Oklahoma City among most lopsided Finals favorites ever against Indiana

[1987_Lakers]

Most lopsided odds in NBA Finals history

1. 2001 Lakers vs Sixers: -2000
2. 2018 Warriors vs Cavs: -1075
3. 1996 Bulls vs Sonics: -950
4. 1999 Spurs vs Knicks: -900
5. 2000 Lakers vs Pacers: -800
6. 2002 Lakers vs Nets: -750
7T. 2025 Thunder vs Pacers: -700
7T. 2004 Lakers vs Pistons: -700
7T. 1986 Celtics vs Rockets: -700

Can the Pacers pull off what the '04 Pistons did?

Also surprised the 2000 Lakers were that big of favorites vs Indiana. I know they were coming off a 67 win season, but they were just coming out of a brutal 7 game series vs Portland and were going up against a battle tested 56 win Indiana team.

[Baller234]

Wow if the other choices are any indication, they were WAY off on that 02 finals.

Everyone knew the Nets had NO chance. :oldlol:

[SouBeachTalents]

I'm surprised '07 didn't make this list. The Spurs were an established dynasty by that point, and the Cavs had a 22 year old LeBron surrounded by arguably the worst Finals supporting cast ever. I would've honestly given the Pacers a much better chance of winning this series than I would've the Cavs in '07.

And I know they were really banged up, and playing an ATG team, but it's weird to see the defending champion Celtics in '87 as such big underdogs at +400.

[tpols]

Yo that Game 1 by Allen Iverson was a GOAT performance. He was normally inefficient and carried a low IQ Westbrook vibe (although not as bad) ... in this game though he put it all together.


https://youtu.be/gIBYW0tAMdk?si=T9MgqEz7Mec0mR5u

Straight 🔥

And I can't help but notice the crowd seemed absolutely thunderous at tip off.

[1987_Lakers]

I'm surprised '07 didn't make this list. The Spurs were an established dynasty by that point, and the Cavs had a 22 year old LeBron surrounded by arguably the worst Finals supporting cast ever. I would've honestly given the Pacers a much better chance of winning this series than I would've the Cavs in '07.

And I know they were really banged up, and playing an ATG team, but it's weird to see the defending champion Celtics in '87 as such big underdogs at +400.

Yea, I'm surprised as well 2007 wasn't up there.

As far as '87, I could see. Lakers were at their peak while the Celtics were dealing with injuries from a shit ton of players. No Walton, McHale playing on a broken foot, Parish playing with an injured ankle, Ainge had a dislocated finger and sprained right knee. They should have lost vs the Pistons that year to be honest.

[JBSptfn]

They should have lost vs the Pistons that year to be honest.

Heck, the Bucks should have defeated them in Round 2. Also, I don't know how the Bulls didn't beat them at least once in Round 1 (something that people from the Jordan Cult don't talk about, just like the Brady cultists don't like to hear how he's the only QB to lose to a 9-7 team in the Super Bowl).

[Wally450]

I'm surprised '07 didn't make this list. The Spurs were an established dynasty by that point, and the Cavs had a 22 year old LeBron surrounded by arguably the worst Finals supporting cast ever. I would've honestly given the Pacers a much better chance of winning this series than I would've the Cavs in '07.

And I know they were really banged up, and playing an ATG team, but it's weird to see the defending champion Celtics in '87 as such big underdogs at +400.

I remember arguing with a friend in high school about how many games that series would go. I said 4. No way the Cavs could win a game against that Spurs team. He said the Cavs would get a game.

Cavs probably could've stolen one, but the Spurs were a well oiled machine at that time.

[1987_Lakers]

I remember arguing with a friend in high school about how many games that series would go. I said 4. No way the Cavs could win a game against that Spurs team. He said the Cavs would get a game.

Cavs probably could've stolen one, but the Spurs were a well oiled machine at that time.

Well oiled machine, but boring to watch. I remember the last episode of The Sopranos aired during those Finals. That last episode got more viewers than every Finals game that year despite being on HBO.

[1987_Lakers]

According to Nielsen ratings, an average of 11.9 million viewers watched The Sopranos "Made in America" on its United States premiere date of Sunday, June 10, 2007. This was a 49% increase from the previous episode and the show's best ratings for both parts of the sixth season. It was also the show's largest audience since the season five premiere.




Game 1 (San Antonio 85, Cleveland 76)
Rating: 6.3/11, t-9 for the week.
Viewers: 9.2 million, #12 for the week.
Among adults 18-49: 3.7 rating, 4.9 million viewers (53% of total viewership), t-4 for the week.
Among African Americans: 16.4 rating, 3.1 million viewers (34% of total viewership), #1 for the week.
Among Hispanics: 3.8 rating, 0.6 million viewers (7% of total viewership), #4 for the week (among English language programs).

Game 2 (San Antonio 102, Cleveland 93)
Rating/share: 5.6/10, #15 for the week.
Viewers: 8.6 million, #15 for the week.
Among adults 18-49: 3.4 rating, 4.5 million viewers (52% of total viewership), #6 for the week.
Among African Americans: 15.2 rating, 2.7 million viewers (31% of total viewership), #2 for the week.
Among Hispanics: 3.6 rating, 0.6 million viewers (7% of total viewership), #7 for the week (among English language programs).

Game 3 (San Antonio 75, Cleveland 72)
Rating/share: 6.4/11, #5 for the week.
Viewers: 9.5 million, #7 for the week.
Among adults 18-49: 3.8 rating, 5.0 million viewers (53% of total viewership), #5 for the week.
Among African Americans: 16.9 rating, 3.1 million viewers (33% of total viewership), #1 for the week.
Among Hispanics: 4.6 rating, 0.9 million viewers (9% of total viewership), #3 for the week (among English language programs).

Game 4 (San Antonio 83, Cleveland 82)
Rating/share: 6.5/12, t-2 for the week.
Viewers: 9.9 million, t-3 for the week.
Among adults 18-49: 4.0 rating, 5.2 million viewers (53% of total viewership), t-2 for the week.
Among African Americans: 15.7 rating, 2.8 million viewers (28% of total viewership), #2 for the week.
Among Hispanics: 5.4 rating, 1 million viewers (10% of total viewership), #1 for the week (among English language programs).

[tpols]

These odds also show Shaq was beating up on scrubs. He needed Kobe to carry him through the West where the real contenders were.

[Hey Yo]

Regardless of numbers, I still say 2004 was the biggest upset. Nobody gave Detroit a chance

[Naero]

Surprised people are still underselling the Pacers this much. OKC is the clear favorite to me, but not prohibitively so. Partly because of their youth and relative inexperience, but mainly because the Pacers have overachieved against everyone they've faced so far. Wouldn't at all be surprised to see a (semi-)competitive 6-game series rather than a (gentleman's) sweep as the odds suggest.

Also surprised that the '01 Lakers were that heavily favored against the Sixers. Should I be when the then-defending champs went 0-12 against the West and the Sixers eked out two seven-game series (one with controversial officiating) against a historically weak East? Maybe not, but it still seems slightful to an opponent with the reigning MVP, DPoY, and CoY. Pro-Sixers bettors must have eaten good after Game 1.

[tpols]

Surprised people are still underselling the Pacers this much. OKC is the clear favorite to me, but not prohibitively so. Partly because of their youth and relative inexperience, but mainly because the Pacers have overachieved against everyone they've faced so far. Wouldn't at all be surprised to see a (semi-)competitive 6-game series rather than a (gentleman's) sweep as the odds suggest.

Also surprised that the '01 Lakers were that heavily favored against the Sixers. Should I be when the then-defending champs went 0-12 against the West and the Sixers eked out two seven-game series (one with controversial officiating) against a historically weak East? Maybe not, but it still seems slightful to an opponent with the reigning MVP, DPoY, and CoY. Pro-Sixers bettors must have eaten good after Game 1.

The odds on that game for the Sixers were probably like +500. So whoever had the balls to bet on them would've made bank. Absurdly risky though.