Agreed. I still think that's more of an issue with older buildings. The Verizon Center in DC holds over 18k and there's no spot where you feel like you're too far away and the huge video screen really helps out as well.
I already have. Teams can't run the fastbreak so they don't bother running. They don't force the issue offensively.
Not that I care either way, but I don't understand the logic here. The court is too short because it was designed for smaller athletes, yet the basket height is fine despite having been designed for smaller athletes? Heh?
You guys are all wrong! My favorite era of basketball is WAAAAAY better than your favorite era of basketball! And I got the opinions to back it up! Your favorite decade sucks! They should call it the suckball era! You guys are acting like a bunch of WhiteStar Warriors here.
It's pretty darned close to useless. Only one team in the 30 or so years of the current 16 team playoff, the 1995 Rockets, has ever won the championship from the bottom half of the bracket (6 seed), and even making the Finals at all from there is exceedingly rare.
Dunking/basket height isn't affecting the league nearly as much as larger/quicker athletes defending which means there's less open space for players to move around. A bigger court would open up more passing and cutting lanes to alleviate the difficulties offenses face right now.
useless is a vague term so in that sense you are not wrong. But even Assuming your data is correct (it seems right but I haven't double-checked) that 5-8 seeds have only once won the NBA championship, that doesn't change the fact that any upsets still had an influence on who actually won it all based on the potential matchups altered. When the Nuggets beat the Sonics as an 8 seed, the Nuggets didn't make it to the finals but theres a pretty good chance that the Sonics would have made it to the finals if they hadn't lost that round.
Actually, after not paying much attention to the NBA for the past 20 years, I think the league is getting more interesting with some of the younger stars and some fresh teams (Note: I have always hated Boston and LA). It's nice to see Oklahoma City, Miami and LA Clippers doing well. Also, it doesn't hurt that my local team actually appears to have a light at the end of tunnel. I think the league can improve by following some of the suggestions mentioned in the thread: Reduce the size of the market or move some teams. Market teams more than than players (at least try to get a closer balance). Reduce the number of teams in the playoffs. However, the biggest change needs to be on style of play. I still see too many players not playing defense (simply moving their feet) and too many offenses run through only 1 or 2 players. Yawn. I really don't care to see Carmelo through up the ball from all angles.
Not necessarily. It really depends on the shooters range, because defenders will just back off and close up those lanes you are talking about regardless of the size of the court. Maybe widening the court some would help a little, but nothing will really change how close they play to the basket besides the shooting range/ability of the players.
It would give teams a bigger incentive to play their pure shooters more which would, by necessity, force defenses to expand out and increase the amount of open court for post players and slashers.
Not necessarily. Those pure shooters lack other attributes, otherwise they would be on the court more frequently to begin with.
No, they wouldn't if the size/speed of the athletes has increased enough that they can cheat defensively and still recover to the shooter on the wing. Add 3-5 feet on each side of the court, so that the 3pt line is a uniform distance from the basket, and now that recovery is much more difficult.
Denver, Clippers, Miami, Dallas all run the fast break pretty damn well. Minnesota with a healthy team (Rubio/Love at full strength), and Boston with Rondo get up and down pretty well. The Spurs are playing some of most efficient offensive basketball of all time right now though I don't know if I would call them a fast break team. The Bobcats suck really bad at it, but they get up and down the floor. Western conference is pretty entertaining when you throw in Houston, Golden State, Lakers, Utah, and OKC to the above Western Conference teams. (Though the east is pretty big dumpster fire of bad basketball outside the top teams though the Knicks/Chicago play pretty appeasing ball) Ironically, the Heat are the team to beat, and they are at their best in the open floor. (probably the only team you can argue "ran" their way to a championship in the modern era) People chucking more threes probably has more to do with the Zone Defense being legal now. I do agree the Kings got hosed in Game 6. They played great ball, went 7 deep, and every big on that team could pass. (Divac/Webber/Brad Miller)
I went to my first NBA game in the post-Jordan-era last night. I had fun. But more than anything else, it made me appreciate MLS crowds. It's almost like a circus the way the NBA needs to constantly distract its fans. There's shit music and sound effects routinely being played while the game is being played. The announcer imploring the crowd to clap is embarrassing. And when the game is stopped they seem petrified that people will realize that they're bored, and so they throw in lasers, dudes on stilts, etc.. And still, the fans only barely seem to care. Seriously, the AYSO sections at Red Bull games put these NBA fans to shame. There's a lot more 3-point attempts than there were when I last watched basketball and a lot fewer fast breaks. I think the latter is maybe because the players are so big relative to the court that they can get behind the fast break a bit faster. Just guessing. I don't know why there are so many threes, but it reminded me a little of the way tennis has become 2 guys creaming the ball from the baseline; there's very little incisive passing the way there was in the olden days of the 1990s. But here's the thing. If nearly any of these players were regular-human sized they couldn't possibly be athletes. I watch Brook Lopez try to run and he just can't do it. He's as elegant as a giraffe after a few Jägermeisters. But because he's 7-feet tall, he's a star. That's bullshit. You could never convince me that a guy like Lopez could ever become an NBA player if he were regular-human sized. Alternately, someone like Messi, an indisputably superlative athlete, could never, ever become a pro basketball player, because he's not genetically predisposed to gigantism. (I'm sure that there are NBA players, somebody like Bryant or Jordan, who could unquestionably become a pro athlete at any sport they set their mind to but those people seem rare, IMO.)
I think it's the percentage play. Well, that and trying to get shots close to the basket. The mid-range jumper is what's disappeared--low percentage in comparison. Of all the complaints about the NBA on this thread, this one is the strangest to me. Yeah, the 7 footers can be fairly awkward. But they're strong and quicker than...well, you should see the many 7 footers who don't make it. However, the wings and guards tend to be amazingly quick athletes with strength and great body control.