What's new
By:

Should the NBA get rid of back to backs?

Saint Cy of JFC said:
Why? We are what, 30 games into the season and we already know 7 of the 8 teams who will be in the playoffs for the West. Why play all these meaningless games? Why not just lower the game, play teh same season length, so players can actually be healthy for the playoffs?
Click to expand...

Because the NBA would lose money. It's a pointless suggestion. It's like sending the NBA a letter titled "A way to lose 1/3rd of your revenue right away". I already explained why extending the season is better. The question is what is the advantage of a shortened season over an extended one?
 
Also all the historical stats won't be comparable if you reduce the number of games to 60 ... makes no sense to do that whatsoever.


Do you want Stockton's and Malone's stats to be meaningless?
 
ONE LOVE said:
Also all the historical stats won't be comparable if you reduce the number of games to 60 ... makes no sense to do that whatsoever.


Do you want Stockton's and Malone's stats to be meaningless?
Click to expand...

For a league that is desperately obsessed with stats, I think this is the biggest issue.
 
Ideally a mix of the 2 would be the best : shorten the season by a few games (say go from 82 to 72/75) and make the season a wee bit longer, say 3 to 4 weeks. That way instead of being more or less 82 games over 24 weeks like it has been for the last 40 years or so, it would be 75 games over 28 weeks. That would make it go from 3.41 games per week to 2.67... that's a good 20% decrease of the rythm with only marginal adjustments. It would allow suppression of back to backs.

But as others have said, stats (ie the cult of comparison between season based on the same 82 games format) and money are big big issues so this remains unlikely and we will probably only see the season extended by a few weeks to spread the load a bit more (see what has already been decided).

Stat comparison is to some extent disingenuous : when coaches are already resting their players more and more, when guys like Lebron James have missed on average 5 games per season for rest or minor ailments (aka counts as rest to me) for the last 5 seasons, is it really relevant to stick to the 82 games for stat comparison ? Aren't averages per game the main tool of comparison between individual seasons and totals only really used to make comparisons at the end of a career ?

add to that that while the best players used to play 40 to 42 minutes back in the day, they hover around 35/37 now... So where is the relevance of comparing stats in that context ?

Really a marginal adjustment would have such massive benefits that I don't understand why it can happen. Stakeholders not wanting to go all the way to 60 games per season, I can understand. Them resisting a move to 72/75 games ona slightly longer period of time, it's not only regrettable, but silly.
 
I always thought that B2Bs are more reasonable if the game is played by both teams who are on a B2B. B2Bs would even be intriguing if the same two teams played each other on each other's court.
 
sahlensguy said:
I always thought that B2Bs are more reasonable if the game is played by both teams who are on a B2B. B2Bs would even be intriguing if the same two teams played each other on each other's court.
Click to expand...

The main problem with back to backs is when there is travel involved... If you play both games at home, it's not ideal, but it's doable, you finish the game, get some physio and a shower, home and bed. But when there is travelling either to go back home or go to another city, the players have to play the second night on 4/5hours of bad quality sleep, cramped up legs that have been folded in a plain in the middle of what should have been a night of sleep, etc...

back to backs without travel wouldn't be a massive issue.
 
Cappy_Smurf said:
Yeah, they should add more games so that Utah can have the entire team injured instead of half...

There's no doubt that overplaying guys increases the chance of being injured, but sure, you want to watch more games of Utah having to depend on backup players logging significant minutes. Brilliant.
Click to expand...

you know what causes these injuries. wrong weightlifting/strengthening regimes! most of these guys do the wrong stuff in the gym.
hell malone and stockton played back to bakc to back at end of their carreers!
but yeah that was baby boomer and gen x!

these generation snowflakes are soft as ****
 
veji1 said:
The main problem with back to backs is when there is travel involved... If you play both games at home, it's not ideal, but it's doable, you finish the game, get some physio and a shower, home and bed. But when there is travelling either to go back home or go to another city, the players have to play the second night on 4/5hours of bad quality sleep, cramped up legs that have been folded in a plain in the middle of what should have been a night of sleep, etc...

back to backs without travel wouldn't be a massive issue.
Click to expand...


you can reduce that by traveling home the next morning, not after the game
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top