Welcome to Trendlines, your weekly installment of what’s trending up and what’s trending down in sports. This week we’re talking about the NBA Finals, and the emergence of the small market team. Think about the iconic NBA franchises: The Los Angeles Lakers, the Boston Celtics, Chicago Bulls and, if you indulge me, the New York Knickerbockers. This NBA Finals features two nicknames to never win an NBA title: the Thunder and Pacers. These two teams are from not-so-iconic American cities: Oklahoma City and Indianapolis. So let’s start there with a big downswing. Trending down – The combined size of the home media markets for NBA finals’ teams: Down 3 million homes from 2024 I’m being a bit charitable here with being down 3 million. I’ve rounded down. Indianapolis has a little over 1 million homes in its media market. Oklahoma City has well under a million. Combined they have a little less than 2 million homes. What a change from 2024 when the Finals teams (Boston and Dallas) each have over 2 million homes in their media markets. But it’s not just from last year from which we’ve seen a tremendous shift. Indeed, I plugged in the current media market size for every Finals team since the early 1980s. Based on the current rankings, this is the Finals with the smallest teams’ media markets in at least the last 40 years. Trending down – The average NBA Finals’ team worth: Down $1.4 billion from 2024 It’s not just the media markets where we can see how the Pacers and Thunder are small markets. Take a look at the valuation for each franchise. Both teams are worth under $4 billion. Now, that is still a billion with a “b”, but last year the two teams were worth about $5 billion on average. The fact that we have one small market team in the Finals isn’t that unusual. Both of these teams have been in the finals before. What makes this year truly unique is that we have two teams worth so little at the same time. In fact, there hasn’t been an NBA Finals’ with two teams in the bottom 10 in the league in terms of worth since at least the early 1990s. Trending up – Players under the age of 25 on NBA finals’ teams: Up 2 players from 2024 Small market doesn’t mean unexciting. Tyrese Haliburton ridiculously clutch shooting in Game 1 proves that. What makes Haliburton’s production so amazing is he was still 24 on February 1 of this year. He’s one of 18 players who have suited up for these squads who were under 25 on that date. That’s a record since at least the early 1980s These are young and fresh players beyond just Haliburton. Thunder’s star Jalen Williams clocks in at a mere 24 years old. His teammate Chet Holmgren is 23. We’re looking at squads that could be good for years to come. Dare I say that, by the time it’s all done, it may be Bulls, Celtics, Knicks, Lakers… and Pacers or Thunder on the pantheon of iconic NBA teams.
Trendlines: The smallest markets are winning the NBA finals
TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:
"NBA Finals Features Small Market Teams Oklahoma City Thunder and Indiana Pacers"
CNN
7.2
TruthLens AI Summary
The NBA Finals this year marks a significant shift in the landscape of the league, as it features two small market teams: the Oklahoma City Thunder and the Indiana Pacers. Historically, the Finals have been dominated by iconic franchises such as the Los Angeles Lakers and Boston Celtics, but this year’s matchup is notable for its lack of large media market representation. The combined size of the media markets for these two teams is approximately 2 million homes, which is a stark decrease from the 2024 Finals that featured teams from Boston and Dallas, each with over 2 million homes in their markets. This year’s Finals is recorded as having the smallest media markets in at least the last four decades, indicating a significant trend downward for market size in the league's championship series. Additionally, the average franchise worth of the teams participating is down by $1.4 billion compared to the previous year, further emphasizing the financial challenges faced by smaller market teams. Both the Thunder and Pacers are valued at under $4 billion, a considerable drop from their average valuation of about $5 billion last year. This situation is unprecedented, as it has been over three decades since two teams in the bottom ten of franchise worth have competed in the Finals simultaneously.
Despite the challenges posed by their small market status, the Finals are not lacking in excitement or talent. The presence of younger players, particularly those under the age of 25, has increased, with a record number of 18 such players participating in these Finals. This includes standout performances from Tyrese Haliburton, who has showcased remarkable skill and clutch shooting at just 24 years old. Teammate Jalen Williams is also making waves at 24, while Chet Holmgren represents the future of the Thunder at 23. The emergence of these young stars suggests that both teams have the potential for sustained success in the league. As fans and analysts reflect on this year’s Finals, there is a growing recognition that the legacy of the NBA may be expanding to include teams like the Pacers and Thunder alongside the traditional giants of the sport, potentially reshaping the narrative of what constitutes an iconic franchise in the league.
TruthLens AI Analysis
The article provides an analysis of the current NBA Finals, highlighting the participation of teams from smaller markets—specifically, the Oklahoma City Thunder and the Indiana Pacers. By contrasting these teams with historically significant franchises, the article emphasizes a trend in the NBA where smaller market teams are gaining visibility, albeit at the expense of viewership and franchise valuation. This analysis seeks to unveil the dynamics of market size and team valuation in the context of the NBA Finals.
Market Size Decline
The piece outlines a notable decrease in the combined media market size for the teams participating in the Finals. The figures cited indicate a loss of 3 million homes compared to the previous year, showcasing the dwindling audience reach for these smaller market teams. This change signals a shift in the demographic appeal of the NBA, suggesting that while competitive balance might be improving, the financial implications for the league and its franchises could be concerning.
Franchise Valuation Concerns
In addition to the media market size, the article discusses the decline in the average franchise worth for the teams involved in the Finals. With both the Thunder and the Pacers valued under $4 billion, this represents a significant drop from the previous year's average of $5 billion. The lack of high-value franchises in the Finals could indicate potential financial instability for the league, raising questions about future revenue sharing and competitive viability for smaller market teams.
Implications for the NBA
This analysis might suggest that the NBA is facing challenges in maintaining viewer engagement when smaller market teams reach the Finals. The iconic franchises that have historically drawn large audiences are absent, which could influence both viewership ratings and advertising revenue. The article subtly implies that the presence of these teams might not resonate with traditional NBA fans, potentially affecting the league's overall marketability.
Audience Perception
The article seems aimed at drawing attention to the evolving landscape of the NBA and could be interpreted as a call to action for the league to address these disparities. By focusing on the small market teams, the piece aligns with a narrative that values competitiveness and the underdog story, appealing to a segment of the audience that supports equity in sports.
Manipulative Elements
While the article appears factual, its tone and focus on the decline in media market size and franchise valuation could serve to manipulate the reader's perception of the NBA's health. By emphasizing these negative trends, it may unintentionally foster a pessimistic outlook on the league's future, while not fully addressing the potential benefits or excitement surrounding the competitive nature of smaller market teams.
Overall, the article presents a genuine concern regarding the state of the NBA, particularly as it relates to market size and franchise valuation. However, it also raises questions about the underlying motivations for highlighting these issues, suggesting a potential bias towards emphasizing the negatives over the positives.