Why are there back to backs? Why 82 games? What Pop did last night was a stroke of brilliance. He obviously is a brilliant man and could care less whether something is on tv or not...in the end of the day...he wants his team to lift another title...and he is a darn good coach. The issue is more about Stern's quote: "severe repercussions" Maybe Stern should realize something. There are way too many games played in the NBA...infact its too much NBA. Why is a Spurs team playing 4 games in 5 nights, with the fourth game against the Heat(well rested team)??? If an NBA player is a valued asset(especially stars), why risk the chance that he may get injured just based on the schedule? Are back to backs preparing you for something in the playoffs?? I get that NBA players are paid a lot of money to play the game. But my qualms aren't with the salary they get paid but more about how many games do you need to assess the star teams vs the garbage teams...By eliminating so many games and preventing back to back games...You create a level playing field. You improve the standard of play. You increase the shelf-life of stars. You make more games more competitive.
If the NBA wants to avoid this in the future, maybe they should figure out how to create a schedule so that nationally televised games only occur between rested teams. Is it really that complicated to do?
I think they should start the season earlier to make the schedule less tight. Like the NHL season, they also play 82 games but their pre-season begins in mid-september.
Argh...considering that the season ends in June...starting up the next season in 3 months sounds like a bit too much basketball...
Your saying too much basketball is a bad thing? It might be bad in the playoffs looking at LeBums 5head, but that means we only wait 3 months which include the summer league for our beloved Rockets.
If I was a Spurs fan I'd rather watch the bench vs the Heat than have no game... historical records would be skewed, all-time stat records would be unobtainable, c'mon, the NBA would make dramatically less money, etc... the short season argument is a dumb one that will never and should never have legs. "But, but, but, the games will mean more, people will appreciate each game more" -- get over it.
For every Karl Malone's you have, you'll have 10 Tracy McGrady's...eventually your stars gets hurt with age. There is no reason for Pop to have to rest his starters, but playing back to back's, traveling, 4 games in 5 nights...all this has a toll on a player and decreases the life-span of quality players... In regards to your historical records statement...they can never be comparable...you cant compare Dr. J to today's players because the game was different then...History can/ and should be compared with stats associated with the players of their respective generation. Wilt will for ever be the greatest offensive weapon in his generation. Michael will be greatest for his and so will Lebron for players that are his contemporaries...
82 games is fine as well as back to backs. But that 4 games in 5 nights on the road has to change. Its not a shorten season with a compact schedule. Even though teams never really had serious issues with the 82 game year, its the stretch where a team has to go on the road for like 12 days straight with few nights off...
I'm all for fewer games. Each game isn't worth enough to the fortunes of teams. You get doldrums in January where players aren't very focused. And, it causes injuries and shortens careers. But, given that there's 82 games -- and no chance the league will ever reduce the number of games (how much do they make on each one?) -- Pop does need to compete for every one of them.
Keep the same number of regular season games, but eliminate the 7th and 8th seeded teams from the playoffs. They're useless.
^ To clarify, removing 7th and 8th seeds from the playoffs allows the NBA to allot more days in the season to the regular season and spread those days out to reduce the number of back-to-backs. It also means you won't see anymore sub-.500 teams with losing records in the playoffs like in 2011. Nobody wants to watch that crap except the fans of those teams.
Fewer games, more days between games, and more team practices would lead to a better product, IMO. You might actually see teams playing defense in all 4 quarters.
Same or I don't care. Not going to cry for people making millions of dollars. I mean I have to go to work five straight days a week for weeks on end I mean it's Pop's and the NBA's problem. I mean Pop could have just said they were "sick" or "injured" or managed things different where the NBA wouldn't have cared.
How would the rounds work in the playoffs. Three teams end up advancing from the first round. Who advances to the finals out of those three teams? Maybe they should just pick the 8 best teams in the league and seed based on wins and performance in their division and then have the playoffs hosted by one city to avoid a ton of travel. Or they could have more days between playoff games to allow for the potential for travel between the coasts.
Players playing a sport in which they are the top 1% deserve to get the salaries they deserve...if games are cut...salaries should reflect those changes... and to your other point about working 5 days a week...these guys are working...just because you dont see them doing a job, doesnt mean they arent...these players spend extensive time away from family for more than half the year...dont hate bc they get paid and you dont...
