We can all say and agree that the game of basketball has changed drastically over the last 10/20/30 years. Players are bigger, faster, and stronger; the game is more fast paced (in most cases); long tenured coaches could be a thing of the past; more opportunities, etc.

My question is this... Do you view the game of basketball as something that is just evolving and will continue to evolve, or do you see this evolution as something terrible, destructive to the game. Some will say that it has changed, it is terrible. Others will say that it is ever evolving, that change doesn't matter.

What say you?

My opinion - I think the game is just evolving. 20 years ago, you could not touch a guy, or there would be a foul called. It is a game that was designed to showcase finesse and skill. Heck, when developed, dribbling wasn't even allowed. There are nay-sayers out there that will say that these "changes" are terrible, but I think it is merely evolution, neither bad nor good. It just is what it is. Every game has evolved. Football has gone to more of a spread to showcase speed, baseball goes from pitching to hitting to pitching to hitting, etc. Golf saw its transformation with the introduction of Tiger Woods, and courses became "Tiger Proof."

The changes we are seeing are merely evolution, IMO.

The NBA has a serious problem on its shoulders, and anyone who doesn't see it is either blind or delusional. With players basically circumventing the rules and "teaming up" to play with "friends," the game is losing any sense of competition and purity. What you're going to find is an Association with 3-5 powerhouse teams, and smaller market teams in the Association are going to be shit for luck. And the sad thing is, the NBA has never stood up to its players. Where the NFL owners basically own the players, the NBA owners are basically the players bitches. Its ruining the game, and pretty soon you're going to see the NBA drop from its #2 position in the world of sports to #4, possibly even #5 [if they don't get this thing straightened out].

Its an absolute roadshow with how these buffoons (#6, Wade, and "Raptor" -- and soon to be Anthony and CP-3) are selling out and being such primadonnas.

I voted neither good nor bad, however it depends on your perspective of good or bad! lol I dont want to get back to the days of the set shot and working the ball around for 2 minutes to get a shot, and I dont like where the high school game is today. If we are talking high school, the rules and interpretations of the rules now allow for a semi wrestling event with a round ball!

The crossover/carry, jump stop/travel, and the block/charge have led to a very physical game. Defenders have very little chance of slowing down a dribbler who can litterally catch the ball traveling away from their body and swing it 180 degrees the other way! This means that the defenders now use hands to slow them down, and they are being allowed more and more.

Whats up with the jump stop! When it first came in, you had to land on both feet and shoot off of it! The argument was that it was a continuation of the layup step. Then you could start passing off of it, now you dont even have to land with both feet at the same time! This and the carry rule would be easy to get back under control, but the pace of the game would change! Your casual observer of basketball wants points, not hard working defense!

The first two examples lead to more block/charges! This call is the hardest in basketball, but with the change of the first two, it would get it under a little control.

But the problem is that NBA guys whine to the NCAA about the players not being ready for their league, so the NCAA allows the pro game to influence it. Then, the NCAA whines to the NFHS and it comes into the high school game!

Scarlet_Buckeye;679061 wrote:The NBA has a serious problem on its shoulders, and anyone who doesn't see it is either blind or delusional. With players basically circumventing the rules and "teaming up" to play with "friends," the game is losing any sense of competition and purity. What you're going to find is an Association with 3-5 powerhouse teams, and smaller market teams in the Association are going to be shit for luck. And the sad thing is, the NBA has never stood up to its players. Where the NFL owners basically own the players, the NBA owners are basically the players bitches. Its ruining the game, and pretty soon you're going to see the NBA drop from its #2 position in the world of sports to #4, possibly even #5 [if they don't get this thing straightened out].

Its an absolute roadshow with how these buffoons (#6, Wade, and "Raptor" -- and soon to be Anthony and CP-3) are selling out and being such primadonnas.

Yeah players never team up in other sports, can you imagine if big name Free Agents went and played on stacked teams in other sports...like the MLB? gee itd be crazy

Scarlet_Buckeye;679061 wrote: The NBA has a serious problem on its shoulders, and anyone who doesn't see it is either blind or delusional.

Then why are ratings waaaaay up?

http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/02/02/you%e2%80%99re-watching-nba-television-ratings-continue-to-rise/
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/columnist/hiestand-tv/2011-02-08-nba-tnt_N.htm

Scarlet_Buckeye;679061 wrote: What you're going to find is an Association with 3-5 powerhouse teams, and smaller market teams in the Association are going to be shit for luck.

That isn't anything new. There's never going to be more "powerhouse" teams because if you start talking about 10 teams having a legit shot then you are getting a lot closer to mass mediocrity ... and that isn't going to draw. The NBA has too many teams and waters down the talent pool to begin with, but the league is doing fine overall.

Scarlet_Buckeye;679061 wrote: Its an absolute roadshow with how these buffoons (#6, Wade, and "Raptor" -- and soon to be Anthony and CP-3) are selling out and being such primadonnas.

Hilarious. Is every guy that ever changed teams a sellout and a primadonna? And how exactly do you "sell out" for less money?

Hb31187;679082 wrote:Yeah players never team up in other sports, can you imagine if big name Free Agents went and played on stacked teams in other sports...like the MLB? gee itd be crazy

Different on so many accounts.

1) There is no salary cap. If a player wants to reject the offering of, say, $300,000,000 and instead play with his "buddies" for $30,000,000 then so be it; but every team has the opportunity to bid some amount on a player that that player just simply cannot afford to turn down.

2) One man can dominate baseball - and he doesn't have to be athletic either. If I have a pitcher who is fat and runs a 40 yard dash in 6.5 seconds, but still throws 110 mph fastballs with nasty movement, I can dominate the entire League. Sure I still have to put up runs, but being able to have one player who can hold another team to 0-2 runs a game is a HUGE advantage. This is why, IMO, any sport where a fat, lazy guy who can't run or chews tobacco while he performs... it really isn't a sport.

I just don't like the NBA game. Even the playoffs are not interesting to me. Unless I am rooting for my team which now sucks, even when they were good I could lose intrest fast. I can watch a high level NCAA bball game and be glued to the TV, even during the regular season, see Kansas K State game last night. There is more at stake in the NCAA game and the kids give it 110% every night and you see the emotion on their faces and body language every night. Same goes for high school games. NCAA and high school tournament games take it to another level for me, these tournaments are just amazing. The NBA playoffs just don't seem to reach the same level, probably because there is always next year in the NBA and high school and college kids know they usually only get one crack at it and one team to do it for.

Hb31187;679082 wrote:Yeah players never team up in other sports, can you imagine if big name Free Agents went and played on stacked teams in other sports...like the MLB? gee itd be crazy

Yeah and the MLB is doing real great right now /sarcasm.

Scarlet_Buckeye;679429 wrote:Different on so many accounts.

2) One man can dominate baseball - and he doesn't have to be athletic either. If I have a pitcher who is fat and runs a 40 yard dash in 6.5 seconds, but still throws 110 mph fastballs with nasty movement, I can dominate the entire League. Sure I still have to put up runs, but being able to have one player who can hold another team to 0-2 runs a game is a HUGE advantage. This is why, IMO, any sport where a fat, lazy guy who can't run or chews tobacco while he performs... it really isn't a sport.

SMH. One man can dominate baseball? A pitcher dominates AT MOST 20% of the time. Less if you are talking about a closer. I haven't seen too many fat pitchers who run 6.5 40s that throw 110 with nasty movement. Link?

And somehow you turn that into baseball isn't a real sport? Why aren't you in Florida or Arizona right now for Spring Training? Are you in too good of shape? Might be the worst post in OC history.

like_that;679450 wrote:Yeah and the MLB is doing real great right now /sarcasm.

Doin no worse then the NBA and NFL

like_that;679450 wrote:Yeah and the MLB is doing real great right now /sarcasm.

Because the big market teams are stacking up but still not winning it every year. Is it coincidence that the World Series ratings for the Yankees win in 2009 was the highest rated series since 2004, when the Red Sox won? And that 2004 series was the highest rated since 1999 when the Yankees last won?

In the last six years, only one team has gone to the WS twice. There is so much parity and there really aren't any "superteams". That isn't good for baseball, just like it wouldn't be good for basketball. NBA business comes down to needing L.A. first, then maybe Boston, and they are looking at a significant drop after that. There have been matchups of a star here and there outside of those two teams and it was generally a ratings disaster. The thing that hasn't really happened is the thriving of another decent market (since Chicago) or several top players assembling and making a run.

Torn on this. Stateside the fundamentals are gone while internationally they remain. IMO the international game is better than the US brand or even College game way better than the NBA game!

Scarlet_Buckeye;679061 wrote:The NBA has a serious problem on its shoulders, and anyone who doesn't see it is either blind or delusional. With players basically circumventing the rules and "teaming up" to play with "friends," the game is losing any sense of competition and purity. What you're going to find is an Association with 3-5 powerhouse teams, and smaller market teams in the Association are going to be shit for luck. And the sad thing is, the NBA has never stood up to its players. Where the NFL owners basically own the players, the NBA owners are basically the players bitches. Its ruining the game, and pretty soon you're going to see the NBA drop from its #2 position in the world of sports to #4, possibly even #5 [if they don't get this thing straightened out].

Its an absolute roadshow with how these buffoons (#6, Wade, and "Raptor" -- and soon to be Anthony and CP-3) are selling out and being such primadonnas.

When you say "#2 position in the world of sports" you mean in the US right?

The general rules and principles should always stay the same. Otherwise, it would become a new game.

The evolution had major jumps (shot clock, three-point line), but generally evolves slowly. But, sometimes a correction needs to be made. The one big 'jump' that I would like to see to increase the flow of games would be the elimination of the fouling team from getting the ball after foul shots (although a second shot is up for grabs, I would change that). There would be very little logic in intentionally fouling anyone if the offense kept the ball after two free shots. It also would greatly speed up the end of a close game where the flow of the game went from basketball to a heated chess match.

As for players in general, it would always happen because humans evolve. We specialize. We train harder, learn what affects us biologically, etc. There's nothing much that can be done for that.

Hb31187;679493 wrote:Doin no worse then the NBA and NFL

Not one of the major sports is even remotely close to the brand equity of the NFL. Not one.

karen lotz;679478 wrote:SMH. One man can dominate baseball? A pitcher dominates AT MOST 20% of the time. Less if you are talking about a closer. I haven't seen too many fat pitchers who run 6.5 40s that throw 110 with nasty movement. Link?

And somehow you turn that into baseball isn't a real sport? Why aren't you in Florida or Arizona right now for Spring Training? Are you in too good of shape? Might be the worst post in OC history.

A very good pitcher can EASILY dominate 60-70% of a game, if not 80%.

While I was exaggerating on the 6.5 40 and throwing 110, what I was getting at is take a look at Roger Clemens... the guy dominated while playing, he is far from what I would consider an "athlete."

I'm not in Florida or Arizona right now for Spring Training because I think the sport is boring as a whole until one's city is in an intense playoff series. Other than that, who wants to sit around for 4 hours standing waiting for a ball to be hit to them?!

Dumb.

I Wear Pants;679705 wrote:When you say "#2 position in the world of sports" you mean in the US right?

Yes, I meant US. Who cares about those hippies in Europe who grandize soccer.

Scarlet_Buckeye;681891 wrote:A very good pitcher can EASILY dominate 60-70% of a game, if not 80%.

While I was exaggerating on the 6.5 40 and throwing 110, what I was getting at is take a look at Roger Clemens... the guy dominated while playing, he is far from what I would consider an "athlete."

I'm not in Florida or Arizona right now for Spring Training because I think the sport is boring as a whole until one's city is in an intense playoff series. Other than that, who wants to sit around for 4 hours standing waiting for a ball to be hit to them?!

Dumb.

His point is a pitcher can't dominate when he only plays 1 out of 5 games (20%).

Scarlet_Buckeye;681895 wrote:Yes, I meant US. Who cares about those hippies in Europe who grandize soccer.

I'm with you on this.

The NBA needs to do something with the regular season, and I think what they need to do is quit putting restrictions that each team is only allowed a certain number of nationally televised games. If the Heat, or Orlando, or Lakers or Boston were on TV every single night, I would watch much more.

As for players teaming it, it's great! As much as people will complain and people won't like it, it will only help the NBA bottom line.

Scarlet_Buckeye;681873 wrote:Not one of the major sports is even remotely close to the brand equity of the NFL. Not one.

You mean the one closing in on a lockout?

Scarlet_Buckeye;681891 wrote:A very good pitcher can EASILY dominate 60-70% of a game, if not 80%.

While I was exaggerating on the 6.5 40 and throwing 110, what I was getting at is take a look at Roger Clemens... the guy dominated while playing, he is far from what I would consider an "athlete."

I'm not in Florida or Arizona right now for Spring Training because I think the sport is boring as a whole until one's city is in an intense playoff series. Other than that, who wants to sit around for 4 hours standing waiting for a ball to be hit to them?!

Dumb.

Ok even if a starting pitcher dominates 80% of a game, you do realize he only pitches 20% of the team's games?

Roger Clemens isn't an athlete? Hmmmmm.

I was wondering why you weren't participating in spring training because of how simple you make it sound. Obviously you are more athletic than everyone that plays baseball.

Again, that was a horrible post. Stick to copy and pasting SEC!

There also must be no athletes in the NFL because they only play half of the game!!!!!!

I used to watch NBA all the time growing up in the 80's, started not to like it in the 90's and it is almost unwatchable to me now. It is at the bottom of sports that I would watch.