Why the three pointer is ruining basketball

[BaBaBlacksheep]

I think most fans could agree that today’s 3 pt shooting contest style of play is awful. Here’s my proposal, which is drastic, but I do believe would make the game more interesting.

Move back the 3 pt line to 30 feet

What I think this will accomplish:

1. Less contested 3s. Players will take less contested 3s because of the distance. There would be less 3s in general, which will make the actual 3s being made more exciting and less of a layup

2. The “midrange” returns.

3. More of an emphasis on cutting/slashing, hi/low action, and ball movement

4. The paint becomes sacred again. If there are less 3s, points in the paint become (even more so) paramount again. Teams will really guard the paint and if you get in there, you will be met with heavy resistance. Nowadays, since 3s are so valued, when you’re in the paint teams more often than not barely put up any resistance.

5. Return of gritty defense. This may be wishful thinking with today’s players, but I do think it will improve.

What do you guys think? To be clear, I don’t think this will ever happen….at least not to the extent that I proposed, but curious to hear your thoughts, and if there are any potential benefits/negatives I’m missing.

I quit watching the NBA years ago because of the current style of play. I don’t know enough about rules to comment about those specifically. But I am curious how NBA ratings are these days? Is it still what it used to be?

 

[Enasic]

I quit watching the NBA years ago because of the current style of play. I don’t know enough about rules to comment about those specifically. But I am curious how NBA ratings are these days? Is it still what it used to be?

I don’t know about the ratings but as far as everyday life…I don’t hear anyone talking about the bulls or basketball in general. My friends, mutual friends, people I talk to at the bar, just the general vibe out there…nobody cares. I think more people are interested in golf, Tbh

 

[BaBaBlacksheep]

I don’t know about the ratings but as far as everyday life…I don’t hear anyone talking about the bulls or basketball in general. My friends, mutual friends, people I talk to at the bar, just the general vibe out there…nobody cares. I think more people are interested in golf, Tbh

Yeah NBA when I was younger was must see TV. Was part of the daily conversation. Now I don’t think I could name many of the biggest stars in the sport.

 

[truthbedamned]

Want to watch an NBA game? Turn it on with 2 minutes to go. Previous 46 is useless. Last 2 minutes will still take an hour.

 

[clonetrooper264]

Appreciation goes both ways. You're making a parallel argument from how many people who are addicted to watching golf as a spectator sport, defend the fine appreciations. And I'm more like, sports played should be organized, but sports watched should be entertaining.

Before anyone bites my head off... let me make the counter point.

When you watch players now, you can see some mutual regard for the ease of just allowing some 3s to get open. Because, like you said, there is an appreciation to the play, and even though player 4 in the chain needs to whip out and cover the space created, player 4 can still defend that shot, but chooses not to. If they choose to defend it, the percentages go from 45% to 35%, and 10% is enough for a player to quit and say, "Why bother". And that's what you see and then don't appreciate as a fan of the deeper side. It's when you appreciate the game, you don't appreciate seeing a million dollar player quitting for a few seconds here, a few seconds there. And that same defender will be 1-2 seconds late getting back for making the choice of closing in, and they don't want to become the offensive player that squanders their opportunity to contribute to a positive offensive stat column.
*And of course, that could be player 4 in the chain to react to ball movement, it could be player 2, the number doesn't matter. This is just the first common scenario you'll see for the signature Celtics Ray Allen 3 slice that basically became modified circle sets. Player 4 stops, gives up, and runs back to offense as the now-open shooter pumps, leaving fate to whoever is boxing out, and thus if they need to run back, that player 4 jumps into the lane as a way to cover up their fk-up, nobody has time to be like WTF, because they all do the same thing too. Over and over.

What you allude to basically comes down to player 4 (or whatever player in the chain) putting forth poor defensive effort, which is a valid point, but a different one than what I was talking about. But let's focus on the entertainment aspect, because ultimately for us, regardless of whether casual or hardcore, the game is entertainment.

What I am observing from the casual fan is that basically they just want to see the stars (probably just the top 20 or so players of the league) and feats of athletic prowess (dunks, blocks, crazy layups, and the like), maybe to some degree exhibits of skill (ankle breakers, contested 3s that get made). Shooting 40+ 3s a game doesn't necessarily take away from the potential for athletic plays, but it seems that way because in the extreme case (Boston Celtics) a team might be shooting more than half their shots from 3. The end result is the same to such a fan, a 3pt shot, so thus "all they do is shoot 3s" and therefore boring. However, the casual fan also wants to see lots of scoring, the final scores of 74-69 from the mid 2000s does not appeal either.

Those of us who care more about the details of the game, might still come to the same conclusion, but we must at least acknowledge that the team (again let's use the Celtics as an example) aren't actually just standing in one place on the 3pt line passing back and forth. There is almost always some type of action towards the basket that starts to trigger defensive rotations, then the ball is kicked out and swung on the perimeter, maybe driven towards the basket again, and perhaps the end result is still an open catch and shoot 3, but it's not because players just stand around for 20 seconds until they get the ball.

The issue, as you alluded to, comes down to the defensive side of this scenario. And perhaps more broadly, the issue with the 3s is not the 3s themselves, but the lack of defensive pressure on those 3s. As you rightly said, a contested 3 may have a 10% or more chance of missing than an open 3, but if the defense opts to just give up the 3 because they don't feel like playing defense, then WTF. And this behavior is actually probably 100% more likely to happen to one of those top 20 players that those casual fans want to see. If we're honest, it is exhausting to be a two way star, especially as a perimeter player, but it's also why if your team's star player at least tries on defense most of the time (ex Jayson Tatum or SGA), it probably motivates the rest of the team to play defense more consistently, thus a more entertaining overall product.

So is the issue that a team is taking 40+ 3s, or that those 40+ 3s aren't defended to your (general you) liking? One thing to ponder, was 90s basketball defense better more because of player effort, or spacing making it easier to defend? I would argue it might be 60/40 in favor of spacing. I think we're also in a time where the defensive philosophies haven't caught up to the offense yet, probably coupled with general rules favoring the offense still (though thank goodness they changed the rip through fouls, at least on paper). Though I question if they can ever really catch up without some rule changes to help the defense out, thus why I think bringing back hand checking could at least give the defense a chance to prevent some of these 3s, as it allows for the defense to be more physical. Physicality, if nothing else, will remind us old heads of the "before time"


*side note: what the average LA Fitness basketball fan considers as good defense is still, in my mind, 90+% fouls and probably more aligned to "prison ball" than anything, though they won't admit it

 

[clonetrooper264]

I don’t know about the ratings but as far as everyday life…I don’t hear anyone talking about the bulls or basketball in general. My friends, mutual friends, people I talk to at the bar, just the general vibe out there…nobody cares. I think more people are interested in golf, Tbh

Part of it might be less people having cable/not wanting to pay for whatever subscription overall. Cable might only get you national TV games these days. Similarly Youtube TV or Hulu might not have your home team because of some stupid thing like the Bulls are doing. League Pass is expensive AF, and I know very few people who have it. Perhaps more people are sailing the pirate seas to watch NBA, it'd be hard to know.

I can say at least for people in my circle, we'll talk about the NBA, but we won't really talk about the Bulls. Maybe a handful might talk to me specifically about the Bulls because they know I am a fan, but I very rarely hear people talk to each other about the Bulls. More people are Bears fans than Bulls fans that I know of at least, and probably until February I am more likely to talk about football than basketball.

 

[Crystallas]

The issue, as you alluded to, comes down to the defensive side of this scenario. And perhaps more broadly, the issue with the 3s is not the 3s themselves, but the lack of defensive pressure on those 3s. As you rightly said, a contested 3 may have a 10% or more chance of missing than an open 3, but if the defense opts to just give up the 3 because they don't feel like playing defense, then WTF. And this behavior is actually probably 100% more likely to happen to one of those top 20 players that those casual fans want to see. If we're honest, it is exhausting to be a two way star, especially as a perimeter player, but it's also why if your team's star player at least tries on defense most of the time (ex Jayson Tatum or SGA), it probably motivates the rest of the team to play defense more consistently, thus a more entertaining overall product.

Doesn't it make you realize just how unfucking believable it was to watch the 06 Pistons, the 92 Bulls, the 89 Pistons, the 84 Celtics, the 1970 Indiana Pacers that made basketball fans take the ABA seriously. They played two ways, and still could kill you from anywhere on the court. Exhausting, but those are real champions. 48 minutes both ways. And I think it's harder to appreciate good offensive play, when it's being demonstrated against lazy defenders. I don't respect stats. Stats are not objective when it comes to quality, and only entertaining if all you have left to watch, is for the stats and nothing more. That's what separates baseball from basketball, the ability to be a lifetime fan and remain entertained. Stats. Thus, not enough people appreciate good defense, only good offense. It's not lazy, it's just not appreciated.

That is your inflation right there, in your statement. The one I snipped. That is why the NBA has uncontrollable stat inflation, and you're 50% right for simplifying it to just being Lazy. Combine the incentive to play the defense, then we have the 100% total. #1, calling them out for being lazy, #2, realizing the league puts spin on lazy, and calls it 'transition'. And despite it being technically true, it is transition, it's not necessarily good transition basketball.

Not all transition needs to be oversimplified to quarters and frequencies, it's knowing when to transition, and coaches that yell at players for not getting ready on the offense. The league is full of rules that benefit the offensive player as well as coaches that HEAVILY are employed for their offensive mindset to match the rules which give them the advantages. This needs to 50/50 offense and defense, otherwise the offense is de-legitimized. The knowledgeable fan sees through the quality of the product at this point.

It all boils down to using the Harlem Globetrotters method of promoting basketball, as a lesson for the NBA. Sure the Globetrotters have a business model of selling spectator entertainment that has been around forever. But the Globetrotters are a circus act, you don't want to be a circus act when you have the real thing. The real thing is worth 100 times that of the circus act.

 

[Crystallas]

I quit watching the NBA years ago because of the current style of play. I don’t know enough about rules to comment about those specifically. But I am curious how NBA ratings are these days? Is it still what it used to be?

I think the NBA knows it has a problem, knows it made some really big mistakes. Knows it's also in this very bad position to where if they fix too many things in the NBA with rule changes, they will likely be rules that the WNBA would be against, and the WNBA is trying to make the leagues closer in rules every few years. So that's really the hurdle right now, is trying to please activists in the NBA that don't even care about basketball, their win is taking credit for changing things(they will get it one day, but on the wrong side of history). And the league can't offend anyone at this level, and because they have to be soft with the rules, with the public, with the fragile activism linked to politics, they hide behind safety.

Adam Silver doesn't know what the hell he is doing. He started in this league becoming an activist, not staying neutral. Partially he was forced to be, thanks to Donald Sterling(the old LA Clips owner who had some pretty racist moments behind closed doors, if you don't remember that name). Then once Silver became his own activist, he tried to be a league representing activist. And the activism met with counter activism, and the league knew that if they promote hard play, then these guys on the court will finally erupt on each other, and it will become the most embarrasing destruction of a proffessional sports league.

So that's why the ratings have hit walls, international markets are accepting the NBA more and more now because they can watch NBA Basketball without the context off the court(so the game remains a getaway from their shitty reality in many cases). But the international markets also run into the same issue with FIBA, and FIBA is getting softer too, except Russian leagues, they play dirty and don't know how to adjust to FIBA.

Then you have China. And because of China, and ONLY because of China, you could measure sports viewship based on who has watched recordings of games to deem what sport is more popular. And those kinds of ratings, the NBA goes back and fourth for being the most watched league in all of sports, worldwide.
India too? I could have sworn coming across an article about the HIL being passed up by the NBA as well, in India for replay viewership. For those who don't care, the HIL is India's biigest sports league, well, at least it was for the longest time. Hockey India League(field hockey).


tl;dr

Ratings are plateuing in the US, growing globally. Chinese kids love basketball, overtaking Soccer, Ping Pong, and Badminton for most popular sport. So the NBA doesn't have to appeal to the audience of the local teams that represent the league. They will get their ratings.

 

[clonetrooper264]

Doesn't it make you realize just how unfucking believable it was to watch the 06 Pistons, the 92 Bulls, the 89 Pistons, the 84 Celtics, the 1970 Indiana Pacers that made basketball fans take the ABA seriously. They played two ways, and still could kill you from anywhere on the court. Exhausting, but those are real champions. 48 minutes both ways. And I think it's harder to appreciate good offensive play, when it's being demonstrated against lazy defenders. I don't respect stats. Stats are not objective when it comes to quality, and only entertaining if all you have left to watch, is for the stats and nothing more. That's what separates baseball from basketball, the ability to be a lifetime fan and remain entertained. Stats. Thus, not enough people appreciate good defense, only good offense. It's not lazy, it's just not appreciated.

That is your inflation right there, in your statement. The one I snipped. That is why the NBA has uncontrollable stat inflation, and you're 50% right for simplifying it to just being Lazy. Combine the incentive to play the defense, then we have the 100% total. #1, calling them out for being lazy, #2, realizing the league puts spin on lazy, and calls it 'transition'. And despite it being technically true, it is transition, it's not necessarily good transition basketball.

Not all transition needs to be oversimplified to quarters and frequencies, it's knowing when to transition, and coaches that yell at players for not getting ready on the offense. The league is full of rules that benefit the offensive player as well as coaches that HEAVILY are employed for their offensive mindset to match the rules which give them the advantages. This needs to 50/50 offense and defense, otherwise the offense is de-legitimized. The knowledgeable fan sees through the quality of the product at this point.

It all boils down to using the Harlem Globetrotters method of promoting basketball, as a lesson for the NBA. Sure the Globetrotters have a business model of selling spectator entertainment that has been around forever. But the Globetrotters are a circus act, you don't want to be a circus act when you have the real thing. The real thing is worth 100 times that of the circus act.

It's not hard to find a basketball fan clamoring for more defense in the league, it's probably just as easy to find as someone wanting to remove the 3pt line or push it back farther, or otherwise find some way to devalue it. At the end of the day, we're kind of all alluding to the same thing: the game lacks the defensive presence to make the offense worth watching. Like you said, lack of defense delegitimizes the offense. Certainly the players might say they're trying to play defense, and some of them, maybe most of them, probably are (again, these are highly unlikely to be the star players on the team), but the rules still favor the offense as of now.

At the same time, we do have to acknowledge that the threat of the 3 is of course as high as it has ever been. It is a difficult thing for a defense to guard 3 or 4 shooters and a great 1v1 player when that 1v1 player gets to operate in space. The space is there because of the threat of the 3, and that threat objectively was not there in the 90s. There were shooters, but usually not ones that could hit at the rate of current players, it just wasn't developed as a skill yet at the time. In the 90s an off the dribble 3 would get you benched. Now you could hit that shot at a near 40% clip and still not be an NBA player. I suppose at the end of the day though the same point remains, offense has evolved, but defense has not evolved with it (or possibly, has not been allowed to evolve).

It'll take worldwide interest in the NBA to drop for Adam Silver to take action though. Current product still generates enough revenue, as you mentioned in your other post.

Funny thing about 3pt shooting...despite what I said about the casual fans, shooting is something that people who actually play basketball probably relate more to. There will come a point in most people's lives where they realize they will never be tall enough or athletic enough to dunk like [insert your favorite dunker here], but maybe there's a chance they can learn to shoot like Steph Curry, or at least be the Steph Curry of their local pickup game/rec league. You see a bit of the same theme when it comes to dribbling and "ankle breakers." In theory the same could be done with defense, but that defense doesn't get showcased in the league, and so instead you get jailhouse defense as the "ideal" defense.

 

[Enasic]

All I know is all of my long term friends and family members who were all die hard bulls and basketball fans back in the day, haven’t watched a game in years. I suspect most people in our age groups have done the same outside a select few basketball lifers.

My suspicion is outside of the global demographic, most US basketball fans are a younger demographic. Obviously the NBA will be making money and generating views no matter what.

To each their own. I have no problem being the “back in my day” old man who gave up on the NBA. Between the NFL and UFC, that’s more than enough sports for me to follow.

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

I think most fans could agree that today’s 3 pt shooting contest style of play is awful. Here’s my proposal, which is drastic, but I do believe would make the game more interesting.

Move back the 3 pt line to 30 feet

What I think this will accomplish:

1. Less contested 3s. Players will take less contested 3s because of the distance. There would be less 3s in general, which will make the actual 3s being made more exciting and less of a layup

2. The “midrange” returns.

3. More of an emphasis on cutting/slashing, hi/low action, and ball movement

4. The paint becomes sacred again. If there are less 3s, points in the paint become (even more so) paramount again. Teams will really guard the paint and if you get in there, you will be met with heavy resistance. Nowadays, since 3s are so valued, when you’re in the paint teams more often than not barely put up any resistance.

5. Return of gritty defense. This may be wishful thinking with today’s players, but I do think it will improve.

What do you guys think? To be clear, I don’t think this will ever happen….at least not to the extent that I proposed, but curious to hear your thoughts, and if there are any potential benefits/negatives I’m missing.

A long with moving the three-point line back, I would widen the court by 4 feet.

 

[Enasic]

A long with moving the three-point line back, I would widen the court by 4 feet.

Would stadiums be able to accommodate? You’d be eliminating some very expensive seats wouldn’t you?

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

Would stadiums be able to accommodate? You’d be eliminating some very expensive seats wouldn’t you?

Probably.

 

[SilenceS]

Rule changes are ok and such but unless the stars actually play with care in the regular season. None of it matters. Even playoffs, the stars will sit to protect their future even though they have guaranteed contracts. Its boring all around

 

[TL1961]

Want to watch an NBA game? Turn it on with 2 minutes to go. Previous 46 is useless. Last 2 minutes will still take an hour.

There was a game the other night in which the last 34 seconds literally took 17 minutes to play

 

[TL1961]

Just eliminate the three-point shot.

Sometimes the answer is simple.

And yes, I know this will absolutely never ever happen.

 

[Crystallas]

I just added an OPPV/ CSKA Moscow era Sergei Bazarevich club practice ball to my collection. It's a 1987 Molten official, retired team ball. Not worth shit, but very hard to find.

I don't like getting Molten Balls, especially pre-2004 Olympics refresh. Bazarevich is just one of those Legends that only old basketball fans know. And I'm not one drop Russian.

....anyways, it also reminded me that the NBA switched Balls a few times.

Wilsons are the easiest to play with. I never met a real hooper that ever, given the choice to a free ball, would choose a Spalding official NBA, over a Wilson official, or any subsequent tiers. Heck, evolution's are the go to for hoopers. Damn good ball, that's why. Spaldings are..... well.... untrustworthy, great when they don't peel, slicken, deflate, rot, or scuff. Wilsons break in and they just become backup balls after they get warn out enough, ***unless you play with them in the rain or outdoors when they clearly are indoor balls, then all bets are off.

Spalding tried to pull a whole Coke II on the league. The league rejected both attempts. So it's no surprise they started to make balls that players love, that made their numbers look better. And what makes a good shooter look great? Wilson Evolutions, and what makes a good ball handler look better? Wilson Jets. Combine elements of two hoopers favorite balls, you truly do get the new official NBA Game Ball. And it's HARD to go back to shooting the old Spalding when you get used to the new Wilson.


So now, I'd like to change my mind a bit, take all those other ideas off the table, and I'd like to see the NBA re-regulate back to a very strict rules of what makes the ball authentic and historically accurate, and restore the material metrics to one standard that I can share with my grandchildren, and that my grandparents can share with me. We're not talking Peach Baskets, heck, not even talking about reverting back to the 17.75" pre-ABA rim. Just the ball.

And after we test that theory, then reintroduce handchecking, then decide if lines need to be moved, and contact tolerance needs to be adjusted, because I'm sure that the adjustments needed to balance offense to defense will be different in the hands of PROS with a different ball. And Wilson is more than capable of it. NIKE makes a damn good ball too, if you buy their more pricey models. Nike's high end leather basketballs play like good Spalding real NBA exclusive balls, before the first synthetic rejection.

 

[clonetrooper264]

I've never played with any of the NBA balls, but I do find it funny that the Wilson Evolution is the "pickup standard" but never used on any organized level. It is a great ball though, consistent quality and probably the best basketball I've ever owned.

 

[clonetrooper264]

The more I read internet sentiment about 3pt shooting, the more confused I get. On the one hand they say they want more defense, particularly 80s/90s style defense. At face value fair enough, but at the same time we know that if the scoring is low then people are also mad. So we need defense, but not too much defense....what's that happy medium I guess?

On the other hand they say 3s are boring, takes no skill, players are just standing around, etc. We know that 3pt shooting does indeed take skill, probably more skill than dunking if we're honest, but sure I suppose it is not fun for everyone to watch because it's not a dunk/block. Take any 3pter highlight video and the comments will say "this is all they do, wish they would bring back post moves", "I wish he would stop shooting 3s", "there's no fundamentals anymore", "all players do is stand around and shoot 3s" But we know the game can't be all dunks/layups. And actually statistically, drives per game are as high as they've ever been. Assists per game are about as high as they've ever been too.

So what is it that people really want to see? It sounds to me combining those two sentiments they just want to see contact dunks/layups/blocks.

 

[Crystallas]

****WARNING It's a long one! (Obviously).

I don't think it's 3s vs Dunks. I think 3s are the outcome of a series of game evolutions. And I don't think Steph Curry can noodle around 5 hard hitting defenders to dunk the ball. So one skillset is good for one player, shooting, dunking, whatever. Team sport, 5 players doing 5 things, working together. Not just, let's make a star today.

You can put whatever in front of a camera that you like, but you can't manufacture all of your rivalries, maximum amount of outcomes, and dictate who is the good guy. That's when it's simply not a sport.

More than just 3s and dunking..... In basketball, there's wrestling and there's boxing. Been a part of the sport since it was invented. It's not basketball without these 2 components as well as others.

Wrestling in the NBA, isn't like greco-roman or WWE. It's how players tangle their arms and get away with it. One of the best artforms in pro sports, and you see it in Football, you see it a little in hockey, but in basketball, you see it used to keep possession of the ball, opposed in other sports, where it's used to advance the ball. It's a very unique, martial art. People generally don't watch off the ball in football at the line after a while, because it's routine and once you know a players moves, you'd rather watch the field like the QB or the Tail. But the NBA, you have 5 guys and the Key area is always going to be the primary or secondary focus, because your eyes can catch the corners and baseline fast, since those are the plays that develop fast. Thus, you don't miss any part of the play. It's a martial art of the game, and you see how a 30 year old player is a black-belt compared to the rookies.

Boxing is legit, throwing blows to the opposing players. Can't throw knockout punches, you can't hit players in the face or below the belt. But you can hit them, and they hit you back at a reasonable amount. Wearing good players out on the inside. It's the great equalizer, it's why Bill Laimbeer needs to be on more top 10 GOAT lists. Because he figured out HOW to neutralize the teams with GOAT-tier fucking players. Like HOLY SHIT, everyone was such an insaine hater of those Bad Boys Pistons, that people dismiss the ONLY truth Zeke has ever spoken from his tongue-forked, manipulative lips. The truth that the Pistons figured out how to break the pattern of every #1 pick is either the next great Center, or the #1 pick is REALLY tall for their position. They invented the short mans game to exploit the big mans game to the point of winning two consecutive titles and a number of incredible playoffs runs. Where the teams that beat the Pistons, only did so when a guard got hot, and they got cold. Where they built that team on the basis that, depending on the match-up, if your guard gets hot, we're going to bench Bill and let a microwave go off the bench. Just watch what those big men did in the 2nd and the 4th quarter against those Bad Boys. And when the press asks Chuck Daly to explain it, his responses are basically "Duh, that's how you play the game".

The 2006 Pistons are built like the Bad Boys, and it's proof that if your fans will defend that style of play, you will dominate the star power in the league. Ban Wallace with a fro to soften hits he took to the head. You didn't think he was just trying to be retro 1970's stylish, do you? That was good fucking basketball. And it happened because the Kings were playing a portion of Daly's style of play, and the NBA didn't want another team with names only fans knew, to undo their work making other players into household names. But when the 2003 Pistons started to get real good, the league didn't care so much because they needed to manipulate the balance of East vs West now that Jordan was gone, and didn't really care if the East produced a dark horse team, because that might create more names to promote, because LeBron, given the keys to the East, turned out to be a huge crybaby. So we need to beat him up a bit, toughen him, make bad boys 2.0, so they can rewind and replay this story again. But it didn't really work out that way. And the league sure as hell didn't want it to get so out of control, like it was for parts of the 70s and 80s where 20+ teams had multiple enforcers. Remember, 2009 Orlando Magic. That was an enforcer building team that exploited the laxed enforcement of PEDs in the NBA that the league shut down. I mean, how TF does this only act as an example, and not the norm? Because the league creates the best environment for recognizable star players to win. They don't just Gordie Howe it, they Vince McMahon it.

So now, in the last few seasons... the league only really allows grabbing. You can grab, the ref sees you do it, not worth stopping the play over, despite being illegal. If you start, they're still scared shitless over the escalations over the Malice at the Palace. Boxing IMO, needs to go back to the fragrant rules of the 90s, NOT the 80s. It's a sweet spot. A balance. It's where IMO, the nerdy fans need to start recognizing. That we have created a spectrum at some point, post Laimbeer and Post Malice at the Palace. The league was divided since, because we thought that we found that balance, and somehow confused a player:fan altercation as a reason to tone down wrestling. But all we needed to do is dial that back to 1996, because we succeeded IMO, greatest the best product that Naismith-rules influenced basketball could be.

Basketball fans in Europe preferred it to FIBA rules and understood FIBA rules NEEDED to be soft, because these aren't just games, but partially international relations. But then the league changed, and now european fans mostly prefer to follow local teams now, because it's like a college ball vibe. But they follow whoever went to the US. And if the US didn't poach those players, the NBA would tank. So the European fan is now incentivised to support FIBA rules more often, because they think the US is only good, because we play dirty, despite proving how untrue that is. It's all based on things that happened in Detroit. The most influential basketball franchise in the history of professional basketball. Not the winningest, but the franchise to which has created more dark horse winners than anyone else, to everyones surprise or dislike. Because so many people dislike it, they prefer to ignore it, because their teams with their legendary big men, would get delegitimized against that team with those rules.

I think we need to admit as Bulls fans, that while we hated the Pistons 2000x more than we ever hated the Knicks. We have to respect that they did not lie down and just give the fans the NBA finals based on name-recognition, stardom. Because they created that special challenge, they were the ultimate villan. It also, not by design, created the greatest superhero storyline in sports history, even compared to sports leagues with waaaay higher viewership and bigger fanbases. Everyone knows the Jordan story after being a fan for 5 years. Heck, most of our grandmothers know the Jordan story. Most non-sports watching grandmothers of fans in Russia and Ghana and Argentina know the Jordan story, so as long as they have a TV. It's legit, Black Jesus. The Gospel, and we were spoiled to see it happen on a team with bad ownership, which makes it even more amazing.

I mean, I LOVE that story too, especially living it. But I'd like to see the players now develop rivalries again. NOW, modern ball. I do want to see it, and I want to see more of those stories, BEFORE I DIE, thank you very much.
Where teams play harder against certain matchups. Real rivals, not this, one guys got beef because some kid tweeted some bullshit, and because another one was getting sloppy seconds with some NBA dick groupie. Like, that's stupid shit, that's not a real rivalry. People say "Whut?" when McGee or... Delonte ... well, not going to rewind on player vs player off-court beef, but any fan knows WTF I'm talking about. That's not a rivalry, it's a beef. A rivalry is watching Dr. J stare down Kareem after dancing around him for 48 minutes. Lary Bird and Magic, Bruce Bowen and Supersonics ego-checking back and fourth with Utah and hating each other hardcore. The Nuggets and Spurs games that wound up being the only televised games for most markets from the ABA, thus players going beyond aggressive trying to get attention. Those are real rivalries. And yes, the NBA marketted the shit out of Magic vs Bird, but that was a media-created rivalry that *started* in college. Jordan's the first player to make everyone his rival, even if you uttered the tiniest critique of him.... "That's al I needed". Imagine if someone like Nokic was like that, or Luka, or if Ja becomes like that. Shit, Ja has the tools, not the body. Ja is more Tmac than Mike. But, we'd all tune in. Someone needs to take THOSE reigns, not like Kobe, even though Kobe was freaking amazing and close, not like LeBron, waiting for the league to create it for him. Such a huge part of the draw, the aspect of team and player rivalries that are driven by healthy, physical, competition. In a league where a sane amount of wrestling and boxing are completely tolerated and even promoted. Basically saying to the young players and star players, quit crying. The fans COME FIRST.


Either I make sense, or I don't. But that's how I really feel about where the divide exists. It's based on who gets to be pushed, and if it's not your guy, everyone's ok with it. That's what's wrong here. If I can reflect and appreciate Bill Laimbeer and Isaiah Thomas(on the court). John Starks, Reggie Miller, Rick Fox, obviously Rodman who found ways to do things that nobody else would do....etc etc **** Ron Artest, he was a thug with no strategy. We need to accept that players like that make the league better, and that if they come beat up on your guys, my guys, whoever, there should be VERY little exception. The only exception, is the intent to end another players career JUST because they are skilled, and you see a clear pattern. And IMO, that's how it was FOREVER in all leagues, until LeBron as the chosen one couldn't win when it was handed to him and the NBA changed.