So there’s something interesting about the anti-NBA sentiment. We all like a sport that for the most part is terrifically static. Only 12 of 60 or 130 teams has a chance at a title. The good teams are the good teams even with roster turnover.
But there’s a sort of fatalism here.
When talking about transfers, ELA pointed out, no one imagines someone might get hurt. Players and fans have settled into this spot where we assume someone establishes early and they’re just set. We’re not into the journey, or the ups and downs, we’re just obsessed with a team’s ability to be there right at the end. Like the Cletics should be fun and interesting, but we say they won’t beat the Warriors, so why bother?
I think the way of consuming the NBA has in some ways shifted, at least to me. If you like the NBA you like the broader picture and seek out what might be interesting. What was lost was the thing where you saw a team that was ok to good and projected potential greatness. It seems like the world is smaller (it’s mostly been a league with little parity, but now we seem hyper aware of it. Like if in the 90s we were just more skeptical of the Knick and Western Conference)
Chances are, the Warriors break up after this year. KD might leave. Green and Klay will get deals. They’ll fall back, and if it’s just about them, the three-year blip will end. But my gut is, that fatalism will remain, and just move to another team.
