How interested/engaged/enthusiastic are you about the Jazz right now?

[GunterD]

I'm a little more engaged at this point this year than last because I'm interested in seeing how Ace plays, and if the Jazz can tank the season naturally without being too gross. But I'm definitely not like champing at the bit waiting for the season to start or anything like I usually am around this time of year. Last year taught me how not to have the team be at the center of my interests, and I doubt that's changing this year. But I kinda miss having something to obsess about.

 

[KqWIN]

True. Come to think about it they are very jazz-like. Mabye explains why I became a fan of the Buffalo Bills. Prolific offense that somehow cant put it all together in the big games, seems like we say that they are going to finally get over the hump but than they lose to Kansas City in the playoffs again.

NBA has experimented with a cup/tournament play, I just dont think anyone cares after the thing is over with.

I honestly don’t mind different levels of “importance” throughout the season. That’s something I’ve learned from watching Football. Some clubs will prioritize different competitions more than others, and some competitions simply are seen as important across the board. That is totally fine and actually adds to the product.

I don’t want to hijack this conversation, but I think NBA basketball is great when played at full competition level. The issue is that NBA teams cannot play 82 games + playoffs at that level. An 82 game schedule is simply incompatible with the current game.

Everyone is afraid about reducing the # of games or having games that mean less….I see it as a good thing because if we had X amount of games seen as less important, it would mean that the remaining games would be seen as more important. I think the current situation leads to the entirety of the regular season being watered down. I’d rather have ~60 games that are of high quality/importance and ~20 games that are of lesser quality/importance (like the carabao cup).

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

I'd like to see Ace start to develop well. He has a ton of potential as a Paul George-like scoring wing on the perimeter and something like Lamar Odom on the interior.

I'd like to see Keyonte and Brice have good seasons.

I'm not going to stan for Cody Williams this year. It's exhausting.

 

[SoUjazzfan]

After four decades of being a hard core fan I think I'm realizing what little window we had to win it all has closed. Watching uncompetitive ball is just not that enjoyable any more and as I've grown older I have gained other hobbies that are more personal. I'll likely spend more time watching instructional videos and such to get better at those pass times than watch the Jazz tank. Or at least that is what I say until the season starts. Hopefully Ace, TH, Flip and even Cody improve. I would like to be able to watch through four quarters and think we may have a chance to win on any given night.

 

[seattlejazzfan]

very excited and engaged but we need bailey to be really good. there is a lot riding on that.

voted more than normal.

 

[GunterD]

I honestly don’t mind different levels of “importance” throughout the season. That’s something I’ve learned from watching Football. Some clubs will prioritize different competitions more than others, and some competitions simply are seen as important across the board. That is totally fine and actually adds to the product.

I don’t want to hijack this conversation, but I think NBA basketball is great when played at full competition level. The issue is that NBA teams cannot play 82 games + playoffs at that level. An 82 game schedule is simply incompatible with the current game.

Everyone is afraid about reducing the # of games or having games that mean less….I see it as a good thing because if we had X amount of games seen as less important, it would mean that the remaining games would be seen as more important. I think the current situation leads to the entirety of the regular season being watered down. I’d rather have ~60 games that are of high quality/importance and ~20 games that are of lesser quality/importance (like the carabao cup).

Its funny because I don't think there are very many people that would actually argue that reducing the number of games would be a bad thing from a product perspective. Each game means more, less strain on the player's bodies so they can play harder and be injured less, less need to rest players with a greater potential detriment to doing so. Cutting the games to somewhere in the 60s would be hugely beneficial to players fans and product.

The thing that would keep it from happening would be the money. They'd need to figure out a way that they could suck the same amount of money out of the fans while providing less product. The problem isn't even like ticket sales, I'd imagine most fans would be OK with a 20% hike in prices if it meant they were seeing a better product and had a better chance of actually seeing LeBron or whoever the one time per year they come to town. Its more how the TV deals and player salaries would work with fewer games. I doubt the owners, media, and players would ever be able to negotiate an agreement that would allow a significant reduction in games played.

 

[SoberasHotRod]

Its funny because I don't think there are very many people that would actually argue that reducing the number of games would be a bad thing from a product perspective. Each game means more, less strain on the player's bodies so they can play harder and be injured less, less need to rest players with a greater potential detriment to doing so. Cutting the games to somewhere in the 60s would be hugely beneficial to players fans and product.

The thing that would keep it from happening would be the money. They'd need to figure out a way that they could suck the same amount of money out of the fans while providing less product. The problem isn't even like ticket sales, I'd imagine most fans would be OK with a 20% hike in prices if it meant they were seeing a better product and had a better chance of actually seeing LeBron or whoever the one time per year they come to town. Its more how the TV deals and player salaries would work with fewer games. I doubt the owners, media, and players would ever be able to negotiate an agreement that would allow a significant reduction in games played.

It wouldn't really affect nationally televised games, so it really only affects local TV deals. I don't understand fully all of the issues, but I know that local TV deals are one of the biggest points of friction in the NBA and cause most of the uneveness among teams. I wonder if at some point local TV deals get figured out and the amount of games can then be reduced.

 

[KqWIN]

Its funny because I don't think there are very many people that would actually argue that reducing the number of games would be a bad thing from a product perspective. Each game means more, less strain on the player's bodies so they can play harder and be injured less, less need to rest players with a greater potential detriment to doing so. Cutting the games to somewhere in the 60s would be hugely beneficial to players fans and product.

The thing that would keep it from happening would be the money. They'd need to figure out a way that they could suck the same amount of money out of the fans while providing less product. The problem isn't even like ticket sales, I'd imagine most fans would be OK with a 20% hike in prices if it meant they were seeing a better product and had a better chance of actually seeing LeBron or whoever the one time per year they come to town. Its more how the TV deals and player salaries would work with fewer games. I doubt the owners, media, and players would ever be able to negotiate an agreement that would allow a significant reduction in games played.

Eh, there are definitely people that don't want less games for product reasons. I've had so many arguments about this.

The main revenue drivers wouldn't change under this system. National TV games would remain the same number, and you could still have 82 total games—they just wouldn't all carry equal weight. Here's how it could work: imagine a 60-game regular season plus ~20 games from a separate cup competition. Players could choose how much they care about the cup games. If they do care, great—we get a meaningful competition that engages players, owners, and fans. If they don't? That's still great. You'd have 60 higher-quality regular season games plus 20 "lower-stakes" cup games that could serve multiple purposes: rest opportunities, chances for backups to play, and provide a more accessible price point for fans.

The current system makes all 82 games "equal," which makes most of them feel meaningless and leads to the mediocre product. A tiered approach would create clearer distinctions between high and lower stakes games. I think a lot of the disdain for "load management" is that it can come at any time and you have this whole idea that people used their hard earned money just to get snubbed. A tiered system would set expectations appropriately and remove a lot of distrust with fans.

I don't see this happening, though. Both players and owners keep watching the money go up. While a higher-quality product generates more money, revenue and franchise values aren't tied solely to quality. The NBA got a massive media rights deal not because they created a good product that attracted viewers, but because live sports are an increasingly valuable product in a competitive streaming service world. The product being mediocre is a fan problem, not a player or owner problem. While I think they would make more money with a change like this, why rock the boat when you're already making so much?

 

[KqWIN]

It wouldn't really affect nationally televised games, so it really only affects local TV deals. I don't understand fully all of the issues, but I know that local TV deals are one of the biggest points of friction in the NBA and cause most of the uneveness among teams. I wonder if at some point local TV deals get figured out and the amount of games can then be reduced.

The local TV deals is a good point. I may be talking out of my *** here, but the main complication there is not really the money but the web of media rights contracts and getting everything in alignment. It's like building a railroad through 30 different counties. You'll have problems if all 30 counties want to get their say in things and it can only really be done if you have all the parties under one central umbrella. It's why league pass sucks and blackouts exists IIRC.

I don't think it makes much sense to have local media TV deals anymore, but that's just how they work. The NBA would have to buyout every contract which must be painful, complicated process. But if they owned the rights to everything they could change more quickly and provide a better product.

 

[cctrackstar]

the team half tanked for two years and got a broken player, AnoThEr undersized combo guard, and a player with great measurables that has no idea how to play. then they do the full tank and move from first to fifth because the league hates tanking just like i do. silver lining, ace might be really good if he, again, learns how to play.

also, i have a long history of rooting for the underdog, or the high energy bench guys, but these last few years they have traded EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM for draft picks, and draft picks traditionally only work out like a third of the time, especially mid firsts which is what most of them will be.

now they are going to find a new way to tank which is trading away MORE high energy guys so that all that is left is young players that all have something wrong with them, and they are supposedly the future? no don't talk about lauri, he's in trade talks all over the place.

so yeah, let me know when they pull their heads out and get back to winning with what they have.

 

[Sardines]

I'm not a fan of college basketball, or draft prospects, or rookies generally. I've been a lifelong fan of the Jazz and what I care about is them winning games, being fun to watch, and at some point having a shot at a championship.

My interest is at an all time low.

The second they look like a team that can get past the first round of the playoffs I'm back on board. I'll want to be there for the regular season so that I'm familiar enough when the playoffs start to know what I'm seeing, know who the players are, know the storylines, etc..

Until then, I'll let the team figure **** out without wasting any time watching trash basketball.

The only thing that will stop me from being a Jazz fan is if the team moves, x10 if they move to Vegas. If the Jazz move to Vegas they will be my most hated team in all of sports.

 

[Thee Jazz Fan]

I don’t know how someone can’t be super excited about any new Jazz season I always find a reason to be excited.