2020 NBA Season Thread (brought to you by Jerry’s need for attention)

zjcvols

GROWN ASS MAN
Staff member
Joined
Jul 7, 2008
Messages
59,355
Likes
11,855
Until the NBA stops with the B2B it’s only going to be more prevalent. And also, it’s been proven effective. Duncan, LeBron, and other stars have gotten more miles with rest days. It sucks, but also makes sense.
 

95 Vol Alum

Go Big Vols!
Joined
Jan 16, 2010
Messages
43,721
Likes
6,761
Until the NBA stops with the B2B it’s only going to be more prevalent. And also, it’s been proven effective. Duncan, LeBron, and other stars have gotten more miles with rest days. It sucks, but also makes sense.
As long as they are good with eroding salaries. That will make sense too over time.
 

95 Vol Alum

Go Big Vols!
Joined
Jan 16, 2010
Messages
43,721
Likes
6,761
A good amount of Americans have paid sick time with their full time job.
We really comparing a good amount of Americans to NBA athletes? A good amount of Americans work everyday. A good amount of Americans work in July, August, and September. A good amount of Americans aren’t paid when injured.
 

TBrown

Wolf of Beale Street
Joined
Feb 4, 2009
Messages
41,548
Likes
7,787
We really comparing a good amount of Americans to NBA athletes? A good amount of Americans work everyday. A good amount of Americans work in July, August, and September. A good amount of Americans aren’t paid when injured.
A good amount of Americans don’t have guaranteed revenue sharing.
 

zjcvols

GROWN ASS MAN
Staff member
Joined
Jul 7, 2008
Messages
59,355
Likes
11,855
We really comparing a good amount of Americans to NBA athletes? A good amount of Americans work everyday. A good amount of Americans work in July, August, and September. A good amount of Americans aren’t paid when injured.
Those guys all work during the offseason too.

I’m not trying to compare, just saying Americans have sick days also to rest up.

My point being, NBA stars getting rest days makes sense with what the science says and with the current amount of games (even though the Clippers having Kawhi rest two games already seems excessive). I’m not against nba players taking load management days.
 

n_huffhines

What's it gonna cost?
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
61,863
Likes
33,263
Those guys all work during the offseason too.

I’m not trying to compare, just saying Americans have sick days also to rest up.

My point being, NBA stars getting rest days makes sense with what the science says and with the current amount of games (even though the Clippers having Kawhi rest two games already seems excessive). I’m not against nba players taking load management days.
The people opposing it have good points. It really sucks if Kawhi only comes to your city once and doesn't play but any solution I can think of is even more problematic than the initial issue. Maybe eliminating b2b games would help a lot, but wouldn't totally solve it.
 

TNHopeful505

Got 99 Problems, But A Butch Ain't One
Joined
Jan 11, 2009
Messages
8,115
Likes
5,236
Those guys all work during the offseason too.

I’m not trying to compare, just saying Americans have sick days also to rest up.

My point being, NBA stars getting rest days makes sense with what the science says and with the current amount of games (even though the Clippers having Kawhi rest two games already seems excessive). I’m not against nba players taking load management days.
We have sick days to use....when we're sick.

When a construction worker sweats for 12+ hours doing heavy lifting in the 100+ degree heat, the next day, he doesn't get to use a "sick day." And most of those sick days in a lot of places require a doctors note.

I understand your point. But the product people pay for are the players. And if you don't see the complete product when you pay, you're getting ripped off.

The "average" NBA fan won't get to make a playoff game, which are even more expensive than regular priced. For me, to see LeBron or Kahwi play, I'd have to see them when they came to Atlanta. If they didn't play that game, well, I'm out of luck then, aren't I?

I am all for preserving the health of players. However, I don't believe that "sitting them" is the way to go. Should there be fewer games? Possibly. Would make the regular season games mean more. I like whoever said that they should add in 2 more franchises, and then everyone play each other twice each year. Make it around 64 games a year instead of 82. Because the way we're going right now, players are sitting out 18 of them anyways.

Again, I just want to see the purest product available. I don't want to pay hundreds to go to a "regular" game, and then not get to see the players I paid to see. I want my team to win a championship and be healthy, but I'm not willing to sacrifice my fan experience to do so.
 

95 Vol Alum

Go Big Vols!
Joined
Jan 16, 2010
Messages
43,721
Likes
6,761
My contention, assuming that load management is a winning formula, is that no matter how short the schedule, guys will sit to rest. It would reduce the number of games that might happen, but it will still happen. And shortening the season gives the networks less content which results in less revenue and the teams losing ticket/concession sales so salaries will have to come down.

Agree on spreading things out to eliminate the B2B and 4 in 5 stuff (which I think is gone now).
 

n_huffhines

What's it gonna cost?
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
61,863
Likes
33,263
We have sick days to use....when we're sick.

When a construction worker sweats for 12+ hours doing heavy lifting in the 100+ degree heat, the next day, he doesn't get to use a "sick day." And most of those sick days in a lot of places require a doctors note.

I understand your point. But the product people pay for are the players. And if you don't see the complete product when you pay, you're getting ripped off.

The "average" NBA fan won't get to make a playoff game, which are even more expensive than regular priced. For me, to see LeBron or Kahwi play, I'd have to see them when they came to Atlanta. If they didn't play that game, well, I'm out of luck then, aren't I?

I am all for preserving the health of players. However, I don't believe that "sitting them" is the way to go. Should there be fewer games? Possibly. Would make the regular season games mean more. I like whoever said that they should add in 2 more franchises, and then everyone play each other twice each year. Make it around 64 games a year instead of 82. Because the way we're going right now, players are sitting out 18 of them anyways.

Again, I just want to see the purest product available. I don't want to pay hundreds to go to a "regular" game, and then not get to see the players I paid to see. I want my team to win a championship and be healthy, but I'm not willing to sacrifice my fan experience to do so.
Another tweak that I think would be awesome is 3 game series in the playoffs. Part of me loves the fact that the best team usually wins, but it also feels a bit too predictable most years. The NCAA tournament makes stupid money because there is something so electric about the one and done in hoops. I don't want to go that far with pro hoops, and 3 seems like a happy medium. I think the ratings per event would explode symbiotically with increased gambling action.
 

n_huffhines

What's it gonna cost?
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
61,863
Likes
33,263
My contention, assuming that load management is a winning formula, is that no matter how short the schedule, guys will sit to rest. It would reduce the number of games that might happen, but it will still happen. And shortening the season gives the networks less content which results in less revenue and the teams losing ticket/concession sales so salaries will have to come down.

Agree on spreading things out to eliminate the B2B and 4 in 5 stuff (which I think is gone now).
I don't think this is a certainty. There is a very good chance that 82 games isn't the sweet spot for profit maximization for the networks, arenas, etc. I'm not saying shorter is profit maximization. Maybe 100 games is. I kinda doubt that, but whatever it is, moving towards it will result in increased player pay if they bargain correctly.
 

95 Vol Alum

Go Big Vols!
Joined
Jan 16, 2010
Messages
43,721
Likes
6,761
I don't think this is a certainty. There is a very good chance that 82 games isn't the sweet spot for profit maximization for the networks, arenas, etc. I'm not saying shorter is profit maximization. Maybe 100 games is. I kinda doubt that, but whatever it is, moving towards it will result in increased player pay if they bargain correctly.
Well, I assume the national networks pay for access to broadcast a set number of games per 82 game season including playoff series. Perhaps they could fill the same broadcast schedule with lower tier match-ups and be happy paying the same price. But maybe the model isn't what I think it is.

Regular season viewing is down, that much I believe is fact. The why could be debated. You definitely could tell that ESPN did not like losing Leonard (v. Giannis) and him then playing for TNT this week. Poor decision by whomever was in charge to have him, of all players, on B2B national games.
 

95 Vol Alum

Go Big Vols!
Joined
Jan 16, 2010
Messages
43,721
Likes
6,761
Which raises another interesting point, as superstar players collude to play together on a few super teams, it further dilutes the remainder of the product making lower tier match-ups even less attractive.
 

n_huffhines

What's it gonna cost?
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
61,863
Likes
33,263
Well, I assume the national networks pay for access to broadcast a set number of games per 82 game season including playoff series. Perhaps they could fill the same broadcast schedule with lower tier match-ups and be happy paying the same price. But maybe the model isn't what I think it is.

Regular season viewing is down, that much I believe is fact. The why could be debated. You definitely could tell that ESPN did not like losing Leonard (v. Giannis) and him then playing for TNT this week. Poor decision by whomever was in charge to have him, of all players, on B2B national games.
Yeah, and it sucks that they can't flex that ****. If Kawhi announces he's out, swap to a different matchup.
 

n_huffhines

What's it gonna cost?
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
61,863
Likes
33,263
Which raises another interesting point, as superstar players collude to play together on a few super teams, it further dilutes the remainder of the product making lower tier match-ups even less attractive.
Idk, maybe I'm just a superfan, but therd are only a few teams I'm not interested in watching. There are storylines everywhere. I'm super interested in the Grizz and they might be 25-57. Pels, same
 

95 Vol Alum

Go Big Vols!
Joined
Jan 16, 2010
Messages
43,721
Likes
6,761
Idk, maybe I'm just a superfan, but therd are only a few teams I'm not interested in watching. There are storylines everywhere. I'm super interested in the Grizz and they might be 25-57. Pels, same
I'm the opposite. I watch all the Grizz stuff (or as much as I can swing) and occasionally watch the others, including playoffs sans Grizz.
 

zjcvols

GROWN ASS MAN
Staff member
Joined
Jul 7, 2008
Messages
59,355
Likes
11,855
Another tweak that I think would be awesome is 3 game series in the playoffs. Part of me loves the fact that the best team usually wins, but it also feels a bit too predictable most years. The NCAA tournament makes stupid money because there is something so electric about the one and done in hoops. I don't want to go that far with pro hoops, and 3 seems like a happy medium. I think the ratings per event would explode symbiotically with increased gambling action.
First round- 3 games
Second round- 5 games
Final two rounds- 7 games

It’s amazing how little I watch of the first two NBA playoff rounds.
 
Likes: n_huffhines

n_huffhines

What's it gonna cost?
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
61,863
Likes
33,263
First round- 3 games
Second round- 5 games
Final two rounds- 7 games

It’s amazing how little I watch of the first two NBA playoff rounds.
There are too many playoff games. Do they max out at 3 on a weeknight? 4? That's a lot. Even the most avid fans will miss games.
 

95 Vol Alum

Go Big Vols!
Joined
Jan 16, 2010
Messages
43,721
Likes
6,761
Looks like the LAC were fined due to Doc Rivers' comments regarding Leonard sitting. Basically said he feels great and needs to continue to feel great when the NBA ruled that they were properly managing an injury by sitting him. His comments weren't consistent with the teams request.
 
Likes: n_huffhines

VN Store



Sponsors
 

Top