Comments on: Increasing Scoring in the NBA

By: Simon Moody

Simon Moody — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:00:09 +0000

I like the suggestions you have made and I especially agree with your idea that we need to eliminate the need for referees being forced into making judgement calls. I am not convinced that giving the shooter the benefit of the doubt all the time is the best solution because players are becoming so skilled with ball and shot fakes. I think the competition committee needs to put more thought into opening the court up and providing lanes for our stars to flourish in. Vince Carter is the ultimate example of wasted talent because our league refuses to allow him the opportunity to get to the basket.

Good luck Cuban in pushing the committee to open its eyes and ears. Something has to be change for me to continue watching this league.

By: J E Bert

J E Bert — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:00:09 +0000

Just saw what may have been the worst half in finals history (game 3).

Now compare it to the 82 pt half the Mavs had in 03 vs Sac. This is were the league should move to.

My simple solution – change to five fouls!!! The refs have morphed the rules so much the wrong way over the last 15 years this is a simple way to account for lack of calls.

By: Antone Roundy

Antone Roundy — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:00:08 +0000

As a person who grew up playing soccer, I don’t have a problem with low-scoring sports. Personally, I dislike rules that give the offensive player an advantage. They seem to cater to people with bigger bodies and showboaters. I prefer watching teams like the Utah Jazz, who are all about team play and execution. The Lakers are my least favorite team because they play well enough through the year to get into the playoffs, but don’t seem interested in applying their considerable talent to come together as a team until the playoffs. I hate the charge line–added to increase the number of slam dunks, I presume. I wouldn’t complain if the rule were that you can’t take a charge inside the arc, but having it automatically be a block it ridiculous. I’d prefer for teams have to earn their slam dunks.

By: Brian McCormick

Brian McCormick — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:00:08 +0000

I believe the toughest area to officiate is the post. Most officials are little guys and never played in the post. Most coaches are guards and never played in the post.

Post play now is a wrestling match. It illustrates how the game is moving.

Watch the ESPN Classic games: basketball was a game of grace and skill and athleticism.

Now, basketball is turning into a game of power and speed.

It has lost its gracefulness and finesse, as it is nearly impossible for a great player to make a post move as he gets held and pushed by his defender and doubled by a weakside defender.

Cleaning up the post play would help. I like guard play as much as anyone, but I’d still love to see more players using kareem’s sky hook or Hakeem’s Dream Shake or McHale’s Up and Under. Instead, it’s drop-step bodies banging and a dunk, foul or blocked shot.

It’s ugly basketball.

The other way to increase scoring starts with the coaches loosening the reign and allowing players to play. Nobody runs the floor anymore. Defenses send 3-4 players back on the shot and eliminate the fast break. Teams walk the ball down court and run set plays. Many shots are taken inside of 7 seconds on the shot clock.

I don’t know if there is a rule change to offset this domineering of the players, but coaches must relent and allow players to play. It is more entertaining and more befitting the strengths of today’s players, most of whom grow up playing thousands of AAU games which is little more than a series of 3 v 2 fast breaks.

By: James

James — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:00:08 +0000

BAsketball as any other thing will become such a game as those who pay money whant it to. It is a commercial sport.

By: Scott

Scott — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:00:08 +0000

You haven’t mentioned Shaq’s offensive philosophy.

He takes his 7-1, 480 pound body and
bumps
bumps
bumps
his defender until he is so close to the basket that he can’t miss.

Isn’t this an offensive foul? If you always give the shooter the benefit of the doubt, won’t the game digress into throwing the ball into the paint, letting some huge guy (or strong guard like Mark Jackson used to be)endlessly bump his defender into a favorable position on the floor?

Owners have created the problem. Coaches are fired on a whim. So, the only way for a coach to protect his job is to institute a defensive philosophy that allows the less talented team to slow down the more talented team.

Your team is constantly criticized for “not playing defense” when it should be praised for it. It’s what makes me a MFFL.

If owners truly wanted to speed up the game someone would hire Rick Barry or Paul Westhead to coach their team. I don’t see team’s knocking down Westhead or Barry’s doors.

By: Dan

Dan — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:00:08 +0000

1.”Brilliant coaching. Take advantage of the rules as enforced.”
Interesting point- Nobody suggested this to Don Nelson?
2.”…creating a distinct advantage for the defense.
That?s not the way it?s supposed to be”.
Supposed to be or not the way you would like it to be-that is the question. (Hamlet?)
Once again if there is a distinct advantage why not exploit it?
3.”This is the point in time where all the fools rush in and talk about how the game would
slow to a crawl because there would be so many fouls.”
ALL the fools have spoken.
4.”This is the part where the rest of the fools rush in and tell me what they think about the Mavs and our defense
and that?s why I?m writing this.”
If all the fools have already spoken -Where did the rest come from?
Did Yogi write that for you?
If I am not mistaken previous entries explain how Ref tendencies
are noted an used in adjusting game strategies. Y/N
Fight for rules changes. Until such changes are adopted would it not make more sense to
“Take advantage of the rules as enforced.”
Love,
A Fool with nothing better to do.

By: Mike

Mike — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:00:08 +0000

I think if the refs just called the games according to the rules, scoring would increase as well. Toward the end of games, you almost have to mug someone to get the foul called. Why should the end of the game be different than any other part of it?

Looking at game 2 of the finals, everyone is talking about Kobe’s shot. I’m looking at the lakers play just before that. Lakers down 6, Shaq gets a rebound and goes back up for a layup. Sheed rotates over with both arms straight up in the air. They bump, and Shaq gets the bucket and the foul. Why did Sheed get called? He obviously did nothing to impede Shaq. Without that foul, the lakers would still have been down 4.

I like your idea Mark, I think it will open up a lot of defenses. But I think the first step is to get the refs to call the game according to the rules.

By: Dan Again

Dan Again — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:00:08 +0000

Stolen from a review of “The Innovators Dilema”
“There is a certain type of technological innovation that Christensen labels disruptive technology,
which mainstream customers initially reject.
Following these customers causes well-managed firms to allow strategic innovations to languish.
The solution?
Create a subsidiary entirely focused on the emerging market, one that is free to be visionary
while courting an unorthodox customer base and staying poised to catch the next great wave of industry growth.”
Sift through previous blog entries put them together I can argue the following:
1. You feel obliged to the fans to offer them first rate entertainment.
2. The NBA Head Office is a mess. If Stern & Co were to follow your suggestions the league as a whole would benefit.
3. Start-ups do not need alot of capital but they need customers.
I could go on but I am getting bored. My conclusion-
START YOUR OWN LEAGUE offer the fan an alternative,become a force to be reckoned with,”somebody is always out to kick your ass”
Go kick some ass.How freaked out would the NBA get if you were seriuos and posed a threat to their market share!
I would venture that they would probably adopt some changes rather quickly.
Thanks for turning me on to Christensen.

By: Kyle Thompson

Kyle Thompson — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:00:08 +0000

I could not agree more. There is nothing “classic” about games that end 69-65 where each team shoots well under 40%. Mark is suggesting the playing field is LEVELED, not giving the offense an advantage. Anytime we can take the thought process away from an official, it is a good thing for any sport. Too much of these calls are already “judgement” calls by NBA refs. Asking them to judge then if a players progress is sufficiently impeded by defense to call the foul, or if the shot was sufficiently altered by touching an elbow is dumb. A hit is a foul. Most simple change in the world, it’s right, and it’s easy. Today’s NBA official has not yet identfied what a travel is, now we ask them to make judgement calls that are unnecessary, too?