History Shows Pacers vs. Thunder May Draw Record-Low Ratings

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
62,988
Reaction score
20,614
Points
113
Per Colin:

History shows that several ingredients lead to a highly rated NBA Finals: big-market teams, marketable superstar players, and a competitive series. Unfortunately, the 2025 NBA Finals between the Pacers and Thunder don’t appear to have any of those ingredients, even with league MVP Shai Gilgeous-Alexander in the fold.

Indiana and Oklahoma City are two of the smallest U.S. television markets in the NBA, according to Nielsen. Indianapolis is the 25th-largest market in the country and 23rd of 29 NBA teams (excluding Toronto), while Oklahoma City is 47th in the U.S. and third to last in the league, only ahead of New Orleans and Memphis.

Series between two relatively small markets tend to draw lower ratings. Since 2000, the two lowest-rated championship series, excluding those affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, were in 2003 between the Spurs and New Jersey Nets (9.86 million) and in 2007 between the Spurs and Cavaliers (9.29 million).

San Antonio is the No. 31 market in the country and Cleveland is No. 19. New Jersey isn’t listed, though they get a bite from big markets in New York (No. 1) and Philadelphia (No. 5). There is a reason, however, that the franchise moved to Brooklyn in 2012.

The Thunder and Pacers have both been in the Finals this century, and drew strong ratings, but it helped that their opponents played in large or medium markets that had the league’s biggest names. Indiana faced the Lakers (No. 2 market) with Kobe Bryant and Shaquille O’Neal in 2000 (17.4 million), while the Thunder faced the Heat (No. 18 market) led by LeBron James, Dwyane Wade, and Chris Bosh in 2012 (16.9 million). Oklahoma City also had Kevin Durant, Russell Westbrook, and James Harden at the time.

Gilgeous-Alexander doesn’t have the same viewership pull as those stars, as evidenced by the 5.59 million viewership average of the Thunder’s five-game Western Conference finals series against the Timberwolves, down 17% from last year. The games were also mostly blowouts, as four of five were decided by at least 15 points and three by more than 25 points.

The Pacers aren’t expected to do better. Oklahoma City entered the Minnesota series with -375 odds to win, while the Thunder enter the Finals as -750 favorites, tied for the sixth-most-lopsided Finals when compared with data from Sports Odds History.

The series isn’t expected to be a long one, either. The best odds for an exact series score prediction are for Oklahoma City to win in five games (+225), followed by a Thunder sweep (+290).


Howl Wolves!!
 

Per Colin:

History shows that several ingredients lead to a highly rated NBA Finals: big-market teams, marketable superstar players, and a competitive series. Unfortunately, the 2025 NBA Finals between the Pacers and Thunder don’t appear to have any of those ingredients, even with league MVP Shai Gilgeous-Alexander in the fold.

Indiana and Oklahoma City are two of the smallest U.S. television markets in the NBA, according to Nielsen. Indianapolis is the 25th-largest market in the country and 23rd of 29 NBA teams (excluding Toronto), while Oklahoma City is 47th in the U.S. and third to last in the league, only ahead of New Orleans and Memphis.

Series between two relatively small markets tend to draw lower ratings. Since 2000, the two lowest-rated championship series, excluding those affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, were in 2003 between the Spurs and New Jersey Nets (9.86 million) and in 2007 between the Spurs and Cavaliers (9.29 million).

San Antonio is the No. 31 market in the country and Cleveland is No. 19. New Jersey isn’t listed, though they get a bite from big markets in New York (No. 1) and Philadelphia (No. 5). There is a reason, however, that the franchise moved to Brooklyn in 2012.

The Thunder and Pacers have both been in the Finals this century, and drew strong ratings, but it helped that their opponents played in large or medium markets that had the league’s biggest names. Indiana faced the Lakers (No. 2 market) with Kobe Bryant and Shaquille O’Neal in 2000 (17.4 million), while the Thunder faced the Heat (No. 18 market) led by LeBron James, Dwyane Wade, and Chris Bosh in 2012 (16.9 million). Oklahoma City also had Kevin Durant, Russell Westbrook, and James Harden at the time.

Gilgeous-Alexander doesn’t have the same viewership pull as those stars, as evidenced by the 5.59 million viewership average of the Thunder’s five-game Western Conference finals series against the Timberwolves, down 17% from last year. The games were also mostly blowouts, as four of five were decided by at least 15 points and three by more than 25 points.

The Pacers aren’t expected to do better. Oklahoma City entered the Minnesota series with -375 odds to win, while the Thunder enter the Finals as -750 favorites, tied for the sixth-most-lopsided Finals when compared with data from Sports Odds History.

The series isn’t expected to be a long one, either. The best odds for an exact series score prediction are for Oklahoma City to win in five games (+225), followed by a Thunder sweep (+290).


Howl Wolves!!
The funny thing is this will be the first NBA Finals I've watched since Jordan. Both teams are really humming and I expect it to be a great series.
 

On SportsCenter it was noted that Indianapolis & Oklahoma City are the closest (via air) for any 2 teams in the NBA Finals since 1971 (Baltimore vs Milwaukee).

That'll help since there are very few (if any) direct flights between OKC & IND.
 

I will watch this series with a rooting interest. Go Pacers.

I usually watch hoping one team loses (Lakers, Celtics, etc.).
 










FYI, NBA Games are 4 Quarters at 12 minutes each. 😎

There wasn't a 5th Quarter per your math, but still remarkable to only lead for 0.3 seconds and win the ballgame.

47.7 minutes.
47 minutes, 59.7 seconds

It does make you think. .7 minutes still leaves 18 seconds.
 

47 minutes, 59.7 seconds

It does make you think. .7 minutes still leaves 18 seconds.
Good point.

Also, while the Pacers never led until that last hoop, it did take the Thunder 45 seconds to score first. There was also a 35 second stretch it was tied at 10, the 7 minute mark of the 1st Q.


That's a lot of math.
 
Last edited:




Good point.

Also, while the Pacers never led until that last hoop, it did take the Thunder 45 seconds to score first. There was also a 35 second stretch it was tied at 10, the 7 minute mark of the 1st Q.


That's a lot of math.
Stop Ope3........my head is spinning!
 




Top Bottom