TV Schedule: No Wonder Players Like Big Markets

[PosImpos]

http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2011/12/7/2617841/nba-schedule-2011-2012-chris-paul-new-york-knicks


Giving smaller market teams a better chance of holding onto their stars isn't just about the money the smaller market teams can offer.


For the record, I'd rather watch the Rockets than the Knicks any day of the week.

[Marcus13]

John Wall and Deron Williams won't be on national TV once this season.

That's incredible

[PosImpos]

John Wall and Deron Williams won't be on national TV once this season.

That's incredible

i know, right?

id love to watch john wall but ive never really watched him play.

im pretty sure when the celtics played the wizards last season wall was injured.

[Greenbean]

Wow...tp

[Fafnir]

For the record, I'd rather watch the Rockets than the Knicks any day of the week.

Yes but you're a hardcore NBA fan, aren't enough of us to move the needle I'm afraid.

[bdm860]

I don't know, I disagree with this.

Sure there is a small bias towards the large markets, not a big deal.  Bulls and Knicks are both on national TV 22 times, Thunder and Magic are only on national TV 17 and 16 times.  I can live with that difference, not that major.  Warriors seems a little strange though (though I think the Warriors benefit from being one of 4 teams on West Coast time which is perfect for that late game time slot).

Miami is not a large TV market, yet they are on TV the same number of times as the Lakers (who are the 2nd largest) and more than the Knicks (largest market).  Actually more than any (other team than the Lakers), despite about half of NBA teams being in larger markets.

Cleveland was one of the top TV teams when they were a contender, now they suck and they’re not on TV.
Boston wasn’t on TV (despite being one of the larger markets) much between ’94 and ’07, then they got good and are on TV.  The schedule follows the good, exciting teams, much more than the market size.

And I really don’t believe anybody (even before the Chris Paul trade talks) thought the Hornets or Rockets were going to be a better team than the Knicks this season, despite the records from last year, so I don’t know why the article even brings that up.  With that line of reasoning, Cleveland should have been on TV plenty in 2011 since they won 60+ games in 2010.  That thinking doesn’t make much sense.

And you guys saying you want to watch John Wall.  Why?  That team sucks.  Aren’t you guys just contributing to the problem of raising the superstars above the teams?  John Wall is not a super exciting player.  I would rather watch a good team than a crappy one with a good player (of course there are a few exceptions like LeBron, Blake Griffin I want to watch when they’r young, but John Wall isn’t that kind of superstar player).  Also DC is a top 10 media markets, so it kind of contradicts the whole article.

[Cman]

See, this is actually good news for the Celtics RE: CP3.  Boston gets lots of media attention.

[PosImpos]

I don't know, I disagree with this.

Sure there is a small bias towards the large markets, not a big deal.  Bulls and Knicks are both on national TV 22 times, Thunder and Magic are only on national TV 17 and 16 times.  I can live with that difference, not that major.  Warriors seems a little strange though (though I think the Warriors benefit from being one of 4 teams on West Coast time which is perfect for that late game time slot).

Miami is not a large TV market, yet they are on TV the same number of times as the Lakers (who are the 2nd largest) and more than the Knicks (largest market).  Actually more than any (other team than the Lakers), despite about half of NBA teams being in larger markets.

Cleveland was one of the top TV teams when they were a contender, now they suck and they’re not on TV.
Boston wasn’t on TV (despite being one of the larger markets) much between ’94 and ’07, then they got good and are on TV.  The schedule follows the good, exciting teams, much more than the market size.

And I really don’t believe anybody (even before the Chris Paul trade talks) thought the Hornets or Rockets were going to be a better team than the Knicks this season, despite the records from last year, so I don’t know why the article even brings that up.  With that line of reasoning, Cleveland should have been on TV plenty in 2011 since they won 60+ games in 2010.  That thinking doesn’t make much sense.

And you guys saying you want to watch John Wall.  Why?  That team sucks.  Aren’t you guys just contributing to the problem of raising the superstars above the teams?  John Wall is not a super exciting player.  I would rather watch a good team than a crappy one with a good player (of course there are a few exceptions like LeBron, Blake Griffin I want to watch when they’r young, but John Wall isn’t that kind of superstar player).  Also DC is a top 10 media markets, so it kind of contradicts the whole article.

unless you have one of the league's most popular superstars (e.g. lebron) or you are a big market, you won't get on tv much.  even if your team is very good (e.g. the spurs aren't on national tv much).