rsg@cbscc.UUCP (Bob Garmise) (02/20/85)
Here is a summary of all the responses to the question: What is wrong with the
NBA? Names have been removed to protect the innocent.
***
Original Article:
Subject: What's wrong with the NBA?
Why is the NBA so boring? Except for maybe Boston, Philadelphia, and LA, I
doubt whether most of the readers of this note can name 2 starters on any other
team. The interest in the NBA is minimal. Most of the people I know (are they
the wrong people?) have no idea who's in first, what the divisions are, or even
what the team nicknames are. Is that because we don't have a team here in
Columbus? or is prevalent throughout the country? So tell me...why isn't the
NBA making it?
...bob garmise...at&t bell labs, columbus...
***
One of the problems(my opinion) is that most general managers don't know what
they're doing. That's why you have the Bostons and LA's and Philly's with great
teams and "GREAT FUTURE DRAFT CHOICES" for average players that played with
great players.(I'm sure you could see by some of the trades that have been
made..ie #1 to Boston for Gerald Henderson...incredible!)
Also another problem is the "LONG" season....it really is a bore to watch games
that have no meaning in such a long season. I think a 50 game season is long
enough..it would cut down on injuries and would give players incentive to play
harder in a short season to make the playoffs(I also think they should cut the
number of playoff teams to eight). I could go on and on with the reasons but it
would do no good. The NBA has the BEST players in the world (I also think there
should be international play) and it's ashamed that some of the teams are so
unbalanced. Well I hope I answered some of your questions....Tom
***
1- The zone was banned in the NBA because too many teams clustered around the
basket. No penetration = no layups = 30 foot set shots = low scores = bored
fans = no fans.
6- The 24 second clock was adopted for the same reason. Before the clock, the
average score was something like 30-28, as teams passed the ball endlessly,
trying to set up for a reasonably safe set shot. Since people shot underhanded
at the time, you had to be wide open or have the shot block. Again, low scores
= bored fans = no fans. Another reason for the clock is that too many teams
just stalled, i.e. given a great dribbler (like Cousy) and a 1 point lead, a
team might decide to stall for the last thirty minutes of a game.
8- The refs do call charging. At the pro level, people do not take the charge
anymore. After all, if you were making $1 million, would you stand in the way
of a driving Moses Malone, or Charles Barkley? (:-)
The real reason for the NBA's problem is a general decline in fundamentals. The
players are better athletes, so they get minimal coaching at the high school
and college levels. Those that make it to the top are the most gifted, and
therefore, the least coached of the bunch. Even watching top teams play, I
hardly ever see good defensive position, or a well executed boxout on a
rebound. If you want a stat, note the general decline in foul shooting
percentage. About 10 years ago, 80 percent was a bare minimum. Now it's
considered excellent.
Now the reason fundamentals have declined is part of a general trend in team
sports away from the team and toward the individual. What we have is a cult of
personality. People don't cheer the Bulls, they cheer Michael Jordan. Somebody
noted a parallel development in the NFL. It's part of the same trend. Why does
Brent Musberger talk of a matchup between Marcus Allen and Walter Payton?
Some sociologist could give 100 reasons why this is. However, it does detract
from the game in general. Basketball is never as good as when 5 individuals are
cooperating in a balletic display of athletic skill. When 4 are watching a 5th
solo, it's a lot less interesting.
***
I've never cared much for pro basketball even though I love college basketball
and like to play myself. The main reason is because I simply can't empathise
with those guys -- they're too good. When I see Mark Price (Tech's point guard)
make a great play I say "wow, I wish I could do that!". When Kareem makes
something flat out impossible look easy, then I don't get that same thrill.
It's like a different sport.
Another point along the same lines is that I can learn things from the college
players whereas the NBA players are to far beyond me to learn from them. I
watched Mark Price go towards the basket and dish off underneath and tried it
myself. And Bruce Dalrymple showed me how to outrebound somebody four inches
taller. What can I learn from most pro players? How to shoot from any position,
any angle and still miss? Not quite!
It's rather sad to slight somebody for talent and skill, but there you have it.
At least in pro baseball they'll drop a ball now and again, the hitters will
strike out, and even the greatest pitcher will throw four straight balls.
***
Also I think that the refs should cut this favoritism and special treatment for
certain players. No..I don't think they should call every foul, but I think
they should call the game evenly...none of this home court advantage. A foul is
a foul is a foul I always say. Some of the things players get away with
...example: players battling for rebounds...bodies flying all over, no foul.
But player fakes other player in the air...other player "barely" touches
him....FOUL.......case closed...
***
I think the main problem with the NBA is that the season is just too long. Most
of the complaints Mark Tischler mentioned are intended to keep the game fast
moving and played underneath the hoop. Allow a zone defense in the NBA and
you'd never see a shot inside 15 feet.
I'm not sure that these rules are a good thing. I'm one of the few people I
know who enjoys watching a good four corners stall. The situation is similar to
the one the NFL finds itself in. Change the game to make it faster and more
spectacular, and suddenly find dropping attendance. A curiousity.
Undoubtedly part of the problem is television coverage. I recently went to a
Lakers game, and while it was fun to be in the Forum to see the game, the
actual viewing was abysmal. True, we had seats in the serious nosebleed
section, but the point remains that watching a basketball game live isn't that
exciting unless you are within 30 rows of the court. I enjoy watching on TV a
lot more (and if the announcers are good, that only adds to my enjoyment. Al
McGuire leaps to mind.)
***
Q: What's the most boring hour of sports?
A: The last two minutes of a basketball game.
I never paid much attention to basketball until I moved to L.A. (basketball is
about as popular in Canada as hockey is in the States - ie. not very). I have
watched a few games (ya gotta watch the Bruins 'round here) but I cannot
believe how a fast paced game can come to a screeching halt near the end.
Between fouls and timeouts it takes *forever* to play out the end of a game -
and no one ever concedes victory ("they're only down 10 points with 5 seconds
to go, they have a chance with a three pointer, steal the inbounds, another
three pointer, ..."). I cannot believe there are people who tune in a game just
for the last two minutes. Here, you can have my seat.
***
I read an article in Sport that stated "America does not want to see
intelligent, articulate BLACK millionaires" playing. For those who have played
the game and can appreciate the talent necessary to do seemingly simple things
like fade-away Js and no-look-assists, the game has never been better. But,
basketball is considered a black sport. Most of the audience wants to see
someone who they can perform vicariously through. Most of the audience is also
white. I'd like to see some NFL and Baseball fans name two starters on teams
other than the Cowboys, Yankees, etc. Does anyone know if NBA attendance is
down comparitively with preceding years?
***
Interesting someone should ask why the NBA is so boring now; I find it
considerably less boring now than I did a few years ago. I can't be the only
one, since TV audiences are up by something like 7% leaguewide at a time when
other sports (e.g., pro football) are losing viewers in significant numbers.
The excellent rookie crop this year helps.
This is inherently a boring time of the season. The first third of the season
is interesting because it's a time for evaluation. The last third is
interesting to the extent that it sets up the playoffs, though it only really
matters the division winners (for the bye) and those who may or may not make it.
There's also the question of whether one considers basketball itself to be a
boring sport. I don't think so, but neither do I find baseball boring, and I
know many do. One thing about basketball which is untrue in the other major
sports: there are very few really big plays. Since teams score an average of
about 50 times each, and even the best plays can contribute maybe 3% of the
score. Basketball is a game of momentum and runs, not of the BIG PLAY. Until
the last few minutes of the game, it simply doesn't ride on making a given shot.
There are a few things I would change. I hate the "illegal defense" rule; what
on earth is wrong with zone defense? Everyone effectively plays a zone much of
the time anyway (frequent switches), so why this silly restriction? I *like*
good defense.
The all-inclusive playoffs contribute greatly to the boredom of the regular
season. That goes for hockey, too. Any playoff system which includes sub-.500
teams is braindamaged.
I do like the 3-point field goal, though. It introduces another bit of strategy
without complicating the game too much.
Finally, a response to Carol's statement about Bill Fitch: I disagree. Fitch
took them from 29-53 to 60-22 in one year (of course that was also Larry Bird's
rookie year). The next three years they won 61, 62, and 56 games, as I recall.
That last year ('83) was not so much a breakdown in team play as in attitude.
Fitch is a disciplinarian, and from all accounts he becomes a pain to deal with
after a while. I consider Bill Fitch to be an excellent coach of fundamentals
and team play, and he is probably ideally suited to the young talent in Houston.
I am also really glad he left Boston; the chemistry just wasn't there anymore,
and no one was having fun. They are much looser under KC.
***
I can't believe the reasons you gave for the NBA being so boring!!
Zone Defenses make the league boring? Are you crazy? I can't imagine how boring
the game would be if team like Houston used a 2-1-2 zone. The opposition
wouldn't be able to take a shot closer than 25 feet. That's why they don't
allow a zone in the first place in the NBA.
The 24 second clock is boring? I'd take that over a Dean Smith 4 corner stall
anyday. At least the crowd (who the game is for anyway) gets to see some action
instead. It makes the offense perform.
Bad shot selection? What do you mean? The field goal percentages for teams are
probably up from a few decades ago.
How can you cite one on one play as boring? I, for one, look forward to those
little classic confrontations. I love to see Magic or Gus Williams drive on a
Bird or a Moncrief. It's like watching Goose Gossage pitch to George Brett or
Lester Hayes cover Mark Duper. Comparing college hoops to the pros is like
comparing apples and nicer oranges. You cannot tell me there is more talent in
college hoops. I love college hoops, the way the crowd gets involved and the
emotions that are evident by the teams BUT, the other guys are pros and half of
the people who wow you in college will NEVER be good enough to hack it in the
NBA.
The 3-point shot is exciting, plain and simple. It does not `encourage' a bad
shot, it is just an option. A behind the back pass has become a viable option
for most of the guards today, but like the 3-point shot, I don't think many
pros attempt it in an unwarranted situation where the risk outweighs the
possible advantage.
The NBA has the most action to offer of any major sport PERIOD
***
Here is an idea that came up at lunch. Allow the defense to play ANY kind of
defense they choose. To keep the middle from becoming too congested, the
3-seconds-in-the-lane rule could then apply to both offensive and defensive
players. (Maybe widen the lane also.) This would put more weight on the
referees, but are there any other reasons this couldn't be done?
***
I will humbly submit that I, a baseball fan and (to a lesser extent) a
basketball fan, can
(1) Name a starting lineup for each team in the National League, name at least
80% of all its players (.80x12x25=240) (though I'd recognize about 95% of
them), and
(2) Name the starting five for each team in the Atlantic Division, and at least
50% of all the players in the Eastern Conference (.5x11x12=66) (although
I'd recognize about 75% of them).
David Rubin, Princeton Univ. Statistics
***
The "black" arguement doesn't really work. Ever look at college hoops? The
white/black ratio is about the same there, yet it is much more popular. (Or are
you saying that it's OK so long as we don't pay them? :-)
The games really do not make difference in the NBA because so many teams do
make the playoffs. (Just like the NHL!) Plus, apart from a couple teams, the
NBA teams do not have the identities of the NCAA teams. UNC is UNC, (The ACC is
the best conference) but Golden State? New Jersey Nets? Who cares?
***
Heard that a new rule was going to be installed: Fastbreaking teams that get
fouled on the layup not only get two free throws, but also get to keep
possesion after that. This rule, if instituted, will give the better teams a
better chance to win - unlike last year's NBA championship series, which the
better team did not win.
***
The problems with the NBA can be summarized as follows:
1. They don't play basketball: So much pushing, holding, fouling is allowed
that any fouls called are arbitrary. Consequently fouls are called based more
on reputation than on the sequence of events. The reasons for this is that the
league doesn't want the games to become a simple test of free throw shooting,
but if ALL the fouls were called consistently, I believe that the greatest
basketball players in the world would adjust.
2. In crunch time ( the last few seconds of a game ) ANYTHING goes: The
officials are so afraid of deciding a game at the free throw line that
anything short of decapitation is "good defense" unless the shooter makes the
shot. Consequently the fouling is completely out of hand in the final seconds
of a game. This frame of mind becomes the standard for playoff games. The
reason for this are the same as for problem one above. Again I think that if
the college approach were taken, where games can easily be lost at the line,
the NBA players would respond with the kind of tight but clear defense close
college games end with.
3. It's FIXED!?!?: When playoff time rolls around watch with special attention
the games worked by the head of the NBA officials, ole D.G. His calls are most
creative and the ratio of fouls he hands out between teams, make it hard to
believe he's calling them as he sees them.
***
There |is| a new rule this year similar to what you described. A foul on a
breakaway in which the defender has no chance to play the ball (e.g., grabbing
someone from behind) results in two freethrows and possesion. It is a judgement
call for the official, of course. I saw it called a few times early in the
year, but I haven't seen it since.