Sports Then and Now

With the New York Knicks and Indiana Pacers about to meet for the NBA’s Eastern Conference title, NBA fans are excited for the latest installment of a legendary rivalry that captivated fans during the 1990s.

In the pantheon of great NBA rivalries, few matchups were as intense, dramatic, and personal as the New York Knicks vs. Indiana Pacers during the 1990s. From 1993 to 2000, these two Eastern Conference foes clashed in the playoffs six times, creating unforgettable moments, unforgettable villains and heroes, and a storyline that embodied the gritty, physical nature of 1990s basketball.

At the center of the storm was Reggie Miller, the Pacers’ sharpshooting provocateur, and the Madison Square Garden faithful, who loved to hate him. On the other side were the bruising Knicks, led by Patrick Ewing and a cast of enforcers. Every meeting between these teams was a war, often decided by physicality, willpower, and late-game heroics.

The Origins: 1993 Eastern Conference First Round

The rivalry’s spark came in the 1993 Eastern Conference First Round, when the second-seeded Knicks met the seventh-seeded Pacers. At the time, the Knicks were considered legitimate title contenders, while the Pacers were still trying to establish themselves as a postseason threat.

New York, led by head coach Pat Riley, played a bruising, physical style centered on Ewing, Charles Oakley, and John Starks. They swept the Pacers in three games, but the intensity was unmistakable. Though the series was one-sided, it planted the seeds of hatred and set the tone for what would follow.

1994: The Rivalry Erupts

The rivalry exploded into full bloom during the 1994 Eastern Conference Finals. The Knicks were again contenders, while the Pacers, now coached by Larry Brown, had developed into a dangerous team built around Reggie Miller, Dale and Antonio Davis, and veteran point guard Mark Jackson.

The series went the full seven games, but it was Game 5 at Madison Square Garden that defined the rivalry. Reggie Miller scored 25 of his 39 points in the fourth quarter, raining down three-pointers and engaging in a memorable, animated exchange with Knicks superfan Spike Lee. Miller’s theatrical taunts and the iconic “choke” sign aimed at Lee became part of NBA lore.

The uneven distribution of talent is structural. Can you spell LOTTERY?

The NBA lottery has not dispersed success the way people originally expected.

You can blame Patrick Ewing for the mess in the NBA.

Is there a mess? Don’t you “love this game?” Aren’t the games better attended, the media exposure better than ever, the league’s popularity and fan base broader than ever?  Perhaps, but it won’t last. One of these days fans in 24 cities will wake up and realize the fix is in. It is always in.

Now it is true that “Amazing things happen” in the NBA, but not necessarily in the sense that their current tagline implies. What is amazing, is that the league has gotten away with fixing outcomes, if not fixing individual games, and the victims—most of the league’s fans—are none the wiser. But people are starting to figure it out.

In the 24 years since 1985 when the NBA adopted a lottery to determine draft order, there have been six league champions. The league has expanded to 30 cities in that time but there have been only six champs. Five of them have been from the league’s largest markets.

Since the inception of the lottery, the Lakers have won six titles, Chicago six, Detroit three, Boston two, Houston two, Miami one. That’s 20 titles out of 24 total, to teams from the league’s 11* largest markets. That leaves little San Antonio (37th* largest in US, 27th of 30 in NBA), with four.

By contrast, in the nineteen years between the Celtics eight straight titles (1959-1966) and the implementation of the lottery (1985), there were nine different champions.  One third of those were small market teams: Milwaukee, Portland, and Seattle.

(It is true that the Celtics and the Lakers– including six titles in Minneapolis– dominated the league in its early years, but the draft was not fully operational until the sixties, and it could be said that the institution of the draft brought down the Celtics dynasty.)

So, you do the math: nine different champions in 19 years versus six champs in 24 years; three small market teams out of nine versus one out of six. And you can blame Patrick Ewing, even though his Knicks never won a title. Read the rest of this entry →