I really want to like the NBA... | Page 4 | Syracusefan.com

I really want to like the NBA...

I really don't get the knocks on the NBA used to be a cerebral game and now it isn't.

In addition to what Moqui said (and I've made this point before) the game is probably more cerebral now than ever. The teams have so much more information at their fingertips then they ever have before it's ridiculous. The Knicks can tell you what Melo shoots when he takes no dribbles, when he goes right, when he goes left from the right elbow, etc. (and if the Knicks can tell you that you can bet their opponents can tell you it also) they can tell you how well Chris Paul does when you trap his pick and roll vs hedge, or how often he's going to shoot a jumper when you go under a screen.

That's obviously a lot of stuff that we as fans don't see, but it's absolutely a part of the game and it's exponentially larger than it's been at any point in time in the past
 
NBA no thanks. haven't watched a game since jordan retired.
I don't understand this.. The NBA is at its highest point since Jordan, its still growing and it's eclipsed MLB as the countries second most popular sport. The level of play is awesome, there are some great teams, intriguing storylines and the players in the NBA right now rival those of the Jordan years. Maybe the NBA is more of a 18-49 age demographic game because everyone over the age of 50 seems to have this affinity for Jordan/Magic/Bird and feel that no players/teams/era will ever match or surpass them.
 
I think this board would have more NBA fans if this school managed to produce more NBA players . . .

Its funny because that really doesnt matter or factor into my not watching the NBA. I wish every player well and hope they all have hall of fame careers here but that doesnt even factor into my decision not to watch much of the NBA. I am embarrassed to say I dont think I have ever watched Wes Johnson play an NBA game.
 
every game just doesn't seem to matter like they do in college. the effort...MEH.
 
NBA no thanks. haven't watched a game since jordan retired.(first time).

Too bad-- you're missing one of the greatest players of all time (and in a different way than Jordan, by the way). To each his own.
 
Too bad-- you're missing one of the greatest players of all time (and in a different way than Jordan, by the way). To each his own.

I also have to think it has to due with age.

I'm 42 so I grew up with the great Celtics and Laker teams of the 80's I was 13 when MJ went to the NBA. All kids love the NBA and I couldnt get enough of it. I taped every NBA all star game. I watched the NBA every night it was on. My son is 12 and he loves it.

Fast forward 25-30 years and I just have lost interest. I am sure I am not the only one this has happened too and I can guarantee you that if you are between 18-24 and post on this board it will happen to some of you as well.
 
You can't play a TRUE zone though with the defensive 3 second rule. If I have a quality big I can FORCE defenders away from him or open up driving lanes. To me the NBA is like the American League in baseball, little to no strategy. The rules simply dictate that in the NBA. It would be a much better game without the defensive 3 second rule.

I don't agree. If you let the defense clog the middle with a 24 sec shoot clock the defense would have too big of advantage. Plus you can play set zones, but center has to be one step out of the lane unless there is an offense of player in the lane, but the real strategy is outside the lane anyway. This allows a player to be in help position which is in effect a zone position (i.e. illegal before the rule change) this forces the ball to be moved and the defense rotate while still giving the offense the option to shoot or drive the ball. What it has done is created more 3pt shots being taking and has hurt post play a bit. But the positives out weight the negatives.
 
I don't agree. If you let the defense clog the middle with a 24 sec shoot clock the defense would have too big of advantage. Plus you can play set zones, but center has to be one step out of the lane unless there is an offense of player in the lane, but the real strategy is outside the lane anyway. This allows a player to be in help position which is in effect a zone position (i.e. illegal before the rule change) this forces the ball to be moved and the defense rotate while still giving the offense the option to shoot or drive the ball. What it has done is created more 3pt shots being taking and has hurt post play a bit. But the positives out weight the negatives.

Seeing the Clipperrs score 46? points in the first quarter last week I am all for giving the defense an advantage. The offense can FORCE defenders out of the lane. Isn't there enough scoring already in the NBA? We are talking about the best offensive players in the world. How much does a help defender really help? Look at international basketball. Sure those players have gotten much better, but how do you think they can compete with a USA team full of superstars? The NBA is far too offense dominated. Even defensive, grind it out teams like the Spurs are changing their ways. It's the reason the Lakers are struggling. They are old and do not have enough scoring. Do you think Phil Jackson's triangle offense is really that spectacular or do you think he has just coached the best players? NBA rules help the offense and help the superstar. The days of teams like the late 80's early 90's bad boy Pistons are over and done with. It's a shame really.
 
And this is SEVEN years old...and also why MJ is the greatest player EVER

The death of defense?
by Roland Lazenby / October 20, 2006:
It remains one of the enduring images of NBA lore – Joe Dumars guarding a determined young Michael Jordan in the 1990 Eastern Conference playoffs.

Dumars of the “Bad Boy” Detroit Pistons, the league’s two-time defending champs, looked like a gaucho corralling the ultimate toro, his feet moving furiously (maybe the best defensive slide in the history of the game), one forearm firmly barred into Jordan to keep contact, the other bent arm thrust into the air, giving Dumars his only hope of keeping his balance while trying to ride the Jordan whirlwind.

Jerry West watched the performance and remarked privately that most people considered Isiah Thomas the Pistons’ superstar, but West pointed out that it was Dumars who was the supreme talent.

Why?

Well, West said, both Thomas and Dumars could push the envelope offensively, “but Joe’s defense sets him apart.”

Just how good was that defense?

It left a supremely disappointed Jordan sobbing at the back of the team bus when the series was over (it’s also probably the only NBA defense ever to spawn a best-selling book: Sam Smith’s ‘The Jordan Rules’).

Indeed, it was a formative moment in pro basketball history because it brought Jordan the ultimate challenge and propelled him toward a greatness that fascinated a global audience. Whether they liked pro basketball or not, people felt compelled to watch “His Airness” grow up against the Pistons’ physical challenge.

“I think that ‘Jordan Rules’ defense, as much as anything else, played a part in the making of Michael Jordan,” said Tex Winter, who was an assistant coach for that Chicago team. The 1990 loss forced Jordan and the Bulls to find an answer to Detroit’s muscle.

“Those Jordan Rules were murder,” Winter explained. “The fact that we could win the next year even though they were playing that defense says everything about Jordan as a competitor. Any lesser player would have folded his tent.”

Jordan had to dig deeper to respond to the Pistons, and his effort pushed his Bulls to six championships over the next eight seasons.

The unfortunate footnote to this legacy is that under an interpretation of the rules adopted by the NBA last season, if Dumars were playing today he would not be allowed to guard Jordan so physically, or perhaps even guard him at all.

Today Dumars is the chief basketball executive of the team he once led as a player. He’s an honest man, which means he chooses his words carefully.

Asked in July if he could defend Jordan under today’s interpretation of the rules, Dumars first laughed, then offered a long pause before replying, “It would have been virtually impossible to defend Michael Jordan based on the way the game’s being called right now.”
 
FAVORING ONE STYLE OVER ANOTHER

Dumars put together a Pistons team that won an NBA championship in 2004 and made a return to the Finals in 2005. That team would have a harder time playing its defensive style in today’s game, Dumars said.

“We could still compete, but it would be a lot tougher.”

As one of the top executives in the league, Dumars is hesitant to criticize the changes. He articulates his misgivings cautiously, but he makes it clear that the new rules may not allow for much diversity of play.

“I think the game is best played when everyone is allowed to play to their strengths,” he said. “I don’t think any one style should be elevated over another style.”

He said the league was at its best back in the late 80s and early 90s.

“There were different styles. The Lakers had their Showtime style, getting out and running. We had our physical style as the Pistons. The Celtics had their style, as did the Bulls. There wasn’t anyone pushing for one style of play. That made it entertaining. When we played the Lakers, it was a battle of styles, their running against our physical game.”

Dumars said that clash of styles made for great basketball, great entertainment for the fans.

His comments beg the question: Has the league eliminated a defensive style with its new format?

OVERREACTION

Hall of Famer Rick Barry, a keen observer of the game, said he would love to see players of the past getting to attack the basket under the new officiating.

“They’d score a lot more,” he said.

Barry called the new rules interpretation “on overreaction by the league to the low scoring teams that have arisen over the last 15 years.”

Actually the league was perhaps trying to remedy the wrong problem, Barry said.

The problem of low scoring is that coaches with less talented teams, beginning with Mike Fratello back in the 80s, put “an emphasis on ball control, on keeping down the number of possessions. That was the way Fratello kept his teams in ball games. It was the smart thing to do to win.”

Soon other coaches, who needed to win to avoid getting fired, began copying Fratello’s approach.

With that slower style also came the rise of muscular – some say illegal – defenses, such as Dumars’ “Bad Boy” Pistons and Pat Riley’s New York Knicks.

The combination of a slower tempo and the muscular defense turned the NBA’s running game into a half-court battle.

Rather than calling touch fouls, the NBA really should have considered shortening the shot clock to 20 or even 18 seconds, Barry said. “That would speed the game up.”

Still, Barry, a prodigious scorer, admits to being angered by hand-checking defenses back in the 70s. And the modern game had become dominated by hand-checking and other physical ploys.

“With the way the game was being played, how much skill does it take to hold and push and shove and grab excessively?” Barry asked. “Now, with the new rules, the athletic players are much more exciting for the fans to watch.”

THE ADJUSTMENT?

Rod Thorn concedes that the increased foul calls were a negative last season because a parade of free throws ultimately slows the tempo of a game and subtracts from the quality of basketball.

“Once the players get used to it, they’ll adjust,” he said.

The changes will not bring the end of defense as we know it, Thorn said. “The good defensive teams are still good. It’s just more difficult to cover those wing players, there’s no doubt about it.”

It does, however, raise questions about the style of defense. Teams that like ball pressure are already rethinking their approach.

Both Tex Winter and Joe Dumars agree that there will be adjustments, just as they agree that now that the NBA has found some new offensive life, there will be no turning back to the old ways.

So the upcoming season becomes a matter of how teams, coaches and players adjust to a new game.

Dumars, always a stoic as a player, takes the same approach as an executive.

“Everybody is going to have to adjust to how the game is being called,” he said. “There’s no sense in complaining about it because it’s not going to change. That’s been the history of the league. The game changes and you have to make adjustments.”

Teams will have to adjust their personnel, coaches will have to adjust their strategies and tactics, and players will have to adjust their play, Dumars said.

There will be adjustments before the season, before games, even during games, he added.

Winter, though, thinks adjustments should not be made just by players and coaches.

He thinks officials still need to adjust how they call the game. They can’t make it a sport of touch fouls.

“It’s pretty hard to play defense against these quicker guards without touching them a little bit,” Winter said. “I think the officials are going to have to make an adjustment too. They can’t call all those touch fouls.”

A big issue for Winter’s Lakers is how the guards will play defensively. Traditionally, Phil Jackson’s teams have featured lots of ball pressure. That means the Lakers’ pressure style has to shift.

“I think you have to play more of a containing defense,” explained Winter. “You can still put some pressure on the offense. You can contain them and slow the ball up.”

But the new guidelines “change how you force turnovers,” Winter explained. “You can’t be as aggressive as you’d like to be with your hands. You can’t be ‘into’ the guy as much.”

As a result, defense now becomes a matter of waiting for the offensive player to make a mistake, rather than forcing a turnover, Winter said.

The Lakers would like to exert the kind of ball pressure they used to deploy when Derek Fisher wore the Forum Blue and Gold.

But the new guidelines are still murky, Winter said.

Before games, officials have visited with teams to explain the new approach, Winter said.

“They come in and tell us all this stuff. Then the first four or five plays of the game, you see them doing just the opposite from what they said. You don’t know what they’re going to call. So you have to adjust accordingly, depending what’s going on from game to game, even half to half.”

Barry agreed immediately, citing several incidents in the playoffs where veteran officials made questionable touch calls that had substantial impact on the outcome of a series.

Still, all in all, Barry says he likes the direction the league is taking toward eliminating hooliganism. Hockey finally did that, which now allows fans to see the brilliance of the world’s fastest, most athletic, skaters, Barry said.

As for Dumars, he’s already begun his adjustments. He signed Flip Murray in the offseason, primarily because he’s a young guard who knows how to move his feet and stay in front of an opponent with a killer crossover and lightning moves.

Dumars knows he’s got to find defenders who know that they can move their feet and look the opponent in the eye. They just can’t touch.
 
I think the rule changes were great and have helped the game a ton. The game was struggling a bit in the late 90's early aughts when Jordan retired and teams were struggling to break 90.
 
I prefer the unpredictability of the NCAA game at both the individual game level and in a broader sense. You know entering the NBA season that its going to be Miami / OKC in the finals (only real surprise is the Lakers). Who will be the top teams for the NCAA title is much more unknown. The race to get in the tourney is also more appealing to me than to get into the NBA playoffs. Bur really its all a personal choice. Some people might prefer a league that is more predictable where they can get to known players and teams more.

At the individual game level, sure the NCAA lacks the talent and fluidity that the NBA games have. But the last minute brain farts, the struggling for points, adds to the competitive appeal of the NCAA game. Also, there are so many different styles in the NCAA while the NBA is much of the same. Some of the slow down teams want to make you gouge your eyes -- but once again its a unique part of the NCAA where teams with different styles can compete despite lack of talent.

It really depends what your looking for. There is no doubt that the NBA game is much higher level of quality basketball, but as I said before I like the rougher edge of the NCAA game where it is not so easy.

There is no right answer.
 
Seeing the Clipperrs score 46? points in the first quarter last week I am all for giving the defense an advantage. The offense can FORCE defenders out of the lane. Isn't there enough scoring already in the NBA? We are talking about the best offensive players in the world. How much does a help defender really help? Look at international basketball. Sure those players have gotten much better, but how do you think they can compete with a USA team full of superstars? The NBA is far too offense dominated. Even defensive, grind it out teams like the Spurs are changing their ways. It's the reason the Lakers are struggling. They are old and do not have enough scoring. Do you think Phil Jackson's triangle offense is really that spectacular or do you think he has just coached the best players? NBA rules help the offense and help the superstar. The days of teams like the late 80's early 90's bad boy Pistons are over and done with. It's a shame really.

Atlanta scored 5 pts in a quarter and 20 in half this year. Chicago is one of the best defensive teams in the last 25 years. The NBA players have dominated international play since 2006 when Coach K took over and it wasn't the coaching or Duke would have killed Maryland on Sunday. In the 80s and 90s hand checking was allowed it made for a very physical brand of basketball, but not better defense. It also created a ton of one on one basketball (Iso ball) which is not that fun to watch.
 
Atlanta scored 5 pts in a quarter and 20 in half this year. Chicago is one of the best defensive teams in the last 25 years. The NBA players have dominated international play since 2006 when Coach K took over and it wasn't the coaching or Duke would have killed Maryland on Sunday. In the 80s and 90s hand checking was allowed it made for a very physical brand of basketball, but not better defense. It also created a ton of one on one basketball (Iso ball) which is not that fun to watch.

More one on one back then than today? I disagree with that completely. The NBA is watered down now. It is a superstar driven league. The NBA has done EVERYTHING to make sure those players stand out. Kobe Bryant scored 81 points in 2006. How does that happen in a league where the defense is better now? 81???? Where is the evidence that defense is better now? It is a fact that the league has made rule changes to help the offense. How does that lend itself to better defense? How many dominant post scorers are there in today's game? It is a watered down league and that league's rules favors the superstar.

Teams are scoring less now, compared to the 80s/90s because of:

1) More 3FG attempts (not hitting at a higher % however)
2) Fewer trips to the FT line (see more 3FG attempts)
3) Pace is down

And why does more contact definitely mean it isn't better defense? Don't we all wish Rakeem was more physical?

NBA games used to be wars. Now it is an offensive showcase where contact is a distant memory. Players like Laimbeer, Mahorn, Oakley, Barkley are long gone.
 
I have had to endure Andrea Bargnani for 7 years. That alone kills your love of the NBA game.

I had to endure Patrick Ewing.

Sent using my Commodore 64
 
More one on one back then than today? I disagree with that completely. The NBA is watered down now. It is a superstar driven league. The NBA has done EVERYTHING to make sure those players stand out. Kobe Bryant scored 81 points in 2006. How does that happen in a league where the defense is better now? 81???? Where is the evidence that defense is better now? It is a fact that the league has made rule changes to help the offense. How does that lend itself to better defense? How many dominant post scorers are there in today's game? It is a watered down league and that league's rules favors the superstar.

Teams are scoring less now, compared to the 80s/90s because of:

1) More 3FG attempts (not hitting at a higher % however)
2) Fewer trips to the FT line (see more 3FG attempts)
3) Pace is down

And why does more contact definitely mean it isn't better defense? Don't we all wish Rakeem was more physical?

NBA games used to be wars. Now it is an offensive showcase where contact is a distant memory. Players like Laimbeer, Mahorn, Oakley, Barkley are long gone.

The definition of now is not 7 years ago. (the fact you going that far to try and make a point proves you don't have one) The rules has effected post play, but the bigger effect on post play is kids don't want to play in the post. That is why there is so few post players in college and in the pros. Durant is 6-11, Dirk 7-0 and neither play in the post very much if at all. The game has changed and you don't have to like and you don't need to give or make-up a reason why.

If there is less post play then there should be less physical contact, why do you want to see more FTs? If you liked that foul shooting expedition that the SU/SH turned into than god bless you, I'd rather see ball movement and player movement.
 
So NOW is only this year, but THEN can span two decades :crazy:

ALL the rule changes you adore were present in 2006.

You can give reasons you like the game, but I can't say why I don't like it. Consistent. Still waiting for you to prove why defense it better now. Guess what? It isn't. Go read John Hollinger. He knows a thing or two about basketball stats. Read Basketball on Paper. These aren't just my opinions.
 
So NOW is only this year, but THEN can span two decades :crazy:

ALL the rule changes you adore were present in 2006.

You can give reasons you like the game, but I can't say why I don't like it. Consistent. Still waiting for you to prove why defense it better now. Guess what? It isn't. Go read John Hollinger. He knows a thing or two about basketball stats. Read Basketball on Paper. These aren't just my opinions.

We are all entitled to our opinions...have a goodnight
 
Teams are scoring less now, compared to the 80s/90s because of:

1) More 3FG attempts (not hitting at a higher % however)
2) Fewer trips to the FT line (see more 3FG attempts)
3) Pace is down

I think it's mostly the last one. The league is shooting 36% from 3 this year. No season in the 1980's did they shoot better than 32% from 3. 1995 was the first year ever that the league finished at 36%.

Teams are scoring 105.5 points per 100 possessions this year. From 83-93 the league figure was pretty much around 108 every year. We had been right around the 107-108 level for the 5 years prior to the lockout; we haven't quite gotten back there since.

The change in pace is ridiculous; teams average about 92 possessions per game now, they were over 100 just about every season in the 80's
 
Still waiting for you to prove why defense it better now. Guess what? It isn't. Go read John Hollinger. He knows a thing or two about basketball stats. Read Basketball on Paper. These aren't just my opinions.

As I said in my other post, offensive efficiency #'s are lower this year than they were throughout most of the 80's and 90's, though some of that may be the by product of the lockout, certainly it was last year.
 

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
641
Replies
5
Views
556
    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Wednesday for Basketball
Replies
7
Views
698
Replies
6
Views
3K
    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Thursday for Basketball
Replies
6
Views
693

Forum statistics

Threads
169,537
Messages
4,838,577
Members
5,981
Latest member
SYRtoBOS

Online statistics

Members online
91
Guests online
910
Total visitors
1,001


...
Top Bottom