How I would fix the nba

[LastWhiteSoxFanStanding]

84-69? EIGHTY FOUR SIXTY NINE? 69 as we all know can be a great number, but it has no place as a final score in a basketball game.

I am so sick and tired of hearing announcers say that a defensive game is a game for basketbll purists. Since when did you ever see an 84-69 game in the 60s, 70s or 80s? Never! It never happened. This new wave of basketball does emphasize defense, and yes defense equates to purism in football and baseball, but not in basketball.

Here are my suggestions to get basketball back to the way it is supposed to be.

1. Four fouls before fouling out. Seriously, who ever fouls out? Six is way too many, players feel no risk giving out a cheap foul to stop a layup or a fastbreak. Maybe if they had to actually worry about fouling out, there would be less fouls and the game would open up more.

2. 6 seconds to cross the half court line. One of the most fun things to watch in basketball is the press. But nobody presses ever because there is too much time to cross the halfcourt line. Giving less time to cross halfcourt would encourage teams to press more. And this would lead to more easy baskets for both the defense if they force a turnover and the offense if they are able to burn the press. Plus, this adds more strategy to the game.

3. Less time outs and no in game time outs. There are way too many timeouts in the nba now. Any time the defense plays well to stop an inbounds play they are not rewarded because all the offense has to do is simply call a time out. Why not? Its not like they are going to run out of them. Also, there should be no in game timeouts. If a player is dumb enough to get trapped then he should not be able to weasel his way out of it by calling a time out.

4. Shorter playoff series. First round should be best of 3, second round best of 5, third round and finals best of 7. Also less time in between games. If these guys are the best athletes in the world why do they need so much time off? Plus playing more on back to back days would bring in more strategy in terms of bench usage.

[Greyroofoo]

I never really understood what exactly a sports "purist" is.

[CraigSca]

1) Inform NBA referees that there's a traveling rule.

2) Inform the refs that just because they're the home team doesn't mean they get all the close calls. Call the game as the rulebook defines it.

3) What the game really needs is a team from nowhere with 10 guys who are willing to run their butts off for 48 minutes. None of this, everyone stand around and clear the lane so Joe Blough can dribble for 20 secs, perform a half-assed one-on-one move and miss a 10-footer.

[JW]

1. Do away with the rule that allows a team to call timeout and then inbound the ball from midcourt after a made basket in the last two minutes.

The NFL equivalent of this would be to allow a team that had just been scored on to call timeout and then have the choice of making the other team kickoff from its own goalline in the final two minutes. Just think of the excitement that would create if your team had just gone down by 2 points in the big game with half a minute left.

2. As said above, call traveling.

3. Fully allow the zone, with no limitations.

4. Do away with the no charging zone around the basket, another gimmick to allow more flashy dunks.

5. 30-second clock instead of 24. I don't care if scoring might go down. I just want to see real basketball. 30 seconds would give a team more of a chance to run an offense and break down a defense. It would reward team play more and demand better team defense.

6. Reduce the number of timeouts and decrease the TV timeouts. I know this won't happen for money reasons.

7. As mentioned above, prohibit players from calling timeouts while under duress or up in the air.

[EagleFan]

About a 10 year lockout would work, as long as you also did the same with the WNBA.

[Bubba Wheels]

Eliminate any overlap between the NBA and NHL schedules. Next, make a rule that only those that play both sports can play either. Therefore, someone playing on an NBA team in, say, spring/summer must also play a certain amount of minutes on an NHL team during their fall/winter scedule. Would be very entertaining, and give much to talk about for the game announcers ("O'Neil is doing much better on his rebounding this NBA season than he did in tending the net for Vancouver earlier this year!")

[FBPro]

1. Allow true zone defense.

2. Raise basket height to 12'.

Both of these working together would go along way towards returning it to a overall team game instead of 1 or 2 players and contant run and (yawn.....) and gun.

[Logan]

I hope it dies and never comes back.

[Solecismic]

Wider court, wider lane, call all fouls, allow the zone and no more than two time outs per half. Shots from inside the lane (including dunks) worth only one point.

[Zippo]

just make it exactly like college hoops.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Failing Zippo's suggestion, I've seen a lot worse lists than JW's set up the thread a bit (except for #7, I think that's a legit part of the game that hurts nothing).

Also, perhaps add a rule that says you're allowed one dunk for each shot outside the lane that you hit during the game - dunk more than your limit, that's a technical. In other words, you gotta have some shot to go with your flashy dunk moves.

[Huckleberry]

Too complicated. Just tell them to call the rulebook. Handchecks and hipchecks that impede the ballhandler go uncalled all the time. Call the fouls.

You'd go through 3 months of people fouling out until they adjusted. Then the game would open up.

And call the traveling and carrying, too.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by Zippo

just make it exactly like college hoops.

dingdingding!

[FBPro]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

Shots from inside the lane (including dunks) worth only one point.

I could go for this instead of raising the hoop.

[stevew]

Originally Posted by Huckleberry

Too complicated. Just tell them to call the rulebook. Handchecks and hipchecks that impede the ballhandler go uncalled all the time. Call the fouls.

You'd go through 3 months of people fouling out until they adjusted. Then the game would open up.

And call the traveling and carrying, too.

Yeah, exactly.

[JW]

Originally Posted by Zippo

just make it exactly like college hoops.

That would work.

[daedalus]

What Huckleberry said. If the referees would just make the calls in the rules (traveling, carrying, fouls), nothing else would have to be done.

I feel like raising the rim is ridiculous because it changes the fundamental of the game itself and makes it a totally different game to play. This sounds hypocritical but I would be for widening the court, the lane and the 3-point line to internatonal size. I'm not sure I can justify this feeling but it doesn't feel as "different" to me.

[Karim]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

Wider court...

Can this be done? The call for wider ice has been around for ages but is never looked at because it would mean taking out the first few rows - the most expensive seats in the house. I'm assuming this would also be the case for arenas that share the NHL/NBA but maybe not for basketball-only arenas?

[DaddyTorgo]

but taking out the first few rows of seats, the most expensive seats, really doesn't trickle down there, but trickles down further up. It just makes the next most expensive the most expensive and so on and so forth all the way. Sure you take a net hit somewhere, but it wouldn't be the most expensive seats, it'd be the ones right before the closest aisle, which are usually much less expensive than the most expensive.

[Warhammer]

As others have said, just call fouls by the book. I was watching some classic NBA finals and it was amazing some of the fouls they called. Yes, they were fouls, but I am so used to the way the game is called today, I was shocked they were called.

Also, stop giving star players star treatment. The reason why they are stars is because they were better when they all played by the same rules.

One other thing, the league needs to market based upon teams, not stars. That would make a lot of the me-first attitude go away.

[stevew]

I think the advancement timeouts are a bad idea as well. It makes the end of the game drag on forever. You should have to advance the ball into your half of the court if you want to get the side inbounds play.

[Gary Gorski]

Two simple ways to fix the NBA

1. As mentioned a couple of times call the violations. Get rid of the clutching and hand checking and call the travels. There will be an adjustment period of games that take forever with all the whistles but players will adjust.

2. TEACH KIDS THE FUNDAMENTALS! Today's kids can do half the moves on an And-1 video tape but couldn't knock down 7 out of 10 free throws to save their life. You don't need to take the one-on-one play out of the NBA necessarily - you need to eliminate the one-on-one play that ends up with a missed shot 55-60% of the time. Just think how exciting Iverson would be if he shot 50% from the floor. He scored 31 a game shooting 42% this season - by contrast Larry Bird shot almost 50% from the floor as his career average and only averaged 24 a game. You wouldn't be excited to watch a player who would average close to 37 PPG (Iverson at 50%)? If these kids would learn the fundamentals of the game and not just how to dunk you would have a better NBA product than ever before because today's athletes are by far better athletes than those of the 60's, 70's or 80's.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by Gary Gorski

2. TEACH KIDS THE FUNDAMENTALS! Today's kids can do half the moves on an And-1 video tape but couldn't knock down 7 out of 10 free throws to save their life. You don't need to take the one-on-one play out of the NBA necessarily - you need to eliminate the one-on-one play that ends up with a missed shot 55-60% of the time. Just think how exciting Iverson would be if he shot 50% from the floor. He scored 31 a game shooting 42% this season - by contrast Larry Bird shot almost 50% from the floor as his career average and only averaged 24 a game. You wouldn't be excited to watch a player who would average close to 37 PPG (Iverson at 50%)? If these kids would learn the fundamentals of the game and not just how to dunk you would have a better NBA product than ever before because today's athletes are by far better athletes than those of the 60's, 70's or 80's.

I wold take it a step further and tell the NBA GMs and personnel folks to draft and/or sign ONLY the kids who know the fundementals, instead of the kids who can just jump out of the gym. The problem is that very few coaches at the lower levels (college, high school, youth leagues etc.) place a strong enough emphasis on the basics of the game.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by JW

5. 30-second clock instead of 24. I don't care if scoring might go down. I just want to see real basketball. 30 seconds would give a team more of a chance to run an offense and break down a defense. It would reward team play more and demand better team defense.

I either like or am indifferent to your other suggestions so I feel bad about picking on the one I don't like but I would say with a 30 second shot clock, it'd be "dribble for 20 seconds and then slash" instead of "dribble for 15 seconds and then slash".

SI

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Bubba Wheels

Eliminate any overlap between the NBA and NHL schedules. Next, make a rule that only those that play both sports can play either. Therefore, someone playing on an NBA team in, say, spring/summer must also play a certain amount of minutes on an NHL team during their fall/winter scedule. Would be very entertaining, and give much to talk about for the game announcers ("O'Neil is doing much better on his rebounding this NBA season than he did in tending the net for Vancouver earlier this year!")

Easily my favorite idea in this thread

SI

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Gary Gorski

2. TEACH KIDS THE FUNDAMENTALS! Today's kids can do half the moves on an And-1 video tape but couldn't knock down 7 out of 10 free throws to save their life. You don't need to take the one-on-one play out of the NBA necessarily - you need to eliminate the one-on-one play that ends up with a missed shot 55-60% of the time. Just think how exciting Iverson would be if he shot 50% from the floor. He scored 31 a game shooting 42% this season - by contrast Larry Bird shot almost 50% from the floor as his career average and only averaged 24 a game. You wouldn't be excited to watch a player who would average close to 37 PPG (Iverson at 50%)? If these kids would learn the fundamentals of the game and not just how to dunk you would have a better NBA product than ever before because today's athletes are by far better athletes than those of the 60's, 70's or 80's.

Problem is that it sounds good on paper but doesn't work so well in practice. If fundamentals won games rather than pure athleticism and the ability to create a shot 10' and in, then NBA GMs would be drafting players who did that. But this isn't the case so you have to alter the game to make it worth it to develop that kind of player.

SI

[Shkspr]

Originally Posted by Zippo

just make it exactly like college hoops.

Because nothing will prevent those 84-69 scores like going to college rules will.

[stevew]

What about calling the "5 second" advancement rule like they have in high school. Basically it means that if you are closely guarded man to man, outside of a certain area, that you have to pass the ball within 5 seconds. The Ball movement isnt there as much as it should be in the pro game. Whether thats a factor of poor passing or whatever, i am uncertain.

[Gary Gorski]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Problem is that it sounds good on paper but doesn't work so well in practice. If fundamentals won games rather than pure athleticism and the ability to create a shot 10' and in, then NBA GMs would be drafting players who did that. But this isn't the case so you have to alter the game to make it worth it to develop that kind of player.

SI

You mean if a 21 year old clone of Larry Bird was to be put in this next draft that Andrew Bogut, Chris Paul, Deron Williams, high schooler Gerald Green or the UNC team would be chosen over him? Bird was less atheltic that most of the players in his day let alone today and he was still better than 99% of them and probably better than anyone who is playing now.

You don't have to be a great athlete to make a wide open 15 foot jump shot if 1) you can make a wide open jump shot 2) have a teammate who understands how to set a screen and 3) have a teammate who understands how and where to pass the ball to a shooter coming off of said screen.

Three fundamental skills that take little to no athleticism and take no altering of the game - the problem is you can't find three guys on most NBA teams that possess those skills and have the athletic ability to stay on the court. Athleticism wins some games because that's all there is now. Players were athletic in the 80s too and those teams would beat the tar out of today's teams because they had the fundamentals too.

I have nothing against athleticism - most of the players in every sport now are more athletic than former players but if you could match that athleticism with the fundamentals that players used to have you would have one hell of a product. The athleticism isn't going to go away at expense of teaching fundamentals either - its going to be there either way but we need players who can shoot free throws, who can understand how to move without the basketball and who can make open shots as well as can drive to the basket and throw down a flashy dunk.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Gary Gorski

You mean if a 21 year old clone of Larry Bird was to be put in this next draft that Andrew Bogut, Chris Paul, Deron Williams, high schooler Gerald Green or the UNC team would be chosen over him? Bird was less atheltic that most of the players in his day let alone today and he was still better than 99% of them and probably better than anyone who is playing now.

You don't have to be a great athlete to make a wide open 15 foot jump shot if 1) you can make a wide open jump shot 2) have a teammate who understands how to set a screen and 3) have a teammate who understands how and where to pass the ball to a shooter coming off of said screen.

I really haven't paid that much attention to the draft the last couple of years, but I've gotta think there are players who fit that mould who weren't taken because "they aren't athletic enough" or "too short" or something along those lines.

To say a "Larry Bird" clone is too easy, too. Do people know he's a Larry Bird clone or is it someone who plays like him but doesn't have the pedigree. I bet if it's the latter, he doesn't nearly get picked before some of those others.

The only "fundamentals heavy white guy" I can think of from the past couple of years was Kirk Hinrich. He was drafted 7th behind such basketball luminaries as Darko or Chris Kamen. Then again, Lebron, Carmelo, and Dwyane Wade were drafted before him and have had better seasons thus far in their careers. The game has changed- you can't just draft on fundamentals and hope to win. There's also something to be said for my sample size being 1 and not all that accurate, but the idea is there- look for college players who have good fundamentals and that's all you'll hear about them "they won't make it in the NBA" because the players who have spent less time on fundamentals and more time on slashing or posting up dominate the game.

SI

[CHEMICAL SOLDIER]

Lessen the 24 second shot clock to 10-15 seconds.

[Gary Gorski]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

The only "fundamentals heavy white guy" I can think of from the past couple of years was Kirk Hinrich. He was drafted 7th behind such basketball luminaries as Darko or Chris Kamen. Then again, Lebron, Carmelo, and Dwyane Wade were drafted before him and have had better seasons thus far in their careers. The game has changed- you can't just draft on fundamentals and hope to win.
SI

Ok well lets get on the same page here to start - this has nothing to do with wanting to see more white guys in the NBA or something like that. White players are not the only ones who can be fundamentally skilled. Look at guys like Jordan, Magic, Worthy, Isaiah, Dumars...all guys who had better fundamental skills than the players of today.

Putting Carmelo in the same sentence with LeBron and Dwayne Wade is a travesty. Wade has proven that he's just as much substance as show if not more so and LeBron did too for a while until he realized who he was playing with. LeBron's jumper needs some work but his fundamentals are pretty solid and of course there are guys like Tim Duncan who just play about as fundamentally sound as you can.

The flash is an exciting part of the game but the unbelivable dunks and athletic plays only happen a couple times a game at best - the rest of the game sucks if those guys are shooting 35% from the field. Believe me, I don't want to see the athelticism taken out of the game - I don't want to watch 1950's basketball. But it would be nice to see these incredibly talented athletes be able to knock down an open jumper, shoot 80% from the free throw line (which would in turn open the game up because you would actually be concerned with fouling players) and be able to run an offense where there was more passing and moving than standing around and watching. The NBA doesn't need to lose the athletes - it needs the athletes to be taught the fundamentals to go with their athleticism.

[ahbrady]

I was a huge fan of the NBA back in the 80's and early 90's. Now I can't remember the last year that I watched any of a regular season game, and I have only watched 5 or so games in the playoffs. College basketball is becoming nearly as hard for me to enjoy as well. Most of that is due to the huge amount of the game that is just one-on-one. The coaches, scouts, and GM's will have to be the ones to change that, and I'm not sure if that will happen.

I do agree that many of the changes that have already been suggested would help. The main thing is to have the officials call the game the way the rulebook says. Walks, carrying, three seconds, and hand checks are the main ones that would help improve play. I also agree that a five-second closely guarded rule would help. I would also like to see the NBA have 1-and-1 free throws. That might help free throw shooting be a little more important. Technical fouls should be two shots, a personal foul, and the other team gets possession. One free throw is not enough of a deterrent.

[cougarfreak]

Implode the whole league.

[Desnudo]

I would remove the baskets, extend the field to 100 yards, change the ball to a more oval shape, and make them play outdoors on a grass field.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Gary Gorski

Ok well lets get on the same page here to start - this has nothing to do with wanting to see more white guys in the NBA or something like that. White players are not the only ones who can be fundamentally skilled. Look at guys like Jordan, Magic, Worthy, Isaiah, Dumars...all guys who had better fundamental skills than the players of today.

Putting Carmelo in the same sentence with LeBron and Dwayne Wade is a travesty. Wade has proven that he's just as much substance as show if not more so and LeBron did too for a while until he realized who he was playing with. LeBron's jumper needs some work but his fundamentals are pretty solid and of course there are guys like Tim Duncan who just play about as fundamentally sound as you can.

The flash is an exciting part of the game but the unbelivable dunks and athletic plays only happen a couple times a game at best - the rest of the game sucks if those guys are shooting 35% from the field. Believe me, I don't want to see the athelticism taken out of the game - I don't want to watch 1950's basketball. But it would be nice to see these incredibly talented athletes be able to knock down an open jumper, shoot 80% from the free throw line (which would in turn open the game up because you would actually be concerned with fouling players) and be able to run an offense where there was more passing and moving than standing around and watching. The NBA doesn't need to lose the athletes - it needs the athletes to be taught the fundamentals to go with their athleticism.

I never said it was anything about white guys or black guys either. I just got to see Hinrich here at Kansas and he was well regarded for having good fundamentals. As for Anthony in the same sentence as Wade or James- I never said anything to link the three except that they've had better seasons so far than Hinrich. In both cases, you're really putting words in my mouth.

Back to the point at hand, the problem I've been pointing out from the start is that there are only a limited number of hours in a day to play basketball and if you're a prospective player, you can only spend your time on one thing or another. Every hour you spend shooting free throws or making passes is an hour you're not working on your dribbling or your moves. In today's NBA, you can survive with a lower level of fundamentals but if you don't have the athleticism needed, you're just another player who is too slow to make it in the league.

SI

[Gary Gorski]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Back to the point at hand, the problem I've been pointing out from the start is that there are only a limited number of hours in a day to play basketball and if you're a prospective player, you can only spend your time on one thing or another. Every hour you spend shooting free throws or making passes is an hour you're not working on your dribbling or your moves. In today's NBA, you can survive with a lower level of fundamentals but if you don't have the athleticism needed, you're just another player who is too slow to make it in the league.

SI

Thank you, you've pointed out exactly what is wrong with today's young basketball players and why the NBA has turned into what it has.

Why should kids waste time doing something like shooting 100 free throws when they can practice putting a ball underneath their jersey and hitting it with their fist so that it spins around their body? That's a skill used quite frequently in the NBA, no? Why practice passing skills when you can spend time learning how to flick your wrist so it looks like you are throwing the ball at the defender's face yet it just bounces in place? These things sound stupid but the stupid part is that they are true.

Go to a summer camp and see how many 12 year olds can do half the moves from an And-1 tape but look at you like you are speaking a foreign language when you tell them to set a pick for their teammate to curl off of. And why are they like that? Because that is what the grownups have accepted as a great basketball player. Like you said you can get by in the NBA if you don't have good fundamental skills because most of the other players don't either. Yet the media and fans don't talk down about these players - we call them superstars. We've lowered our standards of what makes a great player in an attempt to believe that there are superstars in the league but there really are very few.

Kids do have a finite amount of basketball time - and they should use some of that time to work on their ball handling skills and to improve their athleticism but they seem to have plenty of time to learn skills that would be used in perhaps a Globetrotters game. If coaches got them to focus on important things instead we might see some different results in ten years.

The increase in atheleticism is supposed to help a sport become more exciting not be a crutch to lean on while all the fundamentals go out the window.

[Alf]

I just hope the Spurs win 4-0. Watch them and tell me they are a one one one type of team who can't pass ? You can't. They are a team, not a sum of individuals.

That's what I like in basketball. Of course, as said, they also are athletic (Ginobili, Mohammed), but you can't say that Tony Parker is athletic, can you ? They do set up real backetball plays too

[ahbrady]

I would say that both of the teams in the finals are more team-oriented than most of the NBA teams. Like I previously said though I don't watch much, so I could be wrong on that.

[rjolley]

Originally Posted by Alf

I just hope the Spurs win 4-0. Watch them and tell me they are a one one one type of team who can't pass ? You can't. They are a team, not a sum of individuals.

That's what I like in basketball. Of course, as said, they also are athletic (Ginobili, Mohammed), but you can't say that Tony Parker is athletic, can you ? They do set up real backetball plays too

Actually, you can say that about both teams. The same statements were made about the Pistons for the past couple of seasons. The Pistons are to the Eastern Conference what the the Spurs are to the Western...a team that plays well together and very sound defense.

[Ajaxab]

The Spurs' second quarter in Game 2 was near flawless offensive execution. The passing was crisp, the cuts to the basket were superb and the overall ball movement was very entertaining to watch. Were there any high flying dunks or behind the back passes? None that I can recall, but watching S.A. execute like that was what basketball is all about or should be about IMO.