very slightly by a referee with a gambling problem, and who is to say that the league doesn't favor some teams? Not taking anything away from the Spurs great play, but just making a point that there is more to a game than what we see. Lebron gets the most ridiculous superstar treatment I've ever seen

oh good god.

IndyRealist
05-28-2009, 01:47 PM
Sorry I split all this up into multiple posts, but David Aldridge looked at all the facts that supported his arguement and nothing that might undercut it. For instance:


Most common matchups
11 times: Boston Celtics (9) vs. Minneapolis/Los Angeles Lakers (2)
6 times: Syracuse Nationals/Philadelphia 76ers (1) vs. Minneapolis/Los Angeles Lakers (5)
5 times: Minneapolis/Los Angeles Lakers (3) vs. New York Knicks (2)
4 times: Boston Celtics (3) vs. St. Louis Hawks (1) (such a meeting now impossible due to current conference alignment)
3 times: Detroit Pistons (2) vs. Los Angeles Lakers (1)
2 times: Seattle SuperSonics (1) vs. Washington Bullets (1)
2 times: Boston Celtics (2) vs. Houston Rockets (0)
2 times: Chicago Bulls (2) vs. Utah Jazz (0)


Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_Finals#Most_common_matchups

Which markets did he describe as "large markets"? LA played Boston in the Finals 11 times. Philly played the Lakers 6 times, Lakers played the Knicks 5 times.

The Lakers have been in the Finals 29 times, Boston 20. Philly has been there 9 times, Knicks 8, Pistons 7, Bulls 6, Warriors 6. All of those teams except Detroit where listed as large markets.

The teams that have never made the finals are: the Clippers, Nuggets, Hornets, Timberwolves, Grizzlies, Raptors, and Bobcats. All small markets.

BTownTeamsRKing
05-28-2009, 01:48 PM
oh good god.

heres the thing.

Conspiracies go to far sometimes, but so dismissles like this. Keep your mind open and don't dismiss anything just like that. I know u guys are smarter than that.

Ilir
05-28-2009, 01:49 PM
I read an article talking about how bad the officating has become and i just wanted to bring this up.

"But this spring feels different for two reasons. First, the NBA can't seem to replenish its officiating ranks. 1937, 1939, 1943, 1944, 1947, 1948, 1950, 1951, 1951, 1953, 1954, 1955, 1955 ... those are the actual birth years of 13 current referees. "

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...8&sportCat=nba


The youngest is 54 years old. Nothing against the old but you gotta keep up with athletes in their 20s runnin up and down the court all game while making calls as you run. Its not easy. Its time for some new refs if you ask me

Ilir
05-28-2009, 01:50 PM
before you start blamin the nba for rigging games why dont you look at the problem from where it begins

BTownTeamsRKing
05-28-2009, 01:51 PM
I read an article talking about how bad the officating has become and i just wanted to bring this up.

"But this spring feels different for two reasons. First, the NBA can't seem to replenish its officiating ranks. 1937, 1939, 1943, 1944, 1947, 1948, 1950, 1951, 1951, 1953, 1954, 1955, 1955 ... those are the actual birth years of 13 current referees. "

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...8&sportCat=nba


The youngest is 54 years old. Nothing against the old but you gotta keep up with athletes in their 20s runnin up and down the court all game while making calls as you run. Its not easy. Its time for some new refs if you ask me

agree. not to mention, the game is played so differently now

tr4shb0t
05-28-2009, 01:58 PM
I believe that the better team wins, but that there is a lot of behind-the-scenes stuff that goes on. One of the most obvious things in the playoffs is that the refs try to keep the score close so fans of both teams feel they have a chance and keep watching until the end. Or if they know one team has a clear advantage, the refs try to give the underdog beneficial calls in the first half or first 3 quarters, then they let them play. Then there are definitely favored players and that definitely gets out of control sometimes.

People aren't stupid, and when they see this stuff happen it makes them feel like its fake or rigged, but it is really just more complicated. In the end, I understand the NBA is a business and they have to do some things to benefit themselves. I do have mixed feelings about it though.

IndyRealist
05-28-2009, 02:01 PM
Wasn't the game NBA Jam Session, where if you fell behind by double digits the game made it easier for you to score baskets, just to keep it interesting? Just sayin'.

xDjEpYOnx
05-28-2009, 02:07 PM
Did u know the NFL playoffs TRIPLED the ratings of the NBA Finals the year it was spurs vs. cavs? Next year, we got Celtics vs. Lakers in a trully traditional and hyped up heavy weight battle.

My point is this: Is it not possible the awful rating the Spurs finals produced could have sparked the league to tilt the match ups to have a better product in the playoffs and championships?

I think it is possible.

First, comparing any other sport in America to football is fool's gold, the NFL kicks all other sports in ratings all the time, the NFL even gets to sell out preseason games in certain markets. Regular season football games outrank postseason baseball games at times, and baseball is the number two sport in America, so even basketball would get beat by it.

As far as your point goes, its pretty narrow view of what happened. You're telling everyone that the only reason the Celtics and Lakers made it to the Finals was because Stern wanted it so? The 2 best teams, each with the best records in their conferences, made it to the finals strictly because the Association wanted to get their ratings and endorsements? That's a shallow point of view of your team(and mines, i'm a Lakers fan) to say that the players on those teams had the league conspire for them so they'd make it to the Finals, as if the talent and their abilities on the court weren't enough.

I love a good conspiracy theory every now and then, but this "NBA is rigged" just has too many holes for it to be true, of course anything is possible, but not everything is probable.

Sly Guy
05-28-2009, 02:15 PM
may not be rigged, but it doesn't change the fact the officials suck the d**k of kobe and leBron, and are doing a piss-poor job managing the games this year.

BTownTeamsRKing
05-28-2009, 02:24 PM
First, comparing any other sport in America to football is fool's gold, the NFL kicks all other sports in ratings all the time, the NFL even gets to sell out preseason games in certain markets. Regular season football games outrank postseason baseball games at times, and baseball is the number two sport in America, so even basketball would get beat by it.

As far as your point goes, its pretty narrow view of what happened. You're telling everyone that the only reason the Celtics and Lakers made it to the Finals was because Stern wanted it so? The 2 best teams, each with the best records in their conferences, made it to the finals strictly because the Association wanted to get their ratings and endorsements? That's a shallow point of view of your team(and mines, i'm a Lakers fan) to say that the players on those teams had the league conspire for them so they'd make it to the Finals, as if the talent and their abilities on the court weren't enough.

I love a good conspiracy theory every now and then, but this "NBA is rigged" just has too many holes for it to be true, of course anything is possible, but not everything is probable.

Im just saying its a nice coincidence. Heres the thing about conspiracy theories, they have holes because they likely aren't true. Just sometimes I think things are too good to be true.

I mean we all know how money game 7's bring. We know how crazy the Boston market is for sports and the Celtics had 4 of them in 2 years. thats wild.

stuff llike that make u wonder if things are just too good to be true. thats all

pete_one
05-28-2009, 02:35 PM
can't wait for game 5 tonight

sp1derm00
05-28-2009, 02:56 PM
may not be rigged, but it doesn't change the fact the officials suck the d**k of kobe and leBron, and are doing a piss-poor job managing the games this year.

Yes, especially on the flagrants that were never called in-game by Jones against Kobe. They definitely LOVE kobe sooo much.

kingkobe
05-28-2009, 02:57 PM
Yeah imagine if it turns out that all along NBA was like WWE. Now that'll be SHOCKING!

abe_froman
05-28-2009, 02:58 PM
your not going to stop the theorists from believing there's a conspiracy.doesnt matter what you pull up,how many facts disprove it,its a belief and they wont let facts get in the way...just take a look in the general discussion part of this site,just a few days ago someone made a thread(and there have been many)on a 9/11 conspiracy and it didnt matter how much you tried to explain the faults in his logic or principals of basic metallurgy,he couldnt bring him to be mistaken or might be wrong

theuuord
05-28-2009, 03:18 PM
heres the thing.

Conspiracies go to far sometimes, but so dismissles like this. Keep your mind open and don't dismiss anything just like that. I know u guys are smarter than that.

Oh I keep my mind open. I'm just not an idiot. I, as a matter of fact, am smarter than that.

Anyone who believes that the NBA is rigged from the top down probably thinks they saw Tupac and Elvis having dinner with the Prime Minister of Mars last week, too.

Get it out of your head.

JordansBulls
05-28-2009, 03:34 PM
Sorry I split all this up into multiple posts, but David Aldridge looked at all the facts that supported his arguement and nothing that might undercut it. For instance:



Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_Finals#Most_common_matchups

Which markets did he describe as "large markets"? LA played Boston in the Finals 11 times. Philly played the Lakers 6 times, Lakers played the Knicks 5 times.

The Lakers have been in the Finals 29 times, Boston 20. Philly has been there 9 times, Knicks 8, Pistons 7, Bulls 6, Warriors 6. All of those teams except Detroit where listed as large markets.

The teams that have never made the finals are: the Clippers, Nuggets, Hornets, Timberwolves, Grizzlies, Raptors, and Bobcats. All small markets.


Nice analysis.

theuuord
05-28-2009, 03:36 PM
Nice analysis.

Question though: since when has Los Angeles or Toronto been a small market!?

TheCooLKid2020
05-28-2009, 03:42 PM
The NBA wanted the Spurs to win because in a era of hip hop and all that... they wanted the Good Guy Tim Duncan and the TEAM game of the spurs to win to make the NBA look good.

theuuord
05-28-2009, 03:43 PM
The NBA wanted the Spurs to win because in a era of hip hop and all that... they wanted the Good Guy Tim Duncan and the TEAM game of the spurs to win to make the NBA look good.

oh good GOD.

There's a conspiracy theory for EVERY team winning the Finals, apparently.

IRUAM #21
05-28-2009, 03:45 PM
The NBA wanted the Spurs to win because in a era of hip hop and all that... they wanted the Good Guy Tim Duncan and the TEAM game of the spurs to win to make the NBA look good.

So this is Hip Hop's fault ?

abe_froman
05-28-2009, 03:46 PM
Sorry I split all this up into multiple posts, but David Aldridge looked at all the facts that supported his arguement and nothing that might undercut it. For instance:



Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_Finals#Most_common_matchups

Which markets did he describe as "large markets"? LA played Boston in the Finals 11 times. Philly played the Lakers 6 times, Lakers played the Knicks 5 times.

The Lakers have been in the Finals 29 times, Boston 20. Philly has been there 9 times, Knicks 8, Pistons 7, Bulls 6, Warriors 6. All of those teams except Detroit where listed as large markets.

The teams that have never made the finals are: the Clippers, Nuggets, Hornets, Timberwolves, Grizzlies, Raptors, and Bobcats. All small markets.
but thats not going indepth about those small markets,for instance:
clippers;they're lack of being in the finals couldnt be due to their legendarily bad management.or the bobcats only existing for 5 years?

both of which might have something to do with the lack of titles/finals appearances

or when the large market teams made theirs..like chicago,those 6 all came in one decade but they've always been the 3rd largest market

theuuord
05-28-2009, 03:46 PM
So this is Hip Hop's fault ?

if i rig the NBA
ain't nothin to it
gangsta rap made me do it

IRUAM #21
05-28-2009, 03:47 PM
if i rig the NBA
ain't nothin to it
gangsta rap made me do it

Conspiracy !!!!!

Incublime24
05-28-2009, 04:04 PM
Sorry I split all this up into multiple posts, but David Aldridge looked at all the facts that supported his arguement and nothing that might undercut it. For instance:



Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_Finals#Most_common_matchups

Which markets did he describe as "large markets"? LA played Boston in the Finals 11 times. Philly played the Lakers 6 times, Lakers played the Knicks 5 times.

The Lakers have been in the Finals 29 times, Boston 20. Philly has been there 9 times, Knicks 8, Pistons 7, Bulls 6, Warriors 6. All of those teams except Detroit where listed as large markets.

The teams that have never made the finals are: the Clippers, Nuggets, Hornets, Timberwolves, Grizzlies, Raptors, and Bobcats. All small markets.


Umm...How are the Lakers in a big market, and the Clippers are in a small market? Not only are they in the same city, but they share the same building!! I think all of those teams not making the finals has more to do with bad management rather than the size of the market they are in. If any team can thrive in a small market (e.g. the San Antonio Spurs) then every other small market team should have a chance. No excuses...just build a good team.

macc
05-28-2009, 04:12 PM
I think the league would have to much to lose if anyone found out that it was rigged. I don't think Stern would be stupid enough to get involved in somthing like that. I mean the guy is a billionaire, why would he risk all that for a few more ratings? The NBA is full of stars, even if you don't have Lebron in the finals you have Dwight Howard vs Kobe, or vs Melo.


You have to realize that the NBA is a product that sells itself. If it was a struggling business and times were getting desperate then I could see somethings being rigged or what not to get their fans back, but bottom line is they don't have to. As true fans we're gonna watch year after year, no matter how good/bad our teams do. It sells itself.


With that being said I wouldn't say that the system is flawless. The NBA is a business, and some businesses have parts of it that are corrupt. I could see a player throwing a game, or possibly a corrupt ref. If either is the case I can guarentee Stern isn't the one paying him off or knowing about it. He's at the top, just way to much to lose, not only would that tarnish his name but the game of basketball forever.....


It's like the Gov't. The president most of the time isn't the one that's corrupt, its just entities within the gov't that are. Things that go on behind the Presidents back. Savy

GspLAL
05-28-2009, 04:27 PM
Im just saying its a nice coincidence. Heres the thing about conspiracy theories, they have holes because they likely aren't true. Just sometimes I think things are too good to be true.

I mean we all know how money game 7's bring. We know how crazy the Boston market is for sports and the Celtics had 4 of them in 2 years. thats wild.

stuff llike that make u wonder if things are just too good to be true. thats all

Exactly, not to mention all the money it brings to cover the stadium's cost from tickets, food, merchandise, etc.

theuuord
05-28-2009, 04:29 PM
Exactly, not to mention all the money it brings to cover the stadium's cost from tickets, food, merchandise, etc.

A game seven in last year's NBA Finals would have been AMAZING for revenue.

Too bad the NBA rigged it so the Celtics would win by 40 in game 6, huh?

IBleedPurple
05-28-2009, 04:32 PM
Question though: since when has Los Angeles or Toronto been a small market!?

I think an argument could be made for the Clippers being a small market team, purely from the dominance of the Lakers

xDjEpYOnx
05-28-2009, 04:33 PM
The Lakers have been in the Finals 29 times, Boston 20. Philly has been there 9 times, Knicks 8, Pistons 7, Bulls 6, Warriors 6. All of those teams except Detroit where listed as large markets.

The teams that have never made the finals are: the Clippers, Nuggets, Hornets, Timberwolves, Grizzlies, Raptors, and Bobcats. All small markets.

And of all those matchups, how many of those were under Stern's reign as commish? Stern became the commish in 1984 so i'm sure some of your numbers will change for his tenure as commish. You can't be making a point that since the NBA began, they've been rigging it for big market teams, since they have the overwhelming finals appearances. Looking at your list there, Lakers, Celtics, Bulls, etc, you're talking about some dynasties there. I won't go thru who were on those finals teams, we all know them or the stars on them, but I'd like to think that the league has not been fixed and/or rigged at all, even from its inception.

As for the teams to never make the finals: Bobcats, Grizzlies, and Raptors are expansion teams with short histories(Bobcats since 05, Grizz & Raps since 96), TWolves, since '90, had a shot to make the finals, lost in the WCF in 03-04, Hornets been around since '89, might have had a better team had they kept kobe but they got CP3 and lately have had success, back to back playoff appearances. As far as the last two, Nuggets and Clippers, we can all agree that the Clippers have been horrendous since the dawn of man :D with the exception of the 05-06 season where they made it to the semis but didnt have enough to win game 7 vs PHX; and the Nuggets have had two stretches of playoff teams, in the 80s under Moe and now under Karl, both coaches had prolific scorers, Moe had Alex English and Karl has Melo. The Thugs are just 2 wins away from their first finals appearance.

These teams are just franchises that haven't had the front office to build a championship team. But all it takes is a a few or one great player(s) and appropriate supporting casts and they can make their playoff history soon. This whole conspiracy quest is reaching now. Its not about the markets or economy, its about the talent that is put on the hardwood.

downsos
05-28-2009, 04:34 PM
hrm, a tnt/nba paid reporter stating that there is absolutely no rigging in nba games. I'm sure he's unbiased.

I'm not one for conspiracy theories, i think anything that seems like "rigging" is more than likely just the influence of player reputations and whatnot. But i don't consider david aldridge an objective reporter when it comes to the nba.

+1

theuuord
05-28-2009, 04:38 PM
I think an argument could be made for the Clippers being a small market team, purely from the dominance of the Lakers

Are the Mets a small market team too?

GspLAL
05-28-2009, 04:42 PM
A game seven in last year's NBA Finals would have been AMAZING for revenue.

Too bad the NBA rigged it so the Celtics would win by 40 in game 6, huh?

I wasn't saying every single series is rigged because it brings money to pay off bills, but if need be, I think they would do it.

IndyRealist
05-28-2009, 05:43 PM
And of all those matchups, how many of those were under Stern's reign as commish? Stern became the commish in 1984 so i'm sure some of your numbers will change for his tenure as commish. You can't be making a point that since the NBA began, they've been rigging it for big market teams, since they have the overwhelming finals appearances. Looking at your list there, Lakers, Celtics, Bulls, etc, you're talking about some dynasties there. I won't go thru who were on those finals teams, we all know them or the stars on them, but I'd like to think that the league has not been fixed and/or rigged at all, even from its inception.

As for the teams to never make the finals: Bobcats, Grizzlies, and Raptors are expansion teams with short histories(Bobcats since 05, Grizz & Raps since 96), TWolves, since '90, had a shot to make the finals, lost in the WCF in 03-04, Hornets been around since '89, might have had a better team had they kept kobe but they got CP3 and lately have had success, back to back playoff appearances. As far as the last two, Nuggets and Clippers, we can all agree that the Clippers have been horrendous since the dawn of man :D with the exception of the 05-06 season where they made it to the semis but didnt have enough to win game 7 vs PHX; and the Nuggets have had two stretches of playoff teams, in the 80s under Moe and now under Karl, both coaches had prolific scorers, Moe had Alex English and Karl has Melo. The Thugs are just 2 wins away from their first finals appearance.

These teams are just franchises that haven't had the front office to build a championship team. But all it takes is a a few or one great player(s) and appropriate supporting casts and they can make their playoff history soon. This whole conspiracy quest is reaching now. Its not about the markets or economy, its about the talent that is put on the hardwood.

The Clippers have a small market in that they account for a very small portion of the LA fanbase. I'm sure everyone would agree that there are 10 Lakers fans for every Clipper fan in LA.

Yeah, some of those teams are expansion teams, who could not reasonably make it to the Finals in their short existence. But teams like New Orleans cannot reasonably be called expansion teams anymore, and the Hornets are on the list.

I'm not saying there's a conspiracy, I'm simply pointing out that David Aldridge ignored a LOT of facts in his analysis, which says that there is DEFINITIVELY no conspiracy. His commentary is there to sell newspapers, figuratively speaking, and should be taken as such. He is not an objective observer.

Oh, and no one said the conspiracies started with David Stern.

Incublime24
05-28-2009, 05:50 PM
The Clippers have a small market in that they account for a very small portion of the LA fanbase. I'm sure everyone would agree that there are 10 Lakers fans for every Clipper fan in LA.

Yeah, some of those teams are expansion teams, who could not reasonably make it to the Finals in their short existence. But teams like New Orleans cannot reasonably be called expansion teams anymore, and the Hornets are on the list.

I'm not saying there's a conspiracy, I'm simply pointing out that David Aldridge ignored a LOT of facts in his analysis, which says that there is DEFINITIVELY no conspiracy. His commentary is there to sell newspapers, figuratively speaking, and should be taken as such. He is not an objective observer.

Oh, and no one said the conspiracies started with David Stern.


It doesn't matter how many fans the Clippers have compared to the Lakers. They could have far less fans because their management sucks and the team is run very poorly in contrast to the Lakers. No matter how you slice it the Clippers are in the Los Angeles market, which is one of the biggest in the country. Thus, the Clippers are still a big market team. If the Clippers suddenly acquired Lebron James and started making it to the finals every year and started gaining more fans in the area would they all of a sudden be a big market team in your opinion? The size of the market doesn't have anything to do with the number of fans or victories your team has. It depends on the SIZE OF THE MARKET. LA = BIG MARKET. Clippers are in a big market.

IndyRealist
05-28-2009, 05:57 PM
It doesn't matter how many fans the Clippers have compared to the Lakers. They could have far less fans because their management sucks and the team is run very poorly in contrast to the Lakers. No matter how you slice it the Clippers are in the Los Angeles market, which is one of the biggest in the country. Thus, the Clippers are still a big market team. If the Clippers suddenly acquired Lebron James and started making it to the finals every year and started gaining more fans in the area would they all of a sudden be a big market team in your opinion? The size of the market doesn't have anything to do with the number of fans or victories your team has. It depends on the SIZE OF THE MARKET. LA = BIG MARKET. Clippers are in a big market.

This is splitting hairs. If you have two teams in the same city, one has a HUGE fan base, a storied history, and lots of money behind it, and the other doesn't, and you were looking to give one of them an unfair advantage for ratings purposes, which would you choose? That's why I consider the Clips a small market.

PhillyMac
05-28-2009, 06:04 PM
i really dont care, as long as tacky weak fouls are called on lebron and nobody else, the game will forever be rigged

FOBolous
05-28-2009, 06:16 PM
I think what the problem is that all conspiracy theoriest forgot to account for the fact that the referees are humans (very old humans at that) and humans make mistakes. They don't realize how hard is it to spot fouls in a very face paced, physical game and mistakes are inevitable. Thus they like to point out every mistake as "evidence" of a conspiracy. But when you look at the big picture, review the history of the league, and study the facts...it is clear that there's no conspiracy going on. If there is a conspiracy going on...Houston wouldn't have won the championship those two years that Jordan wasn't in the league. Another more popular team that has more stars would'dve. If there is a conspiracy going on...the unpopular, boring, San Antonio Spurs would not have won all those championships these past few years...neither would've Detroit.

rmonte4
05-28-2009, 06:30 PM
If you believe what Tim Donaghy stated last year, just this one instance that he mentioned a game 6 was rigged by nba execs to extend the series, then the NBA loses all credibility in playoff series' since Stern became president. Remember no one believed in Jose Canseco's statements until they were later uncovered.

"On June 10, 2008, Donaghy's attorney filed a court document alleging, among other things, that Game 6 of the 2002 Western Conference Finals between the Los Angeles Lakers and Sacramento Kings was fixed by two referees. The letter states that Donaghy "learned from Referee A that Referees A and F wanted to extend the series to seven games. Tim knew Referees A and F to be 'company men', always acting in the interest of the NBA, and that night, it was in the NBA's interest to add another game to the series."[34] The Lakers won Game 6, attempting 18 more free throws than the Kings in the fourth quarter, and went on to win the 2002 NBA Finals. The teams were not named, but the Western Conference Finals was the only seven-game series that year.[35]

The document claimed that Donaghy told federal agents that in order to increase television ratings and ticket sales, "top executives of the NBA sought to manipulate games using referees".[34] It also said that NBA officials would tell referees to not call technical fouls on certain players, and states that a referee was privately reprimanded by the league for ejecting a star player in the first quarter of a January 2000 game."

BTownTeamsRKing
05-28-2009, 06:41 PM
If you believe what Tim Donaghy stated last year, just this one instance that he mentioned a game 6 was rigged by nba execs to extend the series, then the NBA loses all credibility in playoff series' since Stern became president. Remember no one believed in Jose Canseco's statements until they were later uncovered.

"On June 10, 2008, Donaghy's attorney filed a court document alleging, among other things, that Game 6 of the 2002 Western Conference Finals between the Los Angeles Lakers and Sacramento Kings was fixed by two referees. The letter states that Donaghy "learned from Referee A that Referees A and F wanted to extend the series to seven games. Tim knew Referees A and F to be 'company men', always acting in the interest of the NBA, and that night, it was in the NBA's interest to add another game to the series."[34] The Lakers won Game 6, attempting 18 more free throws than the Kings in the fourth quarter, and went on to win the 2002 NBA Finals. The teams were not named, but the Western Conference Finals was the only seven-game series that year.[35]

The document claimed that Donaghy told federal agents that in order to increase television ratings and ticket sales, "top executives of the NBA sought to manipulate games using referees".[34] It also said that NBA officials would tell referees to not call technical fouls on certain players, and states that a referee was privately reprimanded by the league for ejecting a star player in the first quarter of a January 2000 game."

Hard Evidence. Good comparison with Canseco. No one beleived him and well looky looky looky wat we got here...

I have a question tho, Is the NBA (Stern) and Refs the same entity? I always thought the refs were their own company that the NBA hired to do games.

Ill bet anything one of those refs was bavetta AKA laker lover.

FOBolous
05-28-2009, 06:52 PM
If you believe what Tim Donaghy stated last year, just this one instance that he mentioned a game 6 was rigged by nba execs to extend the series, then the NBA loses all credibility in playoff series' since Stern became president. Remember no one believed in Jose Canseco's statements until they were later uncovered.

"On June 10, 2008, Donaghy's attorney filed a court document alleging, among other things, that Game 6 of the 2002 Western Conference Finals between the Los Angeles Lakers and Sacramento Kings was fixed by two referees. The letter states that Donaghy "learned from Referee A that Referees A and F wanted to extend the series to seven games. Tim knew Referees A and F to be 'company men', always acting in the interest of the NBA, and that night, it was in the NBA's interest to add another game to the series."[34] The Lakers won Game 6, attempting 18 more free throws than the Kings in the fourth quarter, and went on to win the 2002 NBA Finals. The teams were not named, but the Western Conference Finals was the only seven-game series that year.[35]

The document claimed that Donaghy told federal agents that in order to increase television ratings and ticket sales, "top executives of the NBA sought to manipulate games using referees".[34] It also said that NBA officials would tell referees to not call technical fouls on certain players, and states that a referee was privately reprimanded by the league for ejecting a star player in the first quarter of a January 2000 game."

Tim Donaghy was offered a lighter sentence by federal agents for any leads or tips on any other possible game fixing that could be going on. He just lost everything...his family, his finances, his career...his life. As such, he decided to make up a whole bunch of fairy tales the he knows is believable in order to get a lighter sentence. We all know what the end result of the federal investigation is. Nothing new was discovered.

And that "evidence" doesn't take away from the fact that some of the less popular team has won championships these past 20 years. Houston won the two years that Jordan was gone instead of more popular, star studded teams. San Antonio won a lot of championiships despite drawing low ratings. The same goes for Detroit. Detroit won a championship without having a real star at the moment. Conspiracy my @$$

ManRam
05-28-2009, 06:56 PM
NBA conspiracy theorists= fail

Anyone watching with a non-bias eye, and being objective can see that these games may be poorly officiated at times, but are far from being rigged, let alone favoring one team more than the other. Every game is still won by the team that deserves to win. There were shaky calls last night for instance against the Nuggets in the 4th quarter, but prior to that, they benefited from a fair amount of questionable calls. The Nuggets also played absolutely horrible basketball in the 4th, which is why they lost the game. The calls almost always even out.

People need to remember that refs have one chance to get it right. And this one chance is in real-time, without multiple angles, and without slowing it down. They can't see everything happening on the court (Mo not getting a tech for throwing the ball at Dwight), they can't always position themselves so they can see the play clearly and they have to make quick decisions on 50/50 plays. Try refereeing a game. It's hard as hell. Keep that in mind when you watch the game on your 80 inch HD TV with DVR and the benefit of seeing 18 replays from 18 different angles in slow motion. The refs don't have that luxury.

SJSHARKIES
05-28-2009, 06:58 PM
I don't think there is a conspiracy or any rigged games today, but I will say that the KINGS VS. LAKERS rivalry was some of the most BS calls I have ever seen in my life. Kings were screwed from a championship by the refs.

BigEric
05-28-2009, 07:12 PM
I think the NBA should hire new refs. A whole new crew, and call fouls that are hard or fouls that really disrupt a shot. If the offenseive player shouldn't be able to dictate whether something is a foul or not, it's a smart thing to do, but in my mind it's bush league. Offensive players, Wade and Lebron mostly, make defenders foul them, which isn't right. If a defensive player fouls the offensive player under the defensive players will, than call the foul. If you have Wade and Lebron bumping into people and running full force to draw "fouls", that ruins the game.

BigEric
05-28-2009, 07:18 PM
NBA conspiracy theorists= fail

Anyone watching with a non-bias eye, and being objective can see that these games may be poorly officiated at times, but are far from being rigged, let alone favoring one team more than the other. Every game is still won by the team that deserves to win. There were shaky calls last night for instance against the Nuggets in the 4th quarter, but prior to that, they benefited from a fair amount of questionable calls. The Nuggets also played absolutely horrible basketball in the 4th, which is why they lost the game. The calls almost always even out.

People need to remember that refs have one chance to get it right. And this one chance is in real-time, without multiple angles, and without slowing it down. They can't see everything happening on the court (Mo not getting a tech for throwing the ball at Dwight), they can't always position themselves so they can see the play clearly and they have to make quick decisions on 50/50 plays. Try refereeing a game. It's hard as hell. Keep that in mind when you watch the game on your 80 inch HD TV with DVR and the benefit of seeing 18 replays from 18 different angles in slow motion. The refs don't have that luxury.

I don't agree or disagree with the conspiracy, but the way the game is played today is so kindergarten-ish. Let them play and it'll end this talk. Lebron was talking about how he doesn't complain to refs in the games, that's BS, he whines after every call he doesn't get. Kobe, Wade, Lebron, etc. expect calls to go their way. They are the reason that the foul was called in the first place. A foul SHOULD be when someone does something that isn't right, or well .....wrong. They are all physical players, but when they get their defender where they want, they can abuse them with the refs whistle. I mean don't get me wrong, players do play much more physical against the great players, but it isn't like it's ALL their faults.

superkegger
05-28-2009, 08:01 PM
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/ball_dont_lie/post/The-great-NBA-conspiracy-list;_ylt=AofpH5rG3pYfKszeRbs1kAm8vLYF?urn=nba,166 330

montazingmvp
05-28-2009, 08:29 PM
i'm not one to believe nba conspiracy theories...but this article proves nothing

montazingmvp
05-28-2009, 08:31 PM
but that lakers kings series is very suspicious

SJSHARKIES
05-31-2009, 12:17 AM
Any speculations that the NBA is still rigged should be washed away with Orlando vs. Lakers in the final. If the NBA was truly all about making money, the Cavs would of advanced.

NBA Conspiracy Theories=FAIL

IRUAM #21
05-31-2009, 12:18 AM
People who think the NBA's rigged = EPIC FAIL.

_KB24_
05-31-2009, 02:22 AM
Yeah i hate the whole conspiracy crap. Just look at the teams that are getting hyped and favored to go to the Finals. "THE BEST TEAMS" make it out. Last year , the Celtics and Lakers. This Year everyone thought it was LA and Cleveland. But heres Orlando destroying the Cavs.