I am not pretending it doesn't matter. I just spelled out a way it does matter business-wise.
I am saying all things considered it doesn't matter to the players. And I completely understand why.
Furthermore, the players do things outside the League structure, to promote the game, for example, off-season international tours.
And I don't think the competitiveness of the game is all that consequential to the league, even in marketing.
So on balance, I would give them a pass.
All this "can't you see how they are hurting the brand" to me is just dressing up a "they are making the owners agree" argument.
This is such a bad business decision, you know it is horrible, and you have no way of quantifying it other than vibez
Sorry, not really convincing IMO
it's basically a 3 hour commercial on national TV on how much the NBA sucks.
that will generate hours and hours of national media coverage about how the NBA sucks.
I think that's really bad. you can call it vibes I guess in the sense that basically all of marketing is vibes.
but the risk of injury in a game that historically never has injuries seems like pretty small price to pay.
It is not that common, but it doesn't have to be common for players to consider the risk.
Take Devin Booker for example. His play and team record put him on the borderline of being all-NBA. The last part of the season will decide. He picked up minor lower leg injuries early in the team that made him miss a couple of games. He played with those injuries and hurt himself some more. Then
He is on track to not play enough games to qualify, even if he does nuts in the last part of the season.
Why should not think that him pulling a hamstring (which he does a lot) or turning an ankle (relatively minor injuries) would be a risk he wants to minimize? If he was playing on his Supermax contract, all NBA would be even more consequential for him.
I don't think the injury risk is some "I might tear my ACL out there" type of stuff. But more on the margin. All it has to do in seem like a credible risk. And unless you can show it to be 0%, then it is credible.
The risk of injury doesn't have to be common, it just has to be a real consideration for it to be impactful on player judgment
Most of the time, players would not get injured in a competitive game. But when it does happen, that player gonna look foolish and he will get nothing extra from the fans, Adam Silver, or anyone else than some hoop equivalent of "thoughts and prayers"
-I think off-season runs count as off-season training in players' minds too. And again, we see 100% of the all-star game. But a small fraction of NBA players playing offseason. Like Jokic clearly doesn't take this game seriously, post his Rico Hines runs for me then.
If he feels he's at risk for injury he shouldn't play.
again the entire history of the NBA, players were totally capable of calibrating their effort, to get a good work out in, try a bit and not injure themselves.
it's hard for me to understand what has changed. were the previous players stupid? were they more durable?
Im not asking for playoff effort, or regular season effort, but something close to pro am effort is totally reasonable.
like would you find it acceptable if each team just took turns taking half court shots all game? i mean that would lower the risk of injury to zero ritgh?
clearly there's a balance to strike. and I don't understand how 80 year of nba players could find that balance, but these players can't.
whatever balance their is to strike I think the players are not even close to the acceptable range.
-I think off-season runs count as off-season training in players' minds too. And again, we see 100% of the all-star game. But a small fraction of NBA players playing offseason. Like Jokic clearly doesn't take this game seriously, post his Rico Hines runs for me then.
jokic is notable because he's highly unusual, most NBA players hoop during the summer at some point.
and tbh I think he's exaggerating a lot of that, Aaron Gordon talked about going to sombor, he said they worked out.
again i think it's more about being cool, it's cool to be "aw shucks I don't even hoop during the off season"
The same logic can be applied to your idea of fines. Do you think a $50,000 fine gonna make players try harder?
You are gonna have to fine them huge amounts.
Amounts that the Player's Association will probably have to agree to.
What do you think the Player's Association gonna be more open to, bonuses or fines?
I think the fines are about shame, I think the flopping fines worked under the same principle.
getting a reputation for egregious totally fake flopping was something players wanted to avoid. and I think it worked.
Nah, I disagree. I just think the players, given market conditions, know there isn't a real need to give a damn.
fair enough, I think it's highly anti social behaviour spured on by group social dynamics.
. ASW is legitimately a glorified corporate event.
