How the hell is the NBA a bad product?

[651akathepaul]

651, why do you want 6 teams contracted? For what purpose?

To spread the love. To avoid the Sixers. Teams that know they have no chance so they construct their team to be completely awful so as to get that star the next year that every **** team desperately feels they need. Hand in hand with a shorter schedule, more teams will be competitive and feel they have a chance to "sneak" in. Better players on each team and better chances to win on a nightly basis.

 

[651akathepaul]

Weeds out the players surviving on only talent and potential alone. Makes guys coming in having to differentiate themselves in other ways so as to make them better all around players. If they dont...they don't make it and don't linger around the NBA as the ultimate potential guys who are nothing more than journeymen.

 

[SneakerProSr.]

I just can't buy contraction.

There are only 13-15 decent quarterbacks in the NFL and that's being generous yet nobody is talking about lowering the amount of teams in order for better competitive balance.

 

[statis22]

Getting rid of teams won't stop players from taking less to still play with each other or front offices from being cheap by towing the luxury tax line.

The NBA will always be a league of have & have nots based off of this alone.

 

[651akathepaul]

I just can't buy contraction.

There are only 13-15 decent quarterbacks in the NFL and that's being generous yet nobody is talking about lowering the amount of teams in order for better competitive balance.

Completely different. Can't compare the two.

 

[dland24]

To all the people talking about only 9 teams have won championships in the last 34 years in the NBA I'd like to point that e same percentage of NFL teams had won Super Bowls in the previous 34 years until the Saints and Seahawks broke through.

I am not a mathematician, but are you sure about those numbers?  16 teams, which is 50% of NFL teams have won a Superbowl in the last 34 years.  FIFTY.  Take away the Saints and the Seahawks (putting aside the headscratching reason to do this), you are still at 44% of NFL teams winning a SB in the last 34 years. 

Now look at the NBA.  9 teams. 30% of NBA teams have won a championship in the last 34 years.

Sorry but 20% is a huge difference.  And taking away the Saints and Seahawks titles (which still makes no sense to do), you are still looking at a 14% difference. 

Maybe I am misunderstanding what you are trying to do here.  But if I am interpreting what you are trying to do correctly, you are dead wrong.

 

[CP1708]

651, Ok, but there is something else that you aren’t thinking of when you mention avoiding a Sixers situation.

Tanking is a strategy, for a reason.

Other sports, tanking doesn’t do anything but help add just a piece. But you can get those pieces anywhere else in the draft, over time. Think Brady in the 6th round.

The NBA is 5 guys. They play offense, AND defense. Albert Pujols was a beast, but he can’t bat every inning. Adrian Peterson is a bad man, but he can’t do anything when the other team has the ball.

NBA is not that. Bron, Durant, Kobe, MJ, Magic, Bird, they can do something every 30 seconds, on either side of the court to impact the game/series/season.

To get THAT guy, you must be in the top 2-3 of the draft.

What Philadelphia did was a sound, sound business decision. We aren’t winning, so let’s go get a guy that might help get us there.

You clamoring for Philly or any other team to play harder, better, so they can be mediocre is pointless. Flat out, pointless.

Especially in today’s NBA, where you have a pretty good shot at retaining that superstar piece for 7 years before you have to start sweating him wanting to leave for another team. It gives them time to develop a roster around his skills that will enhance what he can do. The Magic tried to do it with Shaq, when they brought him a guard that could do everything in Penny. They added shooters in Nick and Scott. Then they got him a vet PF to help ease his burden with rebounds. In the end, they disrespected him (in his mind) and he left them. Had they not upset him, he could have played their 15+ years and maybe made them a league champ in time.

Philly isn’t getting that with the 8th pick, after they “play hard” and still lose 50+ games. Philly did the right thing.

You as a fan have to understand that. This league is different, one player can completely change everything. Not the same in other leagues, so you are the one that has to get over it, not the league has to fix it. (tho I think they are going to try somehow)

When you think about it, they already addressed it with the lottery. In the NFL, you get the worst record, you get the first pick. In MLB, you get the worst record, you get the first pick. NBA ain’t like that, they already did try to fix that problem, 25 years ago. All teams can do now, is enhance their CHANCE at that generational player. If they miss, then they suffer.

The NBA also has limited stupid GM’s by eliminating 7 year contracts, and making the majority of them 4 year deals. So now, teams won’t be dead for half a decade when they sign a Joe Johnson, or Brandon Roy, or Amare deal only to have them break a leg 2 months into the contract. That’s yet another step towards helping NBA teams from their own stupidity.

Guess what folks will complain about then? Lack of cohesion or some ****, cuz players aren’t on teams for 8+ years and guys are having to learn new systems, or new teammates more often. That will be the go to complaint here in a couple years, I guarantee it.

 

[dland24]

CP, I dont want to speak out of place, but I dont think you are teaching 651 anything new there.  I think he is fully aware of WHY teams tank in the NBA, and the importance of getting that transcendent star that you likely wouldnt get without a top 3 pick.  I just think the idea of teams intentionally trying to lose is one of the problems that he has with the NBA. 

 

[stillin729]

teams having to tank is because of the way the NBA set up their league

believe me as a Sixers fan; they tanked hard and they really didn't hide the fact they were and if they didn't they'd never get better

 

[sea manup]

 
I suggest you guys pull up some footage of entire NBA games from the 80s. The level of speed & athleticism is so terrible.

At the end of the day, we're just spoiled. The level of basketball globally is better than it has ever been before. It seems like offenses are struggling more but people never account for the freak athletes that the NBA now has become known for. Today's players close out faster, can cover more space, and are a terror in the passing lanes. It's nice to imagine that every player in the 90s was a Scottie type defender or that every center had Hakeem like moves, but let's be serious.

Just compare international competition from 1988 or 1992 to today. It's not even close.

a bit of that speed difference is the low fps of 80s cameras 

same reason why every nique and jordan  dunk looks like they are floating 

 

[sea manup]

teams having to tank is because of the way the NBA set up their league

believe me as a Sixers fan; they tanked hard and they really didn't hide the fact they were and if they didn't they'd never get better

its not the league, its how basketball works

one person can dominate a basketball game more than football, soccer, hockey or baseball

 

[dland24]

teams having to tank is because of the way the NBA set up their league

believe me as a Sixers fan; they tanked hard and they really didn't hide the fact they were and if they didn't they'd never get better

I am not even the one arguing this point....but people agree with the bolded....but in spite of agreeing, they think that is part of the problem.

 

[stillin729]

its not the league, its how basketball works

one person can dominate a basketball game more than football, soccer, hockey or baseball

it is the league; teams in purgatory can't get better unless they get a high superstar caliber player in the draft

you keep picking in the teens and you stay a 6th-8th seed forever

 

[sea manup]

 

its not the league, its how basketball works

one person can dominate a basketball game more than football, soccer, hockey or baseball

it is the league; teams in purgatory can't get better unless they get a high superstar caliber player in the draft

you keep picking in the teens and you stay a 6th-8th seed forever

so what other methods should there be for a bad team to get talent needed to not be bad anymore?

 

[CP1708]

its not the league, its how basketball works

one person can dominate a basketball game more than football, soccer, hockey or baseball

it is the league; teams in purgatory can't get better unless they get a high superstar caliber player in the draft

you keep picking in the teens and you stay a 6th-8th seed forever

What you are arguing doesn't even make sense.

How the hell is that on the league?

 

[CP1708]

Getting rid of teams won't stop players from taking less to still play with each other or front offices from being cheap by towing the luxury tax line.

The NBA will always be a league of have & have nots based off of this alone.

Correct.

Again, the league had 23 teams in the 80's, and 2 teams won everything.

 

[stillin729]

What you are arguing doesn't even make sense.

How the hell is that on the league?

I don't even feel like addressing because it's like talking to a child but doesn't the league decide how many teams there are? yup

half these teams have a bunch of players having no business being on a professional team; the draft has become a joke.

Is your last name Stern or something?

 

[651akathepaul]

It's two frames of thought here. Teams can win with better overall talent and depth without having a Top 5 player in the League. And what I'm saying lessens considerably that need that makes teams feel like it is a must to tank in order to become relevant again. It's not. Teams will always be better if they have one of the best in the entire sport, but they aren't immune to losing. Especially so, if the the rest of the league has more talent on their rosters.

 

[CP1708]

What you are arguing doesn't even make sense.

How the hell is that on the league?

I don't even feel like addressing because it's like talking to a child but doesn't the league decide how many teams there are? yup

half these teams have a bunch of players having no business being on a professional team; the draft has become a joke.

Is your last name Stern or something?

Yeah, you don't have a clue what you're talkin about, ok then.

We should go back to the glory days of the NBA when there was 8 teams, and the Celtics won 11 times in 13 years.

Or the 80's, when there were 23 teams, and 2 teams won everything.


That'll make the league better.

 

[CP1708]

It's two frames of thought here. Teams can win with better overall talent and depth without having a Top 5 player in the League. And what I'm saying lessens considerably that need that makes teams feel like it is a must to tank in order to become relevant again. It's not. Teams will always be better if they have one of the best in the entire sport, but they aren't immune to losing. Especially so, if the the rest of the league has more talent on their rosters.

Any examples of this?

04 Pistons

Who else the past 35+ years?

 

[CP1708]

It's two frames of thought here. Teams can win with better overall talent and depth without having a Top 5 player in the League. And what I'm saying lessens considerably that need that makes teams feel like it is a must to tank in order to become relevant again. It's not. Teams will always be better if they have one of the best in the entire sport, but they aren't immune to losing. Especially so, if the the rest of the league has more talent on their rosters.

In theory, I am assuming you are referring to a team like this current version of the Pacers, yes?

No top 2-3 picks, just solid, young, drafted core, with mid level picks, that develop over time. Their foil the past 3 years, the big bad Heat, who they have to overcome, much like the Pistons over the Celtics in the late 80's, and then the Bulls over the Pistons in the early 90's, yes?

 

[MambaMentality824]

I don't even feel like addressing because it's like talking to a child but doesn't the league decide how many teams there are? yup

half these teams have a bunch of players having no business being on a professional team; the draft has become a joke.

Is your last name Stern or something?

Are you serious man? Half the teams in the NBA? Please, name me which teams are that much of a joke to you? I'd love to hear this. Theres bad teams in every damn sport- that will never change.

 

[Johnny_Cakes]

Contraction won't happen unless the NBA was losing an incredible amount of money per year. I think it's a given that we'll see a couple new franchises in the next 10 years, likely Seattle gets one. The Bay Area could definitely support another team in the South Bay, but I'm guessing the NBA wants to move back into Canada a bit.

 

[tyonenine]

California has enough teams

 

[MambaMentality824]

Dudes talking about teams in the NBA can't reverse their fortune? The Clippers, Warriors, Grizzlies, Suns, Thunder, Pacers, Bulls, Heat, Lakers, Celtics, Nuggets etc. have all gone through periods of being boo boo at some point in the past decade. How do you figure that these teams have become contenders throughout various points in the past few years.

The way some of you talk you make it seem like literally there are only 4 or 5 good teams in the NBA and they are the only ones who have a chance of being good.

Unfortunately, one aspect of the league that will never go away is how dominant the best player in the league is- there a lot of contender with good teams in the NBA, but it's going to be tough for them to ever beat a LeBron/MJ/Kobe/Duncan led team. That goes with the earlier point that the NBA is a PLAYERS league. A dominant player in basketball simply has much more of an effect than it does in baseball, soccer, hockey etc. The NBA will never be able to change that, it isn't on the LEAGUE. That's just how the sport is.

This leads to much more dynasty type teams in the NBA than the other professional leagues and is the reason for the 9 teams in the past 30 years. Doesn't mean those teams don't have to battle their *** for that dominance though. Lakers in early 00's could have easily fell to the Kings/Blazers and only ended up with one chip. The Bulls used to BATTLE the Knicks/Jazz, the Heat are a couple plays away from only having one chip with Wade/Bosh/Bron.

In the end, I don't know if the best team winning the championship is really a bad thing though, I think that's how it should be.