The first game of the NBA Finals Thursday night was a dog. In a largely noncompetitive 48 minutes, the Golden State Warriors rode on the backs of their superior bench players and beat the Cleveland Cavaliers, 104-89.

Ugh.

This series has a chance to be great. It has rich themes, none of them involving the amazing play and wonderfulness of Shaun Livingston and Leandro Barbosa.

This series is supposed to be about the new and future brand of basketball played by the Splash Brothers. It’s about a team that won 73 games, making its case to be ranked with the greatest NBA teams of all time. It’s supposed to be about our nation’s love-hate relationship with LeBron James and the resurrection of downtown Cleveland, a once-great American city that has not won a championship of any kind since Frank Ryan and the Cleveland Browns beat the Baltimore Colts in the NFL title game in 1964.

Count me among those who would like the Cavaliers to win this series. Perhaps this is why Game 1 was such a disappointment. The Cavaliers made a nice little run after halftime, and even took a lead in the third quarter, but they missed 28 shots in the paint and were overwhelmed by the deeper, more confident Warriors.

Watching the Warriors destroy the Cavs down the stretch was deflating for those of us who’d like to see a close series and a Cleveland victory. The Cavs didn’t have Kevin Love for the Finals last year and Kyrie Irving got hurt at the beginning of the series. LeBron had to go it alone and still managed to make it a six-game series. Given that James has his full cast this time around, and given the way the Cavaliers cruised through the Eastern Conference (12-2), it figured that Cleveland would make a better showing in the rematch.

No. The well-rested Cavaliers played like a team with no chance. After what we saw Thursday, it’s hard to make a case for the Cavs winning a game at Oracle Arena in Oakland.

I need to remember that this is how I felt after watching the Celtics destroy the Lakers at the Old Boston Garden in Game 1 of the 1985 Finals. It was a rematch of the ’84 Finals and the Celtics demolished the Lakers in Game 1, 148-114. I recall mocking ancient Kareem Abdul-Jabbar after that game, telling Globe readers that Kareem looked like Willie Mays stumbling around center field for the Mets in the 1973 World Series. Three days later, the Lakers won Game 2 in Boston, en route to a six-game series victory in which Abdul-Jabbar was named Finals MVP.

So there is hope for the Cavs. Maybe.

I want the Cavaliers to win because I think it would be better for basketball. This is not Warrior-hating. Golden State has a terrific coach, great depth, and humble players. The whole world is in love with Stephen Curry. Red Auerbach would have loved Draymond Green and Andre Iguodala. In their come-from-behind series against the Thunder, the Warriors demonstrated their heart and championship pedigree. We watched the no-composure Thunder unravel in a hail of fear and Warrior threes.

No one loves long-range shooting more than me, but I don’t want the Warriors’ game to be celebrated as the future of basketball. What they do flies in the face of more than a century of pick-and-rolls, give-and-gos, and three-man weaves. The fact is, Curry and Splash-mate Klay Thompson are legitimate freaks, able to do things that had never been done. They can create space and arc shots from international waters over 7-foot defenders. But this is not how the next generation of teams should be built. It is simply not sustainable.

The Warriors beat the Thunder even though Golden State outrebounded Oklahoma City only once in seven games. When you are consistently outrebounded, outscored in the paint, and surrender 50-50 balls, you should not be able to win the game because you can drain a bunch of threes. It is not “the way the game is going.’’ Curry and Thompson are a once-in-a-generation tandem.

Which brings us back to LeBron. He had a Larry Bird line of 23 points, 12 rebounds, and 9 assists in Game 1, but his long-range game is diminished. He did not look like the LeBron who tortured the Celtics with 45 points in Game 6 at the Garden four years ago. He looked a little old and burdened by the weight of carrying his team and his city. Losing this series would make LeBron 2-5 in the Finals and cut another hole in the heart of poor Cleveland. It would also kick-start the argument that the Warriors are better than the ’86 Celtics and the ’96 Michael Jordan Bulls. Greatest of All Time.

On the other hand, Cleveland winning a championship this spring would be the biggest sports story of the year . . . until the Cubs win the World Series.

Dan Shaughnessy is a Globe columnist. He can be reached at dshaughnessy@globe.com. Follow him on Twitter @dan_shaughnessy.