Game 1 of the NBA Western Conference Finals, which saw the Warriors erase a 25-point deficit to defeat the Spurs, delivered ABC a 5.6 overnight rating, which is the best figure for any conference finals Game 1 on ABC or ESPN since '14. But while the figure was up for Bristol, yesterday afternoon's game was down 16% from a 6.7 overnight for Warriors-Thunder WCF Game 1 last year on TNT. That game aired on a Monday in primetime. Compared to Cavaliers-Raptors ECF Game 1 last year, which aired on ESPN on a Tuesday night, Spurs-Warriors yesterday was up 37%. ABC's telecast yesterday peaked at a 7.7 rating late in the game from 6:00-6:15pm ET. ABC drew a 17.2 local rating in the S.F.-Oakland-San Jose market for Game 1, down from a 23.4 for Warriors-Thunder Game 1 last year, but good enough to be ABC's best NBA rating in the Bay Area this season to date. The game also drew a 24.7 local rating in San Antonio, which was also that market's best NBA rating this season to date. Meanwhile, WatchESPN had its best streaming audience on record for an NBA Conference Finals Game 1 (Austin Karp, Assistant Managing Editor).
IMPROVING INTEREST LEVELS: In Miami, Greg Cote noted the Warriors and Cavaliers are "ruining this NBA postseason" with series sweeps, but for that reason, they will "ultimately save it with the epic third installment" in their NBA Finals rivalry. These playoffs so far have "mostly been bad" and "undeniably" non-competitive (MIAMI HERALD, 5/14). In San Diego, Nick Canepa wrote the NBA is a "30-team league with two teams." There has to be something "seriously wrong with a sport when the best thing about it is Charles Barkley's commentary." NBA execs can fix that if they "don't sign kids until they're at least two years out of high school" (SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE, 5/14).
MONEY TALKS: In Dallas, Eddie Sefko wrote Mavericks Owner Mark Cuban has a "thought on how to potentially correct -- eliminate, actually -- the lottery." Cuban: "It should be like free agency, where the team with the worst record gets the most money to spend on a rookie. So the worst record, while having more money than the 30th team, has to compete to get the players to commit to them. The best players might not want to play for challenged organizations, which would force teams to be as good as they can be, recordwise." Sefko wrote that concept "might eliminate the idea of tanking to get a better lottery spot, but it also is a slippery slope to suggest that teams wouldn't try to load up on rookie talent with promises of future megacontracts" (DALLAS MORNING NEWS, 5/14).
