Jump to content

Alternate SPORTS! History Thread


Recommended Posts

What if the 2007 Mavericks and Warriors had never met up in the first round?

Golden State had the same record as the #7 seeded Lakers, but L.A. won a tiebreaker.

If GSW had finished with one more win, we would have gotten Mavericks/Lakers and Suns/Warriors in the first round of the playoffs- which could have completely altered the entire playoff complexion.

Dallas usually did well against the Lakers in the post-Shaq and pre-Pau era, and playoff Staples would not have rattled them the way Oracle did. And Dirk's MVP season probably is seen differently

Suns/Warriors could have been the most fun 2-7 series ever.

If Dallas doesn't go out early, they play Utah in round 2. I don't think Utah wins that series considering they don't have homecourt and they were a schizo team away from Delta Center.

Might the Suns have played the Spurs any differently, or could Golden State have worn them out?

And if we get a Mavs/Spurs rematch of their epic 2006 series.... who knows what happens there?

The 2007 Spurs title is always remembered as a yeah but title (The Suns series controversy, avoiding Dallas, getting Utah).

I think they might have been seen differently if they went through Dallas to get to the FInals.

The Warriors were 1-3 that year against the Suns, but the win came in the last meeting that they had that year. With the way they played against Dallas taken under consideration, I think that they pull off the upset over Phoenix in six games, and go on to play the Spurs.

That season, G-Dub was 1-3 against the Alamo boys (SA beat them 129-89 early in the season, and they beat them 126-89 in March). So, by appearances, the Warriors didn't match up well, and probably lose that series in five like they did to Utah.

As for the Mavs, they handle the Lakers in a four game sweep, but it takes them six games to get by Utah (the Jazz played them tough that year in the regular season).

That sets up an epic Spurs-Mavs matchup, which I see Dallas pulling out in seven games for the second straight year before dispatching the Cavs in five games in the Finals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Getting back to an earlier post I did with the St Louis Browns and Washington Senators moving to California, which of the following would be in a position to buy the Browns from Bill Veeck and move them to San Francisco after the 1953 season?

Charlie O. Finley?

F. Wayne Valley?

The Morabito Brothers?

Levi's?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Getting back to an earlier post I did with the St Louis Browns and Washington Senators moving to California, which of the following would be in a position to buy the Browns from Bill Veeck and move them to San Francisco after the 1953 season?

Charlie O. Finley?

F. Wayne Valley?

The Morabito Brothers?

Levi's?

Charlie O. Finley is the best bet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This may have been covered already, but I've often wondered what the NBA would've been like as far as who wins titles (and when) if Michael Jordan stays retired after 1993. I think it effects a lot more than it would initially seem.

I don't by any means claim to be a basketball expert, so I'm not saying this is exactly what would happen, it's just more of a hunch:

Obviously, 1993-1994 and 1994-1995 plays out exactly as it really did. The real interesting stuff starts in 1995-96. With MJ out of the picture, Shaq explodes onto the forefront and snatches his first MVP. In the playoffs, I think Orlando wins the East a second time and gets Seattle in the Finals. It turns out to be a close six games, but Orlando takes it. So, what does this lead to? I think a title keeps Shaq in Orlando, with the hopes of creating a dynasty there. They don't get the 7 seed in '97 and lose to Miami, but take the top seed and sweep Washington instead, take out Atlanta or Detroit in the 2nd round, and get possibly New York or Miami in the ECF. They win the East again, meet up with Utah, and (as much as I hate to say it as a Jazz fan) take their 2nd Finals in a row in 7.

Though the Magic have the makings of a dynasty, the run stops there. Indiana takes the East instead in '98, and falls to Utah 4-2. The Magic, though contenders, struggle to get past round 2 for the next 2 seasons as Penny Hardaway declines and Shaq carries a heavier load. Thus, the Magic run stays at 2 titles and 3 Finals trips, and in 2000, Shaq and the Magic part ways.

I'm not sure where he goes from there, but I have a hunch it wouldn't be Los Angeles because I feel at that point they would have locked up some other big man before then. This would then effect whether or not the Lakers three-peat or even reach the Finals when they do. Would the Spurs take those titles? The Blazers? Would the Pacers, Sixers, Nets, or Kings sneak one in? I'm not sure, but in any case, I really think if MJ stays retired in '93, it totally reshapes NBA history from that point in such a way that'd it'd even effect title runs 10 years after.

Like I said, this is all rather a hunch and not a "this totally happens" sort of declaration. It's just something I have always wondered and feel would make for a pretty interesting story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously, 1993-1994 and 1994-1995 plays out exactly as it really did. The real interesting stuff starts in 1995-96. With MJ out of the picture, Shaq explodes onto the forefront and snatches his first MVP. In the playoffs, I think Orlando wins the East a second time and gets Seattle in the Finals. It turns out to be a close six games, but Orlando takes it. So, what does this lead to? I think a title keeps Shaq in Orlando, with the hopes of creating a dynasty there. They don't get the 7 seed in '97 and lose to Miami, but take the top seed and sweep Washington instead, take out Atlanta or Detroit in the 2nd round, and get possibly New York or Miami in the ECF. They win the East again, meet up with Utah, and (as much as I hate to say it as a Jazz fan) take their 2nd Finals in a row in 7.

I'm not certain Shaq would've stayed in Orlando. The recent Grantland piece on the Magic's lost dynasty reminds ppl how the Magic lowballed Shaq while the Lakers backed the $ truck up for him.

Ring or no ring, I think that doesn't change.

I think the only alt universe titles might've been the Utah Jazz &/or New York Knicks. Both were stonewalled by Chicago, & both tried the hardest to build a roster to counter the Bulls in real life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's one- what if the big 4 commissioners weren't Selig-Bettman-Stern-Tagliabue?

MLB - probably doesn't open up the wild card playoffs as soon, definitely does not award WS home field via the ASG, & perhaps doesn't even try interleague baseball. Steroids might've been handled differently with stronger leadership at the actual time the game was being cheated.

NHL - Sun Belt probably only gets half the teams it has now, Quebec City &/or Hamilton probably NHL cities today, possibly 2-4x fewer franchises which in turn wouldn't dilute the talent as it has.

NBA - probably misses out on its 90's fun & run era marketed to kids.

NFL - player, & ex-player, health & safety perhaps prioritized years earlier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2011 Stanley Cup Playoffs.

What if Montreal did not blow a 2-0 series lead/win either of their game 5/7 OT games vs. Boston?

That completely changes the East playoffs.

Your East semis would have been Washington/Montreal and Philadelphia/Tampa Bay.

How would the East playoffs have played out, and who emerges to play Vancouver in what would have been a completely different type of Stanley Cup Final?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously, 1993-1994 and 1994-1995 plays out exactly as it really did. The real interesting stuff starts in 1995-96. With MJ out of the picture, Shaq explodes onto the forefront and snatches his first MVP. In the playoffs, I think Orlando wins the East a second time and gets Seattle in the Finals. It turns out to be a close six games, but Orlando takes it. So, what does this lead to? I think a title keeps Shaq in Orlando, with the hopes of creating a dynasty there. They don't get the 7 seed in '97 and lose to Miami, but take the top seed and sweep Washington instead, take out Atlanta or Detroit in the 2nd round, and get possibly New York or Miami in the ECF. They win the East again, meet up with Utah, and (as much as I hate to say it as a Jazz fan) take their 2nd Finals in a row in 7.

I'm not certain Shaq would've stayed in Orlando. The recent Grantland piece on the Magic's lost dynasty reminds ppl how the Magic lowballed Shaq while the Lakers backed the $ truck up for him.

Ring or no ring, I think that doesn't change.

I think the only alt universe titles might've been the Utah Jazz &/or New York Knicks. Both were stonewalled by Chicago, & both tried the hardest to build a roster to counter the Bulls in real life.

Ah, I've been meaning to read that piece. Saw it in Bill Simmons' Facebook page I think, but didn't get around to reading it yet. Thanks for reminding me of it!

It makes me wonder also, would the Magic have ponied up more money if Shaq had won the MVP? I'm not necessarily saying they would or wouldn't, but it's something that could have altered things up a bit.

I too think Utah wins at least one title in between 96-99, but I'm not entirely sure about New York. I think the absence of Chicago certainly makes things a little easier for them, but they had a hard enough time getting past Miami and Indiana at the time. 1999 may still happen as it does, but it may not. Maybe we get a full season, the Knicks get hot at the right time and destroy everyone. Who knows? That's the fun part about these alternate histories, there really isn't a "right" or "wrong" per se, just "what may have happened" and "what may not have happened". :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that the Magic should have kept Webber. Then, in the summer of 94, they could have added guys like Detlef Schrempf in FA, and maybe even Tim Hardaway via trade. Webber would have been a perfect compliment to Shaq because he would have been glad to defer to him late in games and let him be the man, unlike Penny and Kobe.

I also read the article about the 86 Rockets. It's too bad what happened to them. I was glad when they beat LA, but then they went downhill after that year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sigh. The White Sox passed up the chance to buy the rights to Babe Ruth for $18,000. So, what would have happened if the Sox did acquire him, assuming his career developed the same way?

Would the Sox have built a dynasty and become the team of the '20s? This obviously hinges on the Black Sox scandal. The Sox had a really talented team positioned for a nice run anyway, but obviously they lost several of those players to banishment. So, would Ruth's presence have changed the economics and gotten those other players more money? Would the players have still agreed to throw the Series if they made more? Would Ruth himself have been involved in the fix? Would Ruth and Shoeless Joe's performances in the Series lead to the Sox winning anyway, causing the gamblers to murder the players who agreed to throw the Series?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sigh. The White Sox passed up the chance to buy the rights to Babe Ruth for $18,000. So, what would have happened if the Sox did acquire him, assuming his career developed the same way?

Would the Sox have built a dynasty and become the team of the '20s? This obviously hinges on the Black Sox scandal. The Sox had a really talented team positioned for a nice run anyway, but obviously they lost several of those players to banishment. So, would Ruth's presence have changed the economics and gotten those other players more money? Would the players have still agreed to throw the Series if they made more? Would Ruth himself have been involved in the fix? Would Ruth and Shoeless Joe's performances in the Series lead to the Sox winning anyway, causing the gamblers to murder the players who agreed to throw the Series?

Would Yankee Stadium have been built when & as it was? How many fewer WS titles for NYY?

If Ruth had been involved with Jackson, I don't want to know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sigh. The White Sox passed up the chance to buy the rights to Babe Ruth for $18,000. So, what would have happened if the Sox did acquire him, assuming his career developed the same way?

Would the Sox have built a dynasty and become the team of the '20s? This obviously hinges on the Black Sox scandal. The Sox had a really talented team positioned for a nice run anyway, but obviously they lost several of those players to banishment. So, would Ruth's presence have changed the economics and gotten those other players more money? Would the players have still agreed to throw the Series if they made more? Would Ruth himself have been involved in the fix? Would Ruth and Shoeless Joe's performances in the Series lead to the Sox winning anyway, causing the gamblers to murder the players who agreed to throw the Series?

If Ruth was on the White Sox, he may have gotten caught up in it because I don't think that Comiskey would have paid him too much since he didn't have a college degree. The highest paid player on that team (Eddie Collins, I think) had a college degree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if the Tampa Bay Stadium Committee decided to reject the St. Petersburg location of Tropicana Field and instead build it in downtown Tampa in the late '80's? Would that have helped their chances in landing the Mariners or Giants rather than having an expansion team? Could this have prevent the attendance problems like the Rays have now? And also, could it help increase the payroll for the Rays so they can keep their stars rather than letting them go ( David Price and Carl Crawford for example)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if Oakland had eliminated the Yankees in the 2000 or 2001 playoffs- how would either Seattle/Oakland ALCS have played out, and how would the World Series against either Arizona/Mets have gone differently?

I think that Oakland would have won the WS in 2000. In 2001, I think the Mariners get payback, but the Diamondbacks beat them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if the Tampa Bay Stadium Committee decided to reject the St. Petersburg location of Tropicana Field and instead build it in downtown Tampa in the late '80's? Would that have helped their chances in landing the Mariners or Giants rather than having an expansion team? Could this have prevent the attendance problems like the Rays have now? And also, could it help increase the payroll for the Rays so they can keep their stars rather than letting them go ( David Price and Carl Crawford for example)?

I don't think the location of the stadium would have impacted anything, and you can throw the White Sox on the list of teams who nearly moved to St. Pete. Back then, all sports leagues saw Tampa Bay, and really all of Florida, as this incredible untapped market in which teams could print money. Nobody had any reservations about moving there, and as such, wouldn't have foreseen the attendance issues. The Sox actually got their stadium deal approved at the finals minutes of the deadline day (technically after midnight when the governor unplugged the official congressional clock) in order to stay in Chicago. Otherwise, they'd be in the Trop right now.

Also, stadium aesthetics and stadium location didn't become an issue until a decade later when teams started building downtown ballparks out of bricks. Nobody looked a the Trop, now seen as a mausoleum, as anything but state of the art. Domes weren't really a concern in the days of astroturf and donut stadiums. Nobody ever thought this new wave of stadiums would come and show how inadequate the recent stadiums were.

As for present day, it would undoubtedly help the Rays. If Tampa had somehow built their own PNC Park in 1988, the Rays would be much better off because they'd get people coming out just to see the park, and also people who made a day of going downtown. There's nothing to do around the Trop other than go to a Rays game, as I understand. As for whether they'd be able to keep their free agents... I think it's for the best they let Carl Crawford go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if the Tampa Bay Stadium Committee decided to reject the St. Petersburg location of Tropicana Field and instead build it in downtown Tampa in the late '80's? Would that have helped their chances in landing the Mariners or Giants rather than having an expansion team? Could this have prevent the attendance problems like the Rays have now? And also, could it help increase the payroll for the Rays so they can keep their stars rather than letting them go ( David Price and Carl Crawford for example)?

I don't think the location of the stadium would have impacted anything, and you can throw the White Sox on the list of teams who nearly moved to St. Pete. Back then, all sports leagues saw Tampa Bay, and really all of Florida, as this incredible untapped market in which teams could print money. Nobody had any reservations about moving there, and as such, wouldn't have foreseen the attendance issues. The Sox actually got their stadium deal approved at the finals minutes of the deadline day (technically after midnight when the governor unplugged the official congressional clock) in order to stay in Chicago. Otherwise, they'd be in the Trop right now.

Also, stadium aesthetics and stadium location didn't become an issue until a decade later when teams started building downtown ballparks out of bricks. Nobody looked a the Trop, now seen as a mausoleum, as anything but state of the art. Domes weren't really a concern in the days of astroturf and donut stadiums. Nobody ever thought this new wave of stadiums would come and show how inadequate the recent stadiums were.

As for present day, it would undoubtedly help the Rays. If Tampa had somehow built their own PNC Park in 1988, the Rays would be much better off because they'd get people coming out just to see the park, and also people who made a day of going downtown. There's nothing to do around the Trop other than go to a Rays game, as I understand. As for whether they'd be able to keep their free agents... I think it's for the best they let Carl Crawford go.

Thanks for the insight there. :unclesam:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Canada's economy instead of going down in the 90's instead went up. So the Jets and Nordiques never relocated and Canada got the pleasure of having three more teams in the NHL being in Halifax, Hamilton and in Saskatoon. on top of that the CFL never expanded to the US and brought the Montreal Alouettes back and got the Atlantic Schooners (who play in Halifax) in on as expansion teams in 1996. Also that year the Bernard Glieberman sold the Ottawa Rough Riders to Jeff Hunt who also bought the Ottawa 67's and brought the Ottawa Rough Riders back up to mainstream sports in Ottawa. The CFL then added for the 2000 season two more teams in Quebec City and Victoria causing the Lions to be renamed the Vancouver Lions The CFL has since been going strong with 12 teams and a solid fan base as Toronto in 2005 agreed with the TFC to split BMO field and has since it;s opening in 2007 been playing there as the Argos and TFC have been enjoying great fan support. The league looks like this:
East Division

Ottawa Rough Riders
Toronto Argonauts
Hamilton Tiger-Cats
Montreal Alouettes
Quebec City Citadels
Atlantic Schooners

West Divison
Winnipeg Blue Bombers
Saskatchewan Roughriders
Edmonton Eskimos
Calgary Stampeders
Vancouver Lions
Victoria Royals

The NHL adds expansion teams to Colorado, Seattle, Milwaukee, Columbus, Kansas City, Tampa Bay, Anaheim, San Jose and Portland, bringing the league to 32 teams in 2 conferences with 2 divisions each. They also keep the Walers in Hartford and the North Stars in Minnesota. The expansions to Florida, Nashville and Atlanta never took place. The NHL has 11 Canadian teams and 21 American teams. The league is thriving like never before.

Eastern Conference

Richard Division

Montreal Canadiens
Toronto Maple Leafs

Ottawa Senators

Quebec Nordiques

Halifax
Hamilton
Boston Bruins

Buffalo Sabers

Lemieux Division

New York Rangers

New York Islanders

Pittsburgh Penguins

Philadelphia Flyers

Hartford Walers

Washington Capitals

Columbus Blue Jackets

Tampa Bay Lightning

Western Conference

Howe Division
Winnipeg Jets

Saskatchewan

Minnesota North Stars

Chicago Blackhawks

Detroit Red Wings

Colorado Avalanche

Milwaukee

Kansas City

​Gretzky Division

Vancouver Canucks

Calgary Flames

Edmonton Oilers

Seattle

Portland

L.A. Kings

San Jose Sharks

Anaheim Ducks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if the NHL didn't feel like taking over control of the Sabres when Adelphia imploded? It was after the Wild and Beej started playing, but before Balsillie struck it rich... I wonder who the hot relocation candidates were at the time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember reading, then seeing on television, that Jim Brown's best sport was not football, but lacrosse. What if there was a viable professional North American league in the 1960s. Would there have been a bidding war for him, or would he have done both?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.