Rosey Picture? Is Derrick Rose For MVP Hype?

First Things First, No Matter
What My Conclusion  Is, Derrick
Rose Is A Freakishly Talented Player

I hate to burst the bubble here, but things have changed regarding how people talk about the Bulls of late. For years it was about their dire need of inside scoring. They were a .500 team.

When Boozer was out to start the season, they had a 9-6 record and very much resembled the .500 team they've been for two years. Since they've gone 25-9 behind a much more balanced inside/outside attack. Now the story I'm hearing has changed as well. Now that they are beating good teams it's all due to Derrick Rose, the league MVP?

They've played Portland, Utah, Dallas Twice, MIA, Bos twice , LAL, OKC, ORL twice. That's 10 solid games with Boozer. The difference from pre-Boozer is instead of losing those games they've won most of them going 7-3 vs just good teams. That's before you consider that one each of the Bos/Orl games was Boozer's first and second game of the year. And I'm not even counting teams like Memphis and Phoenix who they beat with winning records.

Speaking of Portland, if we want to award the MVP to a player who's stepped up to lead his team through injuries, then Lamarcus Aldridge is undoubtedly this year's MVP. It's not even close. But Bulls fans are making that argument for Rose, who's obviously not been hampered by injuries on the Bulls like LA on Portland. Here are a few more arguments:

Rose carried the team when Boozer was hurt at the beginning of the year when they had a crazy tough schedule.

This winning did not start till Carlos Boozer came in to provide the inside scoring they've so famously lacked. I love Noah. Not a Boozer fan. I have to admit though, he's an upgrade. Especially offensively. The hype is ceaseless though... lets check it out:

Boozer had his first game on Dec. 1. At that point the Bulls were 9-6. They had 3 wins vs winning teams. Was this because of Rose?

1. Dallas: They held the Mavs to 83 points. Rose had 22 points on 32% shooting and 6 dimes. Noah had a 10/17 and Taj Gibson a 17/18. This was a defence oriented win led by their big men.

2. Denver: Rose had 18/6 on 33% shooting. But again, Noah had a 19 board double double, they held them to 92 points, and won by a basket.

3. Portland: Rose had a good game, 16/13, but this was Deng's night. When he shot 74% and scored 40 points leading them to the win.

Keep In Mind, I Have Never Liked This Douche

Before Boozer they were beating bad teams and getting beaten by good teams. Upgrade Noah to a 20/10 guy who demands a double team and the result is "it's Rose keeping his team in it" rather then oh yea, that huge signing we made this summer that filled a hole that kept us playing .500 ball for 3 straight years... yea, that worked.

Talking up Rose for work vs the Cavs and Kings of the league is weak for an MVP argument. Even if Boozer has not been playing out of his mind, it balances the team offensively. Shooters stretch the floor for bigs, and vice versa, bigs collapse defences to create open shots/lanes for shooters/slashers. Even when you look at their quality wins after Boozer started playing, they aren't getting them because of Rose. They're winning because of their D.

Vs. LA, 84. OKC, 90. BOS, 79. Mavs 77l. ORL, 90. Lets look into that argument next.

Derick Rose has led the Bulls to wins over every elite team in the league!

Sounds fantastic. But you've got to look closer.

Reason 1 The Bulls Are Winning

At the All Star break a reasonable elite cut off looks to be 35 wins. That makes the elite NBA teams Miami, Orlando, Seattle, San Antonio, LA, Dallas and Boston. This makes sense on paper and practice. So lets look at the production.

Vs elite teams Rose shoots a pretty poor 42% to score 26 ppg. His dimes dip considerably to just over 7. And did they beat elite teams? They've also lost to almost all of them as well. In those losses and wins Rose doesn't change and shoots 42%. In Losses he averages 24 points. In wins about 27 points. So an extra basket and a half. Is this leading the Bulls in these wins over great teams? The difference of a basket and a half?

No. Defence is. A non-factor in Rose's game. Vs Elite teams the Bulls are holding opponents to an average of 94 PPG. In their losses, 104.66 points. In their wins they're crushing the competition with 87.25 points allowed. A difference of 20 PPG? Yes, that's a leading factor to wins.

Reason #2 (and 1) The Bulls Are Winning

In wins Rose only has a single game with more then 10 assists vs Orlando. He had 22/10, but they held the Magic to 78 points. Consider Rose's 11 point, 23% shooting win over the Thunder. Rose is their best player, but they are winning with defence if he plays well or not. In fact, the Bulls have a 9-1 record in Rose's 10 worst shooting games, all of them under 35%.

That's smoke and mirrors though. Are these 'elite' wins? They look like it in the schedule. But a cursory look at those 8 wins shows it's obvious the Bulls didn't actually best elite teams. I guess they were wearing elite jerseys, sure, but they came down to their level of the Bulls competition and not the reverse. Observe:

Their lone win vs Boston came when KG AND Perkins were out.

Their lone win over the Heat came when Lebron was out. They still only beat them by 3 points.

They beat Dallas once with no Butler and a hobbled Dirk who rushed back and was visibly limping on the court. It wasn't Rose's 22/6 that led them in their other Dallas win but 10/17 from Noah and a 17/18 from Taj Gibson as previously discussed.

Their lone win vs the Thunder came on an 11 point, 23% shooting stinker from Rose.

Their win over the Lakers was decent but a total team effort. LA had just lost 4 straight to the Jazz, Pacers, Griz and Rockets the week before... I'm not sure what that means but I watched that game, and LA was looking anything but elite while being crushed by the Bulls D.

The win over the Magic Rose had 12 dimes, but 22 points on 28% shooting... good but not amazing.

Scratch That, The #1 Reason The Bulls
Are Winning Is 'Suited Up' In This Pic All Right

And then the Spurs win, when Rose positively dominated. Don't want to take anything away from a gifted player after all whom I'm huge on. Just low on hype.

Conclusion: Rose has 'led' them to wins over an elite team for sure, once, on a career night. Pretending this is regular is disingenuous. If he keeps up last night for the rest of the season, by all means, give that kid the MVP. As yet though he has not earned it vs the best teams in the NBA. And since we brought up D so much, how did I get through this whole paragraph without giving massive credit to Tom Thibiedeau, who's truly at the heart of the Bulls league and 'team leading' D?

Derick Rose is playing at a higher level then anyone in the league

Rose just had his first 40 point game of his career. In comparison, LeBron James has 3 40 point games this season and one 50 point game. As the PG Rose's best passing game is 14, once. Same as Lebron from the 3. Rose has 15 double digit dime games but he's also the point guard. Lebron has 10. Rose has 17 games shooting over 50%. Bron has 24.

How Bulls Fans Percieved The Rose/James
Argument Before The Decision

With no dominant big men the Heat are the league's 4'th best defensive team. Lebron's offensive impact is also worth noting as the Heat are the 4'th best offensive team He's at the center of everything they run on both ends. This is compared to Rose, running the 19'th 'best' offence in the league... just ahead of the Pistons and Kings depending on the day.

It's not his play giving them a shot like an MVP's play should. It's his inefficiency at the point that's actually stagnating their offence. Forcing low percentage attempts for himself instead of creating easy baskets for his team mates is reflected in his low FG% and assists .

Lebron vs Rose comes down to facts. It's factual that Lebron is out producing Derrick Rose. It's factual that Lebron is lifting the Heat on both ends of the court to an elite level. It's factual that the Bulls are elite at the one thing Rose does not do well, and terrible at the one thing he does do well. Conclusion: Lebron is drastically more valuable to his team.

Lets attempt a Dwight comparison. He seems to get overlooked yearly. With terrible defensive players Orlando is the third best defensive team in the league. Rose's elite offensive numbers. 13 30 + games. 1 40+ game. 15 10 dimes games. 17 games shooting over 50%.

Dwight. A ridiculous 5 20+ rebound games. 22 15 board games. 47 10 board games. 4 5 block games. 1 40 point game. 10 30 point games.47 games shooting over 50%.

I know, it's not fair to compare a center and a PG. But to me, it's aparant that Dwight's impact on D, as well as O, is just above Rose's. He has only shot under 50% in 8 games out of 55. The Magic field crappy defensive players who Howard lifts to elite defensive status.

Rose vs Howard. Fact:The Bulls are a crappy offensive team with, uh... well... pretty freaking elite offensive players. (more on this in a bit). Fact: Rose is not lifting the team offensively because even with his high PPG, they are still nothing but below average offensively. Fact: Dwight Howard makes the Magic good at everything because he's actually the league's MVP. Okay, not a fact, but pretty much.

The Bulls would be nothing, a lottery team, without Derick Rose

Oh, but Rose is scoring lots of points! Sure, but since he's only affecting offence how far would they fall? The better question: how far could they fall? Past the hapless Pistons, who rank two spots down from the Bulls? Detroit is conducting a t-mac experiment at point. Their best scoring big man is Chris Wilcox. Their best rebounder is Greg Monroe. Charlie Villanueva and Ben Gordon, their 'big signings' are not even starting. Rip Hamilton is not even playing. Why? Because the team has no clue how to score or what it's doing. Noah, Boozer and Deng are arguably the best front line in basketball. Taj Gibson is a 'great' backup who can take over games and is coming into his own. Kyle Korver last season... wait a minute now. This gets it's own paragraph.

Kyle Korver just posted the best 3 point percentage in league history last season. 53.6%.

Without Rose this team would still be amazing on D, and could not possibly be that much worse on O. Why? Because Rose doesn't really make them much better on Offense. The reality that scoring loads of points on 44% shooting is not efficient play.

With an average point guard running the offence the Bulls are still better then the Pistons and Kings. They don't have Luol Dengs ripping off 40 points in huge games with elite D. I see no one capable of multiple 15+ board games like both Noah, Boozer AND Gibson have had this season. I don't see any history leading shooters coming off the bench. Noah, their offensive liability, still shoots over 50% for 14 PPG. What I do see is a sneaky stacked team that is a lock for the playoffs with their league leading defence whether Rose is there or not.

I must be mistaken though, because this is the response I get from this point:

You must not be watching the Bulls, if you did, it would be obvious Rose is their best player and takes all the big shots

On the contrary, I am watching the Bulls, and apparently people making this argument are only watching Derrick Rose. Rose is their best offensive player. I could even see how Rose is their best overall player. He's totally the future of the franchise. But he's not the MVP now. Not because of this point.

How do I know? Because of Shawn Marion.

How does Marion prove anything about Derrick Rose? Simple. Marion is a perfect foil to Rose to test the logic of the above statement for validity. In 2007 the Suns were the best team in basketball. There was no doubt this was because they were the most potent offensive team in the league. They had a brilliant play maker with a brilliant offensive coach in a brilliant offensive system.

There was no doubt that Marion was their most versatile and best defensive player. There was no doubt that he was their go to guy on any and all big stops in games. Except the Suns stank on defence. (except not as bad as the Bulls on offence. The Suns were above average ranked 13'th on D while the Bulls are ranked 19'th on O). Marion came 4'th in DPOY voting that year. I'm not sure, but I don't think anyone else on that team has ever received even a single vote for DPOY.

I'm sure you've figured out why this argument stinks. Offence is flashy and sexy but it's not worth more then defence. Being the best at something a team that wins is terrible at does not make you an MVP just because the things you're good at make weekly top 10's. They get you all star selections, and that's very fair, but the MVP is about winning: sports centre is not.

The defensive drop off between Marion and the rest of the Suns is much more drastic then offensive equivalent between Rose and the Bulls. This is self-evident. Shawn Marion on the Suns is vice versa mirror of Rose on the Bulls. Except Marion was way better on O (3'rd on the team) then Rose is on D (5'th or 6'th). Also self-evident: there is no effing way Shawn Marion was the 2007 Suns, or, league MVP.

The only way this argument validly suggests Rose is the league MVP is if you:

1. Think Marion was the 2007 league, or hell, just team MVP on the Suns.

2. Think that offence is more 'valuable' then defence.

In both scenarios you've got a completely impossible task on your hands because both assertions 1 and 2 are categorically ridiculous. Yes, Rose takes the big shots, but he also misses small shots, which lead to situations when he has to take big shots, which leads to a bunch of losses because Derrick Rose as stated, hits fewer shots then he misses.

In fact, Derrick Rose hits even less of his 'big shots'. Per 82games.com, Rose is only shooting 39.6% in clutch situations this season. The Bulls are still winning. Is it because Rose is lifting them? No, it's because he's being carried by team MVP, Tom Thibideau and his supporting cast of kick ass defensive players. Both Rose and Marion made their teams a lot better but neither of them 'made' their teams what they were. That is precisely what MVP's do. QED.

But.. But... But he scores all their points!

Ah, yes, so when trying to cope with the logic of the Shawn Marion foil, some fans have responded by rejecting that logic, and then merely repeating that anyone who watched the games would see Rose is their best scorer. Even though it's not addressed, lets make one more comparison.

Who's the MVP of the showtime Lakers? Is it James Worthy? Jamal Wilkes? Byron Scott? Kareem? Maybe Kareem has a case very early in the era, but the MVP is without question Magic Johnson.

Except every single one of those other players above outscored him in various seasons. Magic's natural place in the points column was third on the team. Everyone but Jamal Wilkes led the team in scoring for an entire season. Even Byron Scott. Other players would tend to take the big shots and scored the most points but Magic was still the MVP.

Why? The Lakers won with offence. They were built around Magic. They won and lost with the ebb and flow of his game. He was most valuable to the team for this reason. If your team wins regardless of how good a game you have, you just can't be that valuable because obviously, something or someone on your team is good enough to generate wins on it's/their own.

The Laker's leading scorers were Scott and Big Game James but they were where they were because they had Magic. Scoring all the points and taking the big shots is a faulty reason to make someone the MVP. The Bulls leading scorer and most exciting player is Derrick Rose, but they are where they are because they have a Magic Defence.

But... But... But... Rose Leads The League In Points/Assists/Rebounds Combined! He Has To Be MVP!

I love how each season a new 'stat' floats out of the ether that people use to justify their bias. I've never heard people mention this before. As if a single point is equal to an assist. A solid dime scores 2 or 3 points and a rebound gets an entire possession yet it's the same as making a free throw?

I've even heard the homer Bulls announcers make this claim during broadcasts. The sad part? This is total bullshit. It's a lie. Just like the 'when Rose shoots more, we win more' lie being pushed by the Rose4MVP agenda, it's factually incorrect. Observe:


Lebron: 26.2 + 7.1 + 7.6=40.9
Kevin Love: 20.8+15.8+2.5=39.1
Dwight: 23 + 13.9 + 1.3= 38.2
Durant: 28.2+7.3+2.8=38.3
Amare: 26.4+8.3+2.6=37.3





Who's at the bottom of this league leading list?

Rose: 24.5+8.1+4.3=36.9

It's not even remotely close. I just took a few people I suspected would be higher then him too. There could be more.

Rose has become the best point guard in the league and is out playing his peers

It's not fair to compare Rose's stats to bigs. Things like rebounds and blocks are so much in their favor. Another hype sound byte I've heard is that Rose is now the best point in the game. If he's the MVP he should be out playing other candidates at his position, right? Howard compared to other 5's screams 'best' and 'elite'. So how's he stack up vs the 1's he's supposedly passed. First up, my boy, Steve Nash.

Nash vs Rose.

15 dime games.
16 - 0.

10 dime games
34 - 15

Rose does score a little more obviously:

30 point games
0 - 13

20 point games

18 - 39

But not nearly as efficiently

50% shooting games
32-17

What's happening? Rose is making bad decisions. Setting up his own shots rather then team mates. It's padding his PPG but killing his team's offence. This is why elite points own him on FG% and dimes while his positive offensive impact is over rated. He looks GREATon sports center. The reality is he's missing way more shots then he's taking, not passing enough.

The Best Of The Best For FCP. Nuff Said.

Team is a lot though. Lets compare the help between Nash/Rose here too.

Inside scoring
Carlos Boozer vs Hakim Warrick or Robin Lopez or Jared Dudley or Marcin Gortat. I love Gortat. Big time. But Boozer, who I really don't like much, is just wildly the better inside scorer.

Outside shooting
Channing Frye vs Kyle Korver. Hmm... Frye's best season from the arc is 43% which is the only season, ever, he's shot over 40%. Korver's best season is a full 10% better when he LED HISTORY in 3 point percentage and he's always been one of the elite shooters in the game.

Not to mention in this match up, Rose is about 1000 times faster then Nash. So if Rose is playing at an MVP level, which is above the entire league, and Rose is an offensive player, why is it that Nash's offensive impact destroys his? Nash's team is elite on offense while Rose has better offensive players.

CP3 vs Rose

Chris Paul's team, well, they suck. I'm not sure how to compare. There is nothing elite about David West. Some nice post moves? But he's soft. And he's not 20/10. Okafor is nice defensively for sure. But the Bulls players own the crappy Hornets. Still...

15 dime games.
4 - 0.

10 dime games
29 - 15

Rose does score a little more obviously:

30 point games
0 - 13

20 point games

17 - 39

But not nearly as efficiently

50% shooting games
28-17

Wait a minute, did Nash just own Chris Paul as well? A bit but at least Paul's team stinks so you can't make the same argument against him. It's still intriguing that with about a quarter the athletic ability, Nash is still playing the point at a higher level then all these people who have supposedly passed him.

Lets just do one more head to head to head comparison in case we got confused with who's elite in Rose's peer group.


Nash/CP3/Rose

Games shooting under 40%

8/16/15

Games with less then 10 dimes
17/29/37

And note, I didn't bring up 3 point shooting cuz it's not really fair and to be fair, you can still be a fantastic PG/player/MVP without shooting 3's.

So Why Has Derrick Rose Been Hyped?

There are 4 main reasons.

1. Rose is awesome, and scores lots of points. High PPG in the NBA is sexy and easy for writers to fake like they know what they're talking about.

2. Rose has a plethora of awesome sports centre highlights.

3. The Bulls have a very good record.

4. Most importantly, Rose plays for a large market team. Amare plays in NYC and got hype for the same reason early in the year when they beat a string of hapless teams for a week or two. (thanks to my reader John for pointing this out, I'd forgotten to mention it, along with Rose's obvious east coast bias).

And keep in mind, I really do love watching Rose. Awesome player. I'm totally looking forward to watching him for years to come. But something sucks about Derrick Rose. It's not him but his growing legions of irrational fans who seem to be beating rational ones into submission.

People are trying to make him the MVP instead of letting him earn it. Dwight Howard's rise is not sexy now. We already know he's great and expect it. Lebron's brilliance has won two MVP's and people want to hate him. Everyone knows CP3 already got robbed but he's so 2008. Not that Rose can't still push his team higher and win it fair and square. He can. He just has not separated himself from the pack as of yet though.

He's been on a team that appears to have been saddled by injuries all season who in reality got better then they've ever been when Noah got hurt because Boozer stepped in to replace him.

They've been lucky because about half the time they've faced the best teams they've gotten gimmes instead of the usual ass kicking like when they faced those same teams full strength. Don't get me wrong, Rose has made a sizeable jump in his career this season. It's great to watch. But he's not playing at an MVP level... yet.

Talent = Skill + Ability: The Battle Of The Steves (and Tyreke Evans)

Evans And Francis' Careers Are Mirror Images Thus Far

By: The Pest

Who's more talented... Tyreke Evans or Stephen Curry?

If you go by the evaluation of the NBA in general last year, it's Evans in a landslide which garnered him ROY honors. But is it the case?

It depends on perspective. If you consider 'right now' Evans was able to overwhelm Curry on the basis of his athletic ability, raw stats and highlight plays. If it's career based, and you picture yourself looking back at the year 2010 when they're getting ready for the Hall Of Fame, your perspective changes. Those who ranked on ability are most likely to be laughing at themselves, and those ranking on skill are most likely going to be saying 'told ya so'.

Allow me to demonstrate. The year is 2002, lets look back and compare two points, Steve Francis and Steve Nash.

Francis was electric. He dunked on people's heads. His nickname was "Franchise". He made highlight reels nightly. Nash was probably the 2'nd or 3'rd (and some may say 4th) best player on a pretty good Mavs team that won 57 games. Here are their 02 stats:

Francis: 21.6 PPG, 7.0 RPG, 6.4 APG, 1.2 SPG, 42%, 35% from 3, 77% from the line, 3.9 TO, 3.0 PF

Nash: 17.9 PPG, 3.2 RPG, 7.7 APG, .6 SPG, 48%, 45% from 3, 89% from the line, 2.8 TOs, 2.0 PF

Francis Liked Playing With Yao So Much,
He Decided To End His Career Playing In China
For A Team Called The Ducks

If you were to say that Nash was the better player, was going to have a better career and much more a lock for the HOF, people would have ridiculed you. If you pointed out that Nash had an array of honed skills that were far superior to Francis, that he was more effective while scoring only marginally fewer points and more assists people would say you were just making excuses and that Nash, while good, was just an inferior player, he didn't have the same talent. (It should be noted that Nash's defence was rarely brought up until he was the best player on a truly GOAT level offensive team).

Looking back now though it's difficult to tell what was thicker, the irony or the heads of those laughing. Francis retired at the age of 30 and was not seriously considered an elite player after the age of 27. Almost 10 career year after this Nash is putting up a career in scoring, just came off a career season leading the 4'th best offense of all time (only surpassed by Magic's showtime Lakers, Bird's Celtic's and MJ's Bulls) with no HOF players on his team... well, except him, because he's cemented himself as a first ballot HOF player.

Where was this evident in 2002 though? You can see the difference in their 'skill stats'. Nash only played 34.6 MPG to Francis' 41.1 meaning that /36 his per game totals were even closer/better.

Nash shot much better from the field (6%), 3 (10%) and the line (12%) indicating he had wildly better shot mechanics which was also evident by watching the many bricks Francis put up when he wasn't close to the cup.

As a ball handler/passer Nash also commits far fewer TO's (over 1 less) a game which is highlighted even more by the fact that as a pass first point guard who got more dimes, Nash made many more risky plays a game dishing to his teammates, and when he was not passing most likely had the ball in his hands running a play.

Francis got more steals but this is more then partly due to his willingness to gamble for them and Nash's religious devotion to never gambling. This discipline is reflected in Nash's much foul rate too as he's not trying to make up for plays he's counted himself out of.

The result is obvious. People under rate skills and over rate natural ability. Francis is putting his feet up on the couch to watch 36 year old Nash is putting up career highs... and he has been for 6 years.

Evans Will Have A Blue Career Without A Jumper

Lets look again at the modern day Francis/Nash of Evans/Curry. Notice the parallels? Evans made sports center like crazy last year and was electric as one of the most athletic guards in the league. But Curry has game that will be effective with or without his athleticism. Tangible skills that are going to carry him through a Hall Of Fame. Evans is a low skill one dimensional player who gets 73% of his field goals directly at the rim, not to mention is only effective scoring with one hand. (note the graphic on the side).

Curry is a high skilled multi-talented player who finishes at the rim with nearly identical effectiveness yet only relies on it for 28% of his field goals. The other 72% come from all over the court including 3 pointers which I don't have to tell you, count for more.

I'll Let Curry's 'Rookie' Shot Chart Have The Last Word

Who's more talented? If you're a student of the game and think about players in terms of careers instead of sports center highlights, I think it's almost obvious Curry wins. Evans might be able to make it on ability for now but it won't last if he doesn't learn how to play more like Curry. Evans can get there, but without remarkably improving his game he will be 'disenFranchised' out of the league in 10 years because he frankly lacks talent. Talent he needs to be a truly great player.

Curry does not need to change his game in the slightest. He's already there. It's so common to misconstrue that athleticism supersedes skill in the talent equation but it's quite the opposite. Curry stands to be a better player at 33 then he is now. Improving at a normal gradual pace his talent will be swishing 3's right into the Hall Of Fame.

But you could see that even before Curry played a minute in the NBA. Observe.

NBA Fan Evolution: Part 1 - Fan Eras

Here are a few highly evolved fans...I recently engaged in a lengthy discussion with an older NBA fan regarding various players in different eras. He was a big fan of guys like Wilt/Russell/West/Kareem and got quite passionate when I suggested that while great and deserving HOF players they played in a much weaker era that inflated their stats. They could not compete at the same level during the 90's peak.

He passionately argued these stars would have no problems retaining status. In fact, it was not weaker but stronger. Play today is just ‘flashy’ or 'fancy', not quality. While I respect his opinion as a fan supporting his players to do it he had to more or less ignore an exhaustive list of strong points which settled all but his mind.

Its self-evident the league has evolved from it’s past, I won't write about that, but rather what I learned: the basketball fan in general has evolved with the league. In fairness its possible he's right and I am wrong. I doubt it based on full games and clips I've watched. Compared to today’s game it looks like the video game graphic at the top of this blog.

These are the stars of a finals game? Seriously? No wonder Bill had 35 boards: he invented 'jumping on defense'Ignoring video evidence he said that it was only a perception that the guys on old film never jump or display ability dribbling the ball... its because they did not want to?? At some point during the back and fourth I realized the intense differences in being a casual/serious fan of pro basketball and how that has itself evolved. It's not so much that you can't compare eras but fans from different eras are too set in their preconceived notions of quality to agree. There is no other reason to think someone could ignore the following list of points. The 60's/70's were weak. Not to say I can't be wrong because my own era affects my own thinking in the same way. But I'm me, not that guy, so I'm writing it from my perspective.

Click to expand an exhaustive list of factual points, if you care...

• - Most of that era's players actually learned to play with soccer balls
  
  
• - the talent pool they came from was literally 1000's of times smaller
  
  
• - the league was so bad defensively that a player could average 50 points, a triple double or 20 boards for a whole season
  
  
• - Players didn't really know how to box out and rarely did, even on foul shots
  
  
• - In 10 years from 1966 to 1976 the size of the league more then doubled from 9 to 24
  
  
• - teams allowing way more scrubs who had never once played at that level into the league to get beat up on by the pros
  
  
• - At the same time as that expansion the ABA opened it's doors. 3 years later NBA owners voted 14-3 to let them merge cuz they knew they were getting crushed.
  
  
• - In 1976 when the merger happened 75% of the ABA players made the NBA sending many star's victims home
  
  
• - of the 4 teams who merged the Spurs won division titles 5 of their first 6 years. The Nuggest were 1-3 games from the league's best record. The Nets who were the best team in the ABA were forced to sell their best player Dr. J and move the team due to the severe financial/draft limitations. Their other great player, Nate tiny Archibald broke his foot. The team still won 22 games.
  
  
• - when the merger happened many stars stats plummeted... some from top five to out of the top 20 in many cats
  
  
• - Elgin Baylor, a 6' 5" player averaged 35 and freaking 20 and 38/19 in back to back seasons. He was 6'5" and was one of the first players who could actually play, but he was 6'5". That's almost a 40/20
  
  
• - one player had a 55 rebound game as well as many other 40+ 50+ games, as did a few other dominant players. In the past 25 years of basketball and more, there has not been a single game over 35 and only a handful close to it
  
  
• - Jerry West at the 2 guard put up better numbers then Michael Jordan in his prime in the 90's, better then Lebron, better then Kobe in his prime, he was 6'2", could not jump, could shoot the lights out and D'ed up, but could barely dribble with his left hand... he was 6'2"
  
  
• - While not playing basketball players did not spend time doing anything else but having sex with women and jumping. That's how Wilt had a 50" vert and planted his stilt in 20,000 pieces of trash... well u know, according to him.
  
  
• - Players used to actually smoke butts at halftime of games
  
  
• - One of Bill Russel's 'innovations' on the game was learning that jumping helped you block shots: read this quote: "To play good defense... it was told back then that you had to stay flatfooted at all times to react quickly. When I started to jump to make defensive plays and to block shots, I was initially corrected, but I stuck with it, and it paid off."^[7]

Close list...

There are 5 myopia inducing Fan eras with plenty of overlap in the group. Fans form opinions about the game and once set its locked in for life. While the 90's/MJ era stands alone as a seperate era, in terms of fandom, the game was very much the same as in the latter 70's and early 00's. Fan eras tend to be driven by how basketball is thought about rather then those who play it so things like major rule changes are the turning points. There are 4 fan eras of hoop:

Pre Shot Clock Era

Did "Mr. Basketball" actually play basketball? Sort of... Not many of these dudes left. This era occurred when the league was in a formative state. Play varied so much its difficult to imagine any comparisons being made. Games were won with stalling techniques and scores were regularly in the teens and 20's.

Simultaneously equipment was improving. Basketballs before the late late 40’s and early early 50’s were not quite symmetrical and did not bounce consistently. Dribbling therefore didn’t become a crucial part of the game till the 50’s altering how you played. Basketball resembled team hand ball with limited on-ball movement resulting in a very pass oriented game. Maybe an old timer thinks George "Mr. Basketball" Mikan is the greatest but its like trying to argue Charlie Chaplin being more talented then Martin Scorcese.

Post Shot Clock To The 1976 ABA/NBA Merger

Athletic players in the NBA were not really welcomed or accepted. People rarely dunked and much of the league was still quite slow. This era was dominated by the Celtic’s 11 championships in 13 years and fostered rules to limit Wilt Chamberlain’s size induced dominance.

Much Improved: But This Is The Finals With GOAT Candidates??? Really???

While players like Jerry West, Bill Russell and Elgin Baylor dramatically increased elite talent the NBA expanded from 9 to 24 teams negating them. Simultaneously the ABA formed in 1967 and drew many of the best making both ends of the era a wash.

In 1976 75% of the merging ABA players forced out their NBA peers. 10 of the new league’s 24 all stars were ABA players . 3 of the elite teams 1976 NBA teams were the ABA teams despite financial and draft penalties accepted as a concession of the merger. Needless to say talent was spread far and thin prior to 1976.

Fans in this era may tend to feel the well documented statistical achievements of the players indicate supreme strength. Due to their disproportionate size many also consider the era's centers the best to ever to play.

Factoring into their stats however is a much faster pace (25 possessions/game or more) and watery competition sporting boys to take on the men. The size factor meant the few truly dominant bigs feasted on a league of diminutive front court players. Elgin Baylor at 6'5" approached scoring 40 PPG and 20 boards over an enitre season. Twice! Nuff said.

Merger To Bad Boys 2

One of the reasons bigs were able to dominate pre-merger was absence of the 3 point shot. Adopted from the ABA it helped to even the size advantage as the lower percentage outside shot now counted for more then a high % inside one. Good shooters at a distance had to be covered by defenders helping to spread the floor and open lanes inside the painted area.

This new unclogged middle opened up the game spawning new strategies featuring athletic players quick players. A 6’5” player who could jump could get a very high percentage dunk or grab a rebound over a center who had moved out of defensive position. Pro ball as we know it was born when the ABA brought it's style and talent to the NBA.

Offensive juggernauts like the Celtics/Lakers led by Bird and Magic flourished as the running game exploded on the 1980’s NBA. Jordan and Dominque were fixtures of the league's highlights and stats. No guard had ever been able to control games like this. They could nearly beat the other team all by themselves as long as it was close near the end. In Jordan's rookie season he dropped 63 points on a shocked Celtics team. Larry Bird won the game. His face however acknowledged some part of of him had been defeated.

No player has been so great under such pressure in history

In response new sophisticated defensive schemes were developed to fight back. The Pistons bad boys team were notoriously physical taking contact to a whole new level. Result: back to back championships. Could have been 3 but the Lakers were bailed out by Pistons injuries in 1988. They made specific “Jordan Rules” to wear down the game’s best player with success.

Defense intensified into the 90’s. Teams saw it as the only way to stop the freakishly athletic new breed of players from crushing them on a nightly basis. Pat Reilly’s Knicks and Heat teams took advantage of ‘hand checking’ loop holes in the rules to literally beat on anyone scoring in the paint. Players like Jordan reacted using their athleticism to become some of the best defensive players ever but to the determent of scoring which was beginning to dip below 90 PPG. Jordan's own PPG would decline as he entered his prime.

Fans from this era are invariably obsessed with defense and incredible individual play capable of beating those defenses. MJ’s quote “defense wins championships” is used more then Michael Jackson’s attorney. After years of marketing ‘superstars’ the league was at a loss on how to sell team defense to it’s fanbase without an MJ caliber superstar to beat them. Combined with the late 90's parade of reitring superstars and weak drafts, they started to feel desperate

The league attempted to curtail the physicality with little success. A tipping point was reached when the second Pistons defensive powerhouse, with no marketable ‘stars’, bullied their way to a 4-1 finals victory (and near sweep) over the NBA’s flagship Lakers team. LA was fielding 4 future HOF players in their prime to late prime, and all arguably more talented the their counterparts who won ‘the belts’.

2005 Rule Changes To Present

Don't cry Minny KG... your title is coming soon!
Ratings slipped and the front office responded with intense aggression. It wanted the growth it saw in the 80’s but didn't have the talent anymore to build around.

NBC was in a similar scenerio a few years back when it replaced Carson with Leno only to learn that Letterman and the guy who replaced David were both much better at the job. NBC was stuck with Leno and it's solution was to copy Letterman's old material and showcase it being fronted by Jay. The NBA did the same thing and copied their 70's ancestors. Instead of copying the 3 point line, they just told their refs to give stars more calls then ever and fronted it as a minor 'rule revision'.

Stern created the world’s first ref fueled time machine. Hand checking which had been made illegal already was redefined to allow a ref to call fouls on even the most minimal contact or just for plainly arbitrary reasons. A defensive 3 seconds forced centers out of the lane and defensive position to block shots and rebound. Refs were told to call as much contact on the perimeter as possible.

It worked. Big time. Steve Nash experienced an unprecedented non-stereoid fueled resurgence at 30. He won two back to back MVP’s after his owner refused to give him a relatively modest contract extension. 13 teams averaged 99 points a game or more after only 2 teams did the previous year.

The Pistons did luck into the finals again due to Dwyane Wade’s shoulder injury but lost to the Spurs... SA had equally good defense but it their guards won the series for them. Their penetration game was built for the new rules. Tony Parker led the league in points in the paint, something no small guard had ever done. The next year saw two offensive teams in the finals with Wade’s call inflated games defeating the Mavs.

I have a man crush on Lebron, but he does have it easierThe trend has continued. We were all a witness to Lebron’s vastly inferior team climbing on his back as he continually annihilated the Piston’s defense for 29 straight points in game 5 of the East finals in 2006. The Spurs continued to win with good defense and great slashing guards who closed out game: before they won with the twin towers of Duncan/Robinson surrounded by shooters.

What does this say about the fans of this new era? I really can't tell. I cut my teeth on the defensive 80's/90’s making it hard to get a good read. Defense is still important but you can’t win a title without quick slashing players. Effective centers are shrinking in size and weight as mobility to get back into position is trumping power and the banging game.

Players like Marcus Camby, Josh Smith, Amare Stoudamire and Dwight Howard have become the best bigs in the game while 7’6” Yao Ming, who would have been a defensive monster in the 90’s (Manute Bol blocked 5 shots a game in that era!) just does not seem quick enough to get to the spot and protect the rim or board. The league has gone from rebound/defend to slash and kick.

Fans who didn’t experience the 90’s may rate these skills as the most important facets of a good basketball star. That was Jordan's game so he still gets his respect but will a player like Alonzo Mourning, who was absolutely devastating in the paint, get the same props? What about a guy like Patrick Ewing or even Greg Ostertag? Will I be on the receiving end of an NBA fan in 10-20 years who rather justly doesn’t feel many of the players in my era would wilt in his modern game? With Dwight Howard winning the dunk contest and having 9 20/20 games this season, it seems likely.

Forget West, is 'anyone' in the 1963 finals even approaching Jordanesque??? Rotation/role playeresque, not 30/7/6, is more like it

Only time will tell. Many claim you can’t compare eras. On stats alone I agree. You can with the right concessions, but maybe comparison is not the right approach as understanding eras garners more legit results. I still think the overall growth of the game and especially the use of athletic ability to not only overpower/out finesse truly trumps many past era superstars. Jerry West would not put up Jordan numbers today but he did in the 60's.

In the same league Jordan would kill him... its just not even close. There were no Jordans, Battiers, Pauls, Pippens or Stocktons so slow 6'2 guys could put up 32/7/6. The advancement since then is just too much for the old, old school guys to overcome.

Still have to know your roots though. You can't know where you're going if you don't know where you're from. You don't want to be the young punk who just does not understand the game but if you look at things honestly you can also avoid being that guy who can't let go of the past.

This is part of one NBA Fan Evolution. If you enjoyed it be sure to check out part 2. It will examine fan evolution in the context of these eras with regard to the growth of media, technology and general sophistication. Available now, click here!

So just one last video... this is Elgin Baylor's 61 point FINALS performance. Where is the D? Where is the speed? This guy nearly averaged a 40/20 for two seasons and is routinely compared to players like Barkley and Lebron.



Be Sure To Pay Attention To What Bob Cousey, Best Point Of His Era, Has To Say At The End

5 Ways To Fix The NBA For Next Season

Players Are Better, How Is The League?

During a David Stern interview the other day he was discussing changes they were considering for next season. He stated people were 'very excited' about the new Euro-style cylinder rule. Once the ball has touched the rim a player may scoop it off without penalty.

My brain bleeds a lot but never so much as when I hear Stern's occupational pretenses. His job supposedly has to do with basketball and it's quality. His paid for interviewers are about as hard on him as Vanity on Smurfette.

With the league in dire straits, scandals and economics that's the best they've got? There's bad refs, a founded perception of rigged games, refs working for the mob, rules who's threat to negatively alter the outcomes of games/series increases with competitiveness.
Typical Stern Interview: Leaf Points South: Check!
So here at Full Court Pest we'll do a bit of Commish work free of charge. If only he would accept it. Without further adeiu, 5 sure fire ways to fix (or at least improve) the NBA for next season.

5. The 'Leave The Bench' Rule And Near Automatic Suspensions MUST Be Changed

An authoritative 'judge' (aka: commissioner) is charged with making calls on issues that are not self-evident. That's why you have the position. Thats why its a 'ruling' and not a 'summary of obvious events.' Mandatory sentencing (and suspensions) are a cop out removing the onus of decisions from that appointed decision maker. David Stern has got to grow a pair and accept the responsibility of simply doing his job.

Stern is afraid of image. He made the leave the bench rule to hide both NBA fights and his ineptitude behind. Countless NBA series have been ruined. The best in recent memory, Suns/Spurs, was over and ruined the moment Amare left the bench even though realized what he was doing and turned around before reaching the fracas and contributing to it.

Which Jersey Got Punished For Plays Like This?
David Stern's reaction was "How am I supposed to be able to know his intentions? I can't read his mind!" You're the freaking commissioner... you're job is to make a judgment in the interests of the league and competition. Instead he issued automatic suspensions handing the series to the Spurs and ruining a fair outcome. Stern had his mandatory rule to follow and put his own stubborn image as ruler of the league in front of the game itself.

How many series have been ruined by this rule? The great Knicks/Heat showdown in the 90's. Shot dead when most of the team was thrown out for an entire game. Its a rule that punishes emotion in Stern's childish fear of the thug image. The higher the competition gets, the more drama and emotion build up, the better the games. That's a fact. The side effect is the chances of an incident also increase. That increases someone's foot crossing a line by an inch and nothing else happens, yet that can determine who wins a series. I call bullshit.

Its a strategy now. Get a less important player to sucker punch the other team's leader in front of their bench. When their players naturally react and cross the line they are suspended. Thats how Robert Horry, premeditated or not, essentially won the Suns series for the Spurs. Its pathetic and needs to be fixed as it was the Spurs irresponsible intense physicality that causes the blow up yet the Suns were punished.

This along with the suspending players for 'unsportmanlike' acts that really don't make impact on other players or the game have to go. Elbows and punches happen when you play intense sports at the highest levels. Punishing a player for being blatantly violent makes sense. Punishing a player for being blatantly competitive to be consistant with punishing the violent player is absolutely another.

Lastly, the suspension based on tech's rule will ruin an entire series/playoffs. Its coming. Do we even want the chance of that? A tech is given indiscriminately for minor things as small as TD laughing on the bench. I don't want that turning an epic series of finals. Do you? And that's why we should get rid of it before it inevitably happens.

4. Call Flops... NOW! Make Them Competitive

Call Flips Too NBA! I Bring You The First 65 Year Old League MVP!Drawing a charge is coaxing/fooling a player into knocking you down. A skill I respect. You anticipate the spot, get there before the offensive player does and do all this craftily enough that his momentum knocks you off the position. Pure sports.

A flop is none of this. When the ref's vision is partially obscured and its 'tough to call' you use your own force to fall down and/or pull his jersey into your mirage of a foul. Cue wildly flailing arms facial expressions worthy of an Oscar. No charge there. Its actually drawing a bad call from impartial refs in an attempt to undermine the game's rules and their spirit. Some say flopping is an art. Most do not.

I actually agree with the former. Flopping is an art. It's already part of the game. A properly executed flop will frustrate the hell out of your opponent. You get to snicker. He attacks/defends less aggressively because he has an extra foul and worries you will flop again. On the fly flopping is hard. Players who complain the most are never very good. Typical jealous critics.

The problem: its already part of the game but outside the rules. The worst flop outcome is an easy path to the basket with a no-call. I say let them flop. Reward skill and the flop masters. Its not easy to do afterall. Punish the unskilled. The result will increase the quality of flops to be entertaining.

You get called for a flop? Thats foul. The flopee gets 2 free throws. If they scored on the play they keep their points. If they didn't score on the play they keep the ball. The refs get fooled a lot on flops but see plenty of them. I say call what you see. If a player is slick enough to get away with it that's his skill. How does this not make the game better (and more attractive in European markets :) ) right away? It cuts down bad flops and leaves them as a secret weapon for the craftiest players. More flops please!

3. Change The Salary Cap, Add Profit Sharing

PS: Apologies in advance but this takes time to explain. If you've made it this far I hope you bear with me. I think there's some meat. If you don't care about the cap feel free to skip.

The salary cap helps small market teams compete. NBA is not MLB and its a good thing. Unfortunately the side effects are horrible for basketball. If you sign one player to a max deal and he has a major injury you're screwed. It takes a decade: 7 years to expire and 3 to rebuild. If you mistake a player's potential or he can't reach it you're screwed again.

Why Should This Define A Franchise For A Decade?
The Magic had 7 straight losing seasons predominantly due to Grant Hill. His was useless amid his injuries and his contract untradeable. They had talent too. Dwight Howard was there for 3 years. T-Mac's own injuries were traded to Houston in 03. It was their inability to pick up other players who could contribute due to the luxury tax line that Hill's contract pushed them over.

Unless your owner does not care about money (Knicks/Mavs/Blazers) winning means GM's making virtually 0 mistakes before players developing together on the court. Bargian players and signing vets to minimum contracts rather then building the best possible squad produces wins. When a players does develop the work put in and the commitment made by fans gets sold out. They can't afford him anymore and his chemistry/continuity with him. Pro sports fans used to enjoy cheering 'their' players to reach their potential. Now signing a player is akin to filling your plate at an all you can eat buffet. By the time you're sitting you've already "If I don't eat this I can get more of that on the next trip.

Take Joe Johnson. After he became good PHX let him go just before his prime. That was followed by selling Rondo, giving away Kurt Thomas and ultimately having to choose between $Amare$ and Marion. They took Amare under the guise of 'getting better defensively.' Every move was made to avoid the tax.

San Antonio are the anti-Suns. Lots of championships. Not the best team they can be though. Crazy? They won 4? Nope! The Spurs win by surrounding one all-time great player with 2 good players and a bunch of scrubs playing for peanuts.

Mind you, the Spurs still got Manu for a KILLING. He puts up better clutch stats then Kobe on half the salary. They pay Parker under 10 to be an all star. Past that the Spurs are a group of okay but bargain basement ballers. Matt Bonner can hit 3's for 2 mil. Bruce Bowen can D up for 4 mil. The Spurs have had an amazing 18 players on their roster this year making below the league average salary. Thats their team. Great, good, good, fill the gaps. They win. Why?

Meet Jaren Jackson: 5 PPG Career, paid $700k, Spurs Champion Assassin?!?!
Not great Spurs teams. The same Spurs team. Greece beat USA due to years of preparation. The Spurs beat more talented teams with consistency. Tim Duncan deserves all his credit, but his value has been over-inflated as the only visible great on this team that wins by buying low, keeping low and selling high. All credit to them. However...

I watch sports to see elite physicial competition... not the stock market moves which is where the real action in the NBA takes place. The NYSE is not in Madison Square Garden and the Knicks in offices are they? Fans tended to agree as the Spurs produced some of the weakest ratings in decades while ratings for things like the NBA draft has sky rocketed.

NFL profit sharing works so why not emulate it? The luxery tax boils down to a wealth redistribution mechanism. Just be blatant. Instead of a tax make a minimum profit threshold. Those above share with those below. The direct result: bringing in Jason Kidd to make the NBA product better in two seperate cities does not cost almost 50 million dollars simply because you signed Eric Dampier and got stuck with him. Punishing your successful franchises rather then helping ones in trouble is a stupid, moronic way to operate when good teams are what you're selling. It does not work either as teams have still folded/moved in Seattle, Charlotte, Vancouver, New Jersy (soon) and Indiana (possibly).

Its killing the league. Anything that makes Donald Sterling one of the most successful owners in the books and the worst on the court is just wrong. Blatantly wrong. Wake up. Figure it out. Simply trying to lower the cap/salaries will NOT fix their problem. But I seriously doubt they view anything as a problem except decreased profits.

Okay, that all needed to be said. Finally...

2. Follow The D-Lead

D-League "Founder". Isiah Thomas Corollary: If Isiah Is Wearing A Suit, Your Organization Will Fail.
Just short of NCAA style selection the D-League's playoff seeding is nothing but fantastic. Let the higher seed pick. It allows truly elite teams to face off later in the playoffs. I'm sick of team A escaping team B because of a bracket. Not only that it adds new drama.

Who's to say that a team will always pick weak? Say the Wizards were 5'th and the Cavs were first how great would it be for basketball if they said "No, we want to embarras our rivals out of the first round. We're good enough that it doesn't matter if they're better then Detroit." What a way to build swagger for a championship run.

It adds a whole other level of strategy. Orlandos dominant but have trouble matching up with Detroit. Should they pick Detroit first and take their biggest challenge when they're fresh at the start of the playoffs? Giving teams control will let them create their own fate and create an new competitive facet as upsets will always be 'chosen' by the losers.

If Detroit is the easiest match up for the Cavs however a hard match up for another team they fear more, who's to say they don't take a better team in the first round and throw a monkey wrench into the real contender's first round? It should continue right through the playoffs. With 4 teams left in each conference the highest seed lets you pick who #2 will face. An advantage that teams WILL play for rather then one extra game at home in a series or two. As it stands now every year end is highlighted by fans going to games to find out the all stars they came to see are sitting on the bench cheering on teh scrubs... except tickets are the same price. This rule alone will improve the dead period from all star to the start of the playoffs.

1. Add A Few Ref Challenges

There Has Got To Be A Better Way To Get A Few Fair CallsOne of the major problems for the entire history of the NBA has been bad calls deciding games. In the course of a game a ref has the ability to 'make up' bad calls by giving a 50/50 call back to the team who lost out on a previous mistake. Its not perfect but this nuance of reffing the games, when executed properly, keeps things under control, competition high and frustration low.

Its not enough. When players with 6 fouls are out one bad call will affect a team for an entire half or more. When there's critical end game possessions or key players in early foul trouble a gimme later is meaningless. The margin of error in basketball at this level is so tight a single blown call will ruin the game's integrity: a ref often has a larger impact the competitors themselves. Sometimes its a game, sometimes its a playoff series, and if the series is important a single call can destroy the whole point of the playoffs and thus an entire season.

A coach could ask his player "are you SURE?" If the player says absolutely they challenge the call. 10-30 seconds later the critical mistake is erased and everyone is happy. If he's wrong the other team gets a couple of technical free throws and the home/away fans have something to cheer/jeer about. If the call prevents Duncan from getting his 3'rd or 4'th foul in the first half then he can stay on the floor and play untentative D as he would have if the right call was made.


Of Course, Rick Adleman Would Have Needed 30 Challanges To Make This Game Fair: It Took 3 YouTube Clips Just To Show The Fix, Umm... Bad CallsThe only result is stronger competition and enhanced fan experience. Nothing kills a city's fanbase like bad calls. The Kings had the best franchise in the NBA and now are the worst team in the league: rumored to be in financial trouble. Does that happen if they didn't get jobbed by the refs vs the Lakers? Probably not.

We've already seen video replay improving games this season. Corrected flagrant and 3 pointer calls at the end of quarters are forcing better officiating and less blown calls. No one is unhappy when the right call is made. Theres nothing to complain about, right?

So why only extended replay to such limited circumstances? Only in the last 2 minutes. Only to see if its a 2 or a 3. Only for flagrant. We've already seen that it makes the games better and reduces player frustration so why not do this on more important calls? Due to rules refs who are reviewing a play and notice a mistake are not even allowed to correct it if its not within the defined limits of what can be changed.

This option has been open to the NBA for decades. Its been 30 years at a bare minimum since the advent of video tape. So why is it ignored? Not wanting to review every call is normal: there are enough stoppages and you can bet coaches would. That's why you give them a few challenges to be managed the same as timeouts, still use replay at the ref's discretion and the game is instantly improved.

Take it to your coach' disarms any complaining players. Gone is the pretentious bullshitting players and coaches constantly engage in when they argue calls they know they have no business getting. "Think I'm wrong? Put your money where you mouth is" is what every ref will be able to credibly say with a single glance. Failed challenges can only boost drama and make the refs look even more credible to help their image crisis of the past 50 years. It does not just help it, it dissolves it overnight. No blown games no bad image no conspiracy theories.

5 massive problems with the NBA that are simple to fix. The talent has recovered from it's post Jordan slump. No excuse there anymore. One meeting and vote by the competition committee and next year's NBA comes back stronger and better then it's ever been.

The Next NBA Ball?Will any of them be implemented? Not likely. While Stern is into surprise changes like introducing a new ball from a secret box that drops shooting percentages while cutting player's hands he avoids rules that are 1. obvious 2. easy to implement and 3. dramatically improve the game.

We can only sit and hope that maybe, just maybe they'll start to get it. Its so damn simple NBA suits. Simple! The issues fans complain about the most are the ones you should be addressing. Could you please just do it? Fix our league? We are your customers. Please???


Feedback Additions

I'm happy to add some feedback on some rules that readers have suggested. Check them out... any more suggestions send them in and I'll add them. Cheers!

1. Flopping has to go. No need for it at all. Its annoying as hell.
2. If a defensive player stays in one spot and jumps straight up in the air and the offensive player jumps into him=No call.
3. Five referees each game so that there can be a 2 to 1 player to referee ratio.
4. Ticky tack fouls should not be called.
5. If there is a loose ball on the floor and you dive first, you should not be called for a foul.
6. If some one catches an air ball as the shot clock expires, dont make them inbound the ball, just play on.
7.Consistency, the referees have to be consistent at all times. If you are going to allow physical play, dont just do it for the first three quarters, do it for the whole game.
8. Make the game more physical. Stop playing a soft brand of basketball no one can identify with. To a certain extent, the more physical a game is, the better.
9. Revert the defensive rules to allow more physical defense to be played.
10. Traveling, this has to be remedied right now. Its terrible and needs to be called better.