This is turning into some weird kind of class thing.
At the end of the day, players can make any and all demands they want. If ownership/management don't want to do it, and it's not in the signed contract, then they don't have to. And if the player doesn't do their job then ownership/management have means available to them to try to remedy the situation via the bargaining agreement.
I can ask my employer to change my manager. They don't have to do it because it's not in my contract, but it's in their interests to do so if I am a valuable employee and it makes me happy. If I decide to use this as leverage to get out of doing my job, and actively start not working in protest, then my employer can fire me or bring me to court.
This really doesn't seem all that different except the numbers and demands are larger.
This is why I think KD is fine but Simmons is an asshole. KD never actually stopped playing, and I seriously doubt he will do that, public posturing to the contrary. If he does, then the Nets can bring it up in a formal action with proof. Simmons, on the other hand, pretty clearly abused the system, and I think the timeline on his back surgery actually makes that even more clear because his back issues were never serious until he reached the point where his back was against the wall (see what I did there?).
Then all of the sudden he starts getting more opinions on what is going on there and finds out that he needs surgery. It indicates to me that he never meaningfully investigated the issue to begin with until he was scrambling to find another reason not to play, at which point an underlying issue that should've been discovered months ago became apparent. We're talking about a multi-millionaire whose physical fitness is his most important resource. There's absolutely no reason he couldn't have gone to specialists the whole time, instead of waiting until the last minute. At least the Kawhi saga had him going to a bunch of different doctors and then having dueling diagnoses.
I wouldn't say it's turning into a weird class thing -- that's a parallel conversation. We're just saying that it's not some "worker solidarity" thing where fans should have class consciousness with the players and support them at all costs in the same way as it is with a "normal labor union". There's a material difference between a teamsters union fighting management for health and childcare, and an NBA player feeling like they should be able to void their contract whenever they want for any reason. I'm good with setting all of that aside, as it's an aside. Ultimately neither side is the same as me -- it's millionaires vs. billionaires. The entire point is that we're a 3rd party -- not NBA player, not owner; fans with our own interests.
So your bolded is where the analogy doesn't work completely, because of the CBA. NBA teams can't just fire you without cause, or fine you without cause.
Players have figured this out. You just show up, and act like an asshole. You don't technically break any rules in the CBA, you show up to practice, but you just act like a complete jerk to everyone, jack up 50 shots in practice, be mean to your teammates and never pass to them. Congrats, you still get paid your entire salary and the team now has a product on the court that is complete garbage. You get flamed on twitter, they have all of their season ticket holders cancel and lose their sponsors, and fans are pissed off because their favorite team is a joke. You go against the spirit of the CBA but not the letter, you win, everyone else loses.
I'm going to side with the players over the owners because I don't give a shit about them and I want to watch the players play.
Oh, you hired three players who are known to have diva behavior and it didn't work out and now everything is broken? Don't care just want to watch basketball.
Nothing wrong with that! There are different kinds of fans.
If you're a fan of the Brooklyn Nets, you're probably pissed off right now. If you're a Warriors fan, lol have fun with your drama rest of the NBA we'll just keep racking up titles over here. If you're a fan of specific players or of superteams or anything like that, sure yeah you don't care. If you're a small market fan and your good players keep requesting trades, you're probably sad. Hell for me it's "do care in general for competitive balance, but lol honestly everything going on with the Nets in particular is amazing and they deserve eachother".
All of that stuff above is just a way of saying "the owners are clearly pissed off with this stuff and the prognosis most people have is that we're in for a really rough round of CBA negotiations" combined with "a lot of fans are also pissed off because the system has screwed up the team they love and they want it changed as well". The NBA is a weird (very fun!) beast with the small amount of incredibly powerful players running the show.
Also players should get 100% of the value their labor creates, just like the arena workers and front office. I would put that at like 90% of revenues, or almost double what they get now. I’ll very aggressively, and to some of y’all annoyingly, I guess, yell for the players and arena workers and everybody else to get theirs until dipshits like Ranadive and Dolan and Dan Gilbert aren’t stealing excess value for themselves.
Not disagreeing with the general thrust of your argument but Simmons was actually hurt and got back surgery this off-season.
The Nets have a team group chat
When his teammates asked if could play in Game 4 vs the Cs, Simmons’s reply was simply to leave the group chat
That's hilarious and a good sign of the trash fire that was the 21-22 Nets.
+2
Options
y2jake215certified Flat Birther theoristthe Last Good Boy onlineRegistered Userregular
Apparently the Celtics KD trade talks have gone:
Nets demand both Jays, get hung up on
Nets change offer to Brown, smart and a bunch of firsts, they are again told to get lost
I wonder which team is leaking this stuff …
They are desperate man. No one wants anything to do with this trade
maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
Apparently the Celtics KD trade talks have gone:
Nets demand both Jays, get hung up on
Nets change offer to Brown, smart and a bunch of firsts, they are again told to get lost
I wonder which team is leaking this stuff …
They are desperate man. No one wants anything to do with this trade
The only team that can afford KD on their roster and still have enough around him to be “win now” is the Nets
He's stuck in a weird spot trade wise because he's both too old and too good. He's good enough that the nets rightfully want a haul for him but too old for any contender to trust his window to stay open while they restock
Apparently the Celtics KD trade talks have gone:
Nets demand both Jays, get hung up on
Nets change offer to Brown, smart and a bunch of firsts, they are again told to get lost
I wonder which team is leaking this stuff …
They are desperate man. No one wants anything to do with this trade
The only team that can afford KD on their roster and still have enough around him to be “win now” is the Nets
Arguably the Warriors could as well, but they just won without him and I don't think he'd want to go back even after seeing how bad it can be on other teams.
Apparently the Celtics KD trade talks have gone:
Nets demand both Jays, get hung up on
Nets change offer to Brown, smart and a bunch of firsts, they are again told to get lost
I wonder which team is leaking this stuff …
They are desperate man. No one wants anything to do with this trade
The only team that can afford KD on their roster and still have enough around him to be “win now” is the Nets
Arguably the Warriors could as well, but they just won without him and I don't think he'd want to go back even after seeing how bad it can be on other teams.
Still think the Nets would demand too much to get him. But he does fit there better than pretty much anywhere else, despite their history (lol).
Also players should get 100% of the value their labor creates, just like the arena workers and front office. I would put that at like 90% of revenues, or almost double what they get now. I’ll very aggressively, and to some of y’all annoyingly, I guess, yell for the players and arena workers and everybody else to get theirs until dipshits like Ranadive and Dolan and Dan Gilbert aren’t stealing excess value for themselves.
I feel like your pov here is a little muddled with a bit of socialist/anti-capitalist thinking but is using the capitalist construction of markets and leverage for the determination of value. So, what i mean is, there is no possible way in which basketball players can be said to generate like $100M per year in value (your 90% idea) that isnt reliant on a nonsensical market based construction of value. Like, if Steph Curry is alone in a gym playing ball, he doesnt generate $100M dollars, does he? In fact, he prob generates almost nothing.
Where does all that other value come from? Arena workers, broadcast people, marketers, merch sellers, front office janitors, etc. etc. etc. Players are already getting way more value than they generate, owners of course generate almost no value, and its all of the infrastructure, support, sales, and everything else that makes it possible to generate any value from Lebron's rare and impressive talent. So, yeah, Lebron, Steph, KD, and the like are valuable, but nothing like the 90% you are saying, imo.
Fair, I don’t know the actual math, but I was being purposefully exaggerated to highlight that the problem isn’t the absolute amount getting paid to players, it’s the percent that ownership steals for themselves, especially given that sports franchise owners don’t actually really own anything here
Fair, I don’t know the actual math, but I was being purposefully exaggerated to highlight that the problem isn’t the absolute amount getting paid to players, it’s the percent that ownership steals for themselves, especially given that sports franchise owners don’t actually really own anything here
Yeah, agreed there.
The reason that i like to point out that we don't need class solidarity with players is, in the end, because these discussions like to frame everything as a 2-sided players vs owners battle, so it gets framed as a traditional labor dispute and people feel compelled to side with the players. However, there are actually (at least) 3 sides, with the fans/consumers actually being stakeholders.
We don't have a lot of bargaining power, but what little we do have we don't have to expend supporting players to the detriment of our interests. If what we want, is to watch good games, have fair ish play, root for teams with relative continuity, etc., a lot of what the top players are doing this against that. To want them to no longer do so doesnt necessitate siding with the bloodsucking ownership class either.
Fair, I don’t know the actual math, but I was being purposefully exaggerated to highlight that the problem isn’t the absolute amount getting paid to players, it’s the percent that ownership steals for themselves, especially given that sports franchise owners don’t actually really own anything here
Yeah, agreed there.
The reason that i like to point out that we don't need class solidarity with players is, in the end, because these discussions like to frame everything as a 2-sided players vs owners battle, so it gets framed as a traditional labor dispute and people feel compelled to side with the players. However, there are actually (at least) 3 sides, with the fans/consumers actually being stakeholders.
We don't have a lot of bargaining power, but what little we do have we don't have to expend supporting players to the detriment of our interests. If what we want, is to watch good games, have fair ish play, root for teams with relative continuity, etc., a lot of what the top players are doing this against that. To want them to no longer do so doesnt necessitate siding with the bloodsucking ownership class either.
I’ve watched the game less and less over the last 15 years for a number of reasons, and a big one is that I don’t find the games compelling until the playoffs. The proliferation of iso ball and rest days and tanking just kinda kills my interest.
Having said that I still pick the players over the owners basically every time - it’s just that a tiny fraction of the players are hurting my interest in the sport. No big deal for me individually, I don’t have much time these days, but that could be a problem if there are a lot of people like me.
I don't know if I agree. When the Warriors and Suns were both on their early hot streaks and met in November, that was one of the best games I have watched in years. Injuries and load management stink but the league is also loaded with talent so there's always someone worth watching every night.
Also, I'll tune into TNT for Chuck and Kenny alone. The production team there has done an incredible job keeping their segments fresh and fun.
I don't know if I agree. When the Warriors and Suns were both on their early hot streaks and met in November, that was one of the best games I have watched in years. Injuries and load management stink but the league is also loaded with talent so there's always someone worth watching every night.
Also, I'll tune into TNT for Chuck and Kenny alone. The production team there has done an incredible job keeping their segments fresh and fun.
Double agree. Load management etc. does suck but watching NBA games is great, especially if your team (the Warriors) has been consistently good. Now if you're watching the Kings regular season...that may be rough. As long as a team can provide SOME entertainment, I like it. Even some of the bad Warriors teams were fun to watch (but that 2019-2020 team I was getting to my breaking point).
I don't know if I agree. When the Warriors and Suns were both on their early hot streaks and met in November, that was one of the best games I have watched in years. Injuries and load management stink but the league is also loaded with talent so there's always someone worth watching every night.
Also, I'll tune into TNT for Chuck and Kenny alone. The production team there has done an incredible job keeping their segments fresh and fun.
I honestly have a hard time seeing the appeal of the TNT guys. They are just so lazy about how they follow the league and develop opinions, just trotting out the same tired ass takes and arguments every night. Chuck can barely stay awake for the West Coast games. I just find them not very thoughtful, and Chuck in particular is a bit of an asshole.
+1
Options
Inquisitor772 x Penny Arcade Fight Club ChampionA fixed point in space and timeRegistered Userregular
A few thoughts after watching this:
1. The slapping away the defender's hands thing, I've always been surprised that it wasn't an offensive foul (and it happens on pretty much every drive).
2. I've never understood why bumping into a defender on a drive was a defensive foul. You can clearly see the driver purposefully bumps into the defender and gets the call. It either should be a no-call or offensive foul, in my opinion.
3. With some of the rule changes (like the pump-fake, jump-in), I believe free throws are down. Like Harden has gone from over 10 a game average to 8ish.
4. The constant moving screens is egregious, I'm really surprised when they are called. Rick Barry even had an amusing rant about all screens these days are moving screens.
3ds: 4983-4935-4575
+1
Options
Inquisitor772 x Penny Arcade Fight Club ChampionA fixed point in space and timeRegistered Userregular
It is really interesting to see the actual film comparison. I think people tend to discount old timers ranting about the rule changes as "old man yells at sky" moments, but when you see just how much those differences change the game, it's hard to deny that they have a point.
Now, whether those functional differences translate into effective differences is a separate question, but I feel like a pretty strong argument can be made that everyone who isn't All-Star caliber or above would likely see a change in their playing time or role, and those at the bottom end would likely be replaced with others who better-fill the particular niches of the time. For example, there's an entire generation of big men who owe Shaq (and the rules during that time) a lot of money, because they very clearly would not be on an NBA roster today.
I don't know if I agree. When the Warriors and Suns were both on their early hot streaks and met in November, that was one of the best games I have watched in years. Injuries and load management stink but the league is also loaded with talent so there's always someone worth watching every night.
Also, I'll tune into TNT for Chuck and Kenny alone. The production team there has done an incredible job keeping their segments fresh and fun.
I should’ve clarified- I love basketball as a sport, so watching even pre-season is enjoyable
By “trash” I really meant way devalued, as the post season includes 18 teams, lasts 2.5 months, and the top players are so focused on rings, they view the regular season as a tune up and roster tinkering season as prep for the real season
+1
Options
ButtersA glass of some milksRegistered Userregular
I have many posts decrying the devaluation of the regular season myself.
moving screens is the one thing i wish was actually called because it's just so aggravating watching guys move halfway across the court while "screening" but if you run into them or get stuck between the ball handler and the guy who's moving the screen to be right next to the ball handler it's going to be a defensive foul.
+7
Options
ButtersA glass of some milksRegistered Userregular
moving screens is the one thing i wish was actually called because it's just so aggravating watching guys move halfway across the court while "screening" but if you run into them or get stuck between the ball handler and the guy who's moving the screen to be right next to the ball handler it's going to be a defensive foul.
Yeah and in 2015-2016 they looked like they were going to enforce the rules more with a bunch of teams complaining about the Warriors, but it didn't last and now everyone is doing it. Its become the NBA equivalent of "can't call pass interference on every play" problem the NFL has dealt with.
Inquisitor772 x Penny Arcade Fight Club ChampionA fixed point in space and timeRegistered Userregular
I challenge anyone who thinks the Warriors had a monopoly on moving screens during their earlier championship runs to coherently define what a moving screen actually is, and why the Warriors were particularly egregious in comparison to plenty of other players and teams in the league since, oh, the early 2000's. I have a feeling that what people think a moving screen is, is not the same thing as what it actually is, similar to how people think traveling means "more than two steps with the ball".
And even if it were true, I'd care more about that particular problem if teams didn't literally hold down Steph Curry and Klay Thompson while they are off-ball.
I do think moving and illegal screens are problems, but I'd prioritize them far below things like offensive foul-baiting and flopping, which are inherently anti-competitive and ruin the entertainment value of the game.
I actually didn't get from the Thinking Basketball video that they thought basketball was tougher back in the day. They actually mentioned how bball had barely any physicality until the 80s, where they penalized harsh fouls less severely, but the general play to play action wasn't out of place today. There is also quite a bit of contact now, but it tends to be created often by the offensive players.
The overall takeaway for me was not that players these days are soft and players back in the day were tough, its more that the game has favored offensive players creating contact over time, because it used to be differently balanced (i.e., the player who creates contact gets the foul called on them), and now the offensive is encouraged to constantly create contact, as it will usually be called against the defensive. Kind of like the unwritten rule today that no offensive contact can be a foul unless the defense falls down.
There was also the anomalous point of the grab and hold 90s and early 2000s. You know, the time period where everyone thought the NBA outside Jordan sucked and would soon be obsolete without him. For anyone who wants to go back to 72-76 playoff games based around giant stiffs banging into each other down low, those were your golden years.
0
Options
Inquisitor772 x Penny Arcade Fight Club ChampionA fixed point in space and timeRegistered Userregular
I actually didn't get from the Thinking Basketball video that they thought basketball was tougher back in the day. They actually mentioned how bball had barely any physicality until the 80s, where they penalized harsh fouls less severely, but the general play to play action wasn't out of place today. There is also quite a bit of contact now, but it tends to be created often by the offensive players.
The overall takeaway for me was not that players these days are soft and players back in the day were tough, its more that the game has favored offensive players creating contact over time, because it used to be differently balanced (i.e., the player who creates contact gets the foul called on them), and now the offensive is encouraged to constantly create contact, as it will usually be called against the defensive. Kind of like the unwritten rule today that no offensive contact can be a foul unless the defense falls down.
There was also the anomalous point of the grab and hold 90s and early 2000s. You know, the time period where everyone thought the NBA outside Jordan sucked and would soon be obsolete without him. For anyone who wants to go back to 72-76 playoff games based around giant stiffs banging into each other down low, those were your golden years.
Yeah I thought it was interesting because people think "toughness" just means extra physicality across the board, but usually leaning towards the defense. As in, "Harden would get mauled if he tried to shoot the way he does today." Which may I guess kind of be true in that maybe players would be more willing to just outright hard foul him (i.e., if I'm gonna get called I'm gonna get my money's worth). But it's also true that in the past players had to be far more careful about where they could throw their bodies around on both ends of the floor. You couldn't just violate someone's space and expect to not get a foul called. So in a weird sense, at least on offense, players are more physical in today's NBA because they play much more like running backs on the line of scrimmage than quarterbacks trying to nail a slant route. Defense is kind of a mixed bag, but I feel like people conflate players' willingness to punch each other with actual defensive play on the floor. It's pretty clear that you can do things on defense today that would be an instant whistle in the past, such as hugging other players or mauling them off the ball or even just putting a forearm on someone's hip.
0
Options
BlackDragon480Bluster KerfuffleMaster of Windy ImportRegistered Userregular
I actually didn't get from the Thinking Basketball video that they thought basketball was tougher back in the day. They actually mentioned how bball had barely any physicality until the 80s, where they penalized harsh fouls less severely, but the general play to play action wasn't out of place today. There is also quite a bit of contact now, but it tends to be created often by the offensive players.
The overall takeaway for me was not that players these days are soft and players back in the day were tough, its more that the game has favored offensive players creating contact over time, because it used to be differently balanced (i.e., the player who creates contact gets the foul called on them), and now the offensive is encouraged to constantly create contact, as it will usually be called against the defensive. Kind of like the unwritten rule today that no offensive contact can be a foul unless the defense falls down.
There was also the anomalous point of the grab and hold 90s and early 2000s. You know, the time period where everyone thought the NBA outside Jordan sucked and would soon be obsolete without him. For anyone who wants to go back to 72-76 playoff games based around giant stiffs banging into each other down low, those were your golden years.
Yeah I thought it was interesting because people think "toughness" just means extra physicality across the board, but usually leaning towards the defense. As in, "Harden would get mauled if he tried to shoot the way he does today." Which may I guess kind of be true in that maybe players would be more willing to just outright hard foul him (i.e., if I'm gonna get called I'm gonna get my money's worth). But it's also true that in the past players had to be far more careful about where they could throw their bodies around on both ends of the floor. You couldn't just violate someone's space and expect to not get a foul called. So in a weird sense, at least on offense, players are more physical in today's NBA because they play much more like running backs on the line of scrimmage than quarterbacks trying to nail a slant route. Defense is kind of a mixed bag, but I feel like people conflate players' willingness to punch each other with actual defensive play on the floor. It's pretty clear that you can do things on defense today that would be an instant whistle in the past, such as hugging other players or mauling them off the ball or even just putting a forearm on someone's hip.
Yeah, I agree with pretty much everything you said. One aspect of toughness that also is often overlooked, is the "mental toughness" to just always be on that defense requires now. Like, I look at NBA classic games from time to time, and to my eyes, basketball looks harder to play today than at any time in the past. While there are stand in the corner artists, even the defense on those guys requires a lot of crashing in, and running out, bumping various cutters running around, and just in general a huge level of hyperawareness.
I wish I could see data on this, but my guess is that the total miles covered by players in a game is higher now than at any point in the past. Anyone who has played pickup knows that there is a type of toughness to be willing to spring up the court on the break, and sprint back on defense, play after play after play. Even in the fast paced 80s though, there was just a lot of standing around on offense, as the defense just overall kind of gave more space, and 1:1 play was more viable (with zone defenses not being allowed), and teams weren't running so many actions to get to those high value spots on the court.
+2
Options
Inquisitor772 x Penny Arcade Fight Club ChampionA fixed point in space and timeRegistered Userregular
Oh yeah players are for sure running around a lot more, especially in the more recent years. And they for sure have to pay attention a lot more even if they don't have the ball or aren't guarding the primary ball-handler. Then they have to make sure they somehow don't breathe on the guy dribbling the ball or they'll get called for a foul.
You know, I really wouldn't mind if they just made all moving screens illegal in a blanket, easy-to-enforce way: "A legal screen is one where a player has both feet planted on the floor for at least 1 second prior to significant physical contact with an opposing player. The screening player must have both hands clasped in front of them."
This would cut down on a lot of the moving and just-plain-illegal screens that we see today where players are putting kimuras and arm bars on each other while running around while still allowing much of the play action we see today.
1 second seems a little long given the pace the game is played at today
one thing they really should crack down on though is arguing foul calls
they should take a page out of baseball's book with the way they do balls and strikes and basically lower the bar for issuing techs for arguing fouls
right or wrong, no one likes to see that shit, if the officiating gets really egregious there should be a way of litigating that post game but during a game, there should be no tolerance for fucking with the refs
1 second seems a little long given the pace the game is played at today
one thing they really should crack down on though is arguing foul calls
they should take a page out of baseball's book with the way they do balls and strikes and basically lower the bar for issuing techs for arguing fouls
right or wrong, no one likes to see that shit, if the officiating gets really egregious there should be a way of litigating that post game but during a game, there should be no tolerance for fucking with the refs
Arguing with officials doesn't slow the game down because its done during the free throw process its just they like to focus on Lebron arguing with the ref than rando pg's free throw process.
it's not just lebron, its pretty darn pervasive throughout the league and i feel its gotten worse as players realize they have long ropes regarding it
sometimes to the point of not getting back on the other side of the floor cause they're busy litigating the last play
Luka is notorious for this
AAAAA!!! PLAAAYGUUU!!!!
+1
Options
RingoHe/Hima distinct lack of substanceRegistered Userregular
I'm pretty sure it's generally felt by players and coaches in all levels of (American?) basketball that if you're not working the refs you're handicapping your team
It doesn't help that rules go unenforced and refereeing isn't a full time job with performance metrics or even regular training
it's not just lebron, its pretty darn pervasive throughout the league and i feel its gotten worse as players realize they have long ropes regarding it
sometimes to the point of not getting back on the other side of the floor cause they're busy litigating the last play
Luka is notorious for this
Lebron was a stand in for any star player. Players are always going to argue with refs and NBA refs are pretty biased and shitty so I can't really blame the players.
Plus if they complain after the game the NBA still fines them.
Inquisitor772 x Penny Arcade Fight Club ChampionA fixed point in space and timeRegistered Userregular
I'd be OK if they made it such that players can't argue with refs, but I'm not sure that would actually be a meaningful improvement to the quality of officiating or the entertainment value of the game.
Posts
Nothing wrong with that! There are different kinds of fans.
If you're a fan of the Brooklyn Nets, you're probably pissed off right now. If you're a Warriors fan, lol have fun with your drama rest of the NBA we'll just keep racking up titles over here. If you're a fan of specific players or of superteams or anything like that, sure yeah you don't care. If you're a small market fan and your good players keep requesting trades, you're probably sad. Hell for me it's "do care in general for competitive balance, but lol honestly everything going on with the Nets in particular is amazing and they deserve eachother".
All of that stuff above is just a way of saying "the owners are clearly pissed off with this stuff and the prognosis most people have is that we're in for a really rough round of CBA negotiations" combined with "a lot of fans are also pissed off because the system has screwed up the team they love and they want it changed as well". The NBA is a weird (very fun!) beast with the small amount of incredibly powerful players running the show.
The Nets have a team group chat
When his teammates asked if could play in Game 4 vs the Cs, Simmons’s reply was simply to leave the group chat
Wait this wasn't just a funny metaphor? It literally happened?
That's hilarious.
That's hilarious and a good sign of the trash fire that was the 21-22 Nets.
Nets demand both Jays, get hung up on
Nets change offer to Brown, smart and a bunch of firsts, they are again told to get lost
I wonder which team is leaking this stuff …
They are desperate man. No one wants anything to do with this trade
maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
Being reported as true, I’m sure all the players will deny it until their next appearance on Dray’s podcast
The only team that can afford KD on their roster and still have enough around him to be “win now” is the Nets
Arguably the Warriors could as well, but they just won without him and I don't think he'd want to go back even after seeing how bad it can be on other teams.
{Twitter, Everybody's doing it. }{Writing and Story Blog}
Still think the Nets would demand too much to get him. But he does fit there better than pretty much anywhere else, despite their history (lol).
I feel like your pov here is a little muddled with a bit of socialist/anti-capitalist thinking but is using the capitalist construction of markets and leverage for the determination of value. So, what i mean is, there is no possible way in which basketball players can be said to generate like $100M per year in value (your 90% idea) that isnt reliant on a nonsensical market based construction of value. Like, if Steph Curry is alone in a gym playing ball, he doesnt generate $100M dollars, does he? In fact, he prob generates almost nothing.
Where does all that other value come from? Arena workers, broadcast people, marketers, merch sellers, front office janitors, etc. etc. etc. Players are already getting way more value than they generate, owners of course generate almost no value, and its all of the infrastructure, support, sales, and everything else that makes it possible to generate any value from Lebron's rare and impressive talent. So, yeah, Lebron, Steph, KD, and the like are valuable, but nothing like the 90% you are saying, imo.
Yeah, agreed there.
The reason that i like to point out that we don't need class solidarity with players is, in the end, because these discussions like to frame everything as a 2-sided players vs owners battle, so it gets framed as a traditional labor dispute and people feel compelled to side with the players. However, there are actually (at least) 3 sides, with the fans/consumers actually being stakeholders.
We don't have a lot of bargaining power, but what little we do have we don't have to expend supporting players to the detriment of our interests. If what we want, is to watch good games, have fair ish play, root for teams with relative continuity, etc., a lot of what the top players are doing this against that. To want them to no longer do so doesnt necessitate siding with the bloodsucking ownership class either.
I’ve watched the game less and less over the last 15 years for a number of reasons, and a big one is that I don’t find the games compelling until the playoffs. The proliferation of iso ball and rest days and tanking just kinda kills my interest.
Having said that I still pick the players over the owners basically every time - it’s just that a tiny fraction of the players are hurting my interest in the sport. No big deal for me individually, I don’t have much time these days, but that could be a problem if there are a lot of people like me.
But the regular season is awful, yeah
I don't know if I agree. When the Warriors and Suns were both on their early hot streaks and met in November, that was one of the best games I have watched in years. Injuries and load management stink but the league is also loaded with talent so there's always someone worth watching every night.
Also, I'll tune into TNT for Chuck and Kenny alone. The production team there has done an incredible job keeping their segments fresh and fun.
Double agree. Load management etc. does suck but watching NBA games is great, especially if your team (the Warriors) has been consistently good. Now if you're watching the Kings regular season...that may be rough. As long as a team can provide SOME entertainment, I like it. Even some of the bad Warriors teams were fun to watch (but that 2019-2020 team I was getting to my breaking point).
I honestly have a hard time seeing the appeal of the TNT guys. They are just so lazy about how they follow the league and develop opinions, just trotting out the same tired ass takes and arguments every night. Chuck can barely stay awake for the West Coast games. I just find them not very thoughtful, and Chuck in particular is a bit of an asshole.
A few thoughts after watching this:
1. The slapping away the defender's hands thing, I've always been surprised that it wasn't an offensive foul (and it happens on pretty much every drive).
2. I've never understood why bumping into a defender on a drive was a defensive foul. You can clearly see the driver purposefully bumps into the defender and gets the call. It either should be a no-call or offensive foul, in my opinion.
3. With some of the rule changes (like the pump-fake, jump-in), I believe free throws are down. Like Harden has gone from over 10 a game average to 8ish.
4. The constant moving screens is egregious, I'm really surprised when they are called. Rick Barry even had an amusing rant about all screens these days are moving screens.
Now, whether those functional differences translate into effective differences is a separate question, but I feel like a pretty strong argument can be made that everyone who isn't All-Star caliber or above would likely see a change in their playing time or role, and those at the bottom end would likely be replaced with others who better-fill the particular niches of the time. For example, there's an entire generation of big men who owe Shaq (and the rules during that time) a lot of money, because they very clearly would not be on an NBA roster today.
I should’ve clarified- I love basketball as a sport, so watching even pre-season is enjoyable
By “trash” I really meant way devalued, as the post season includes 18 teams, lasts 2.5 months, and the top players are so focused on rings, they view the regular season as a tune up and roster tinkering season as prep for the real season
Yeah and in 2015-2016 they looked like they were going to enforce the rules more with a bunch of teams complaining about the Warriors, but it didn't last and now everyone is doing it. Its become the NBA equivalent of "can't call pass interference on every play" problem the NFL has dealt with.
And even if it were true, I'd care more about that particular problem if teams didn't literally hold down Steph Curry and Klay Thompson while they are off-ball.
I do think moving and illegal screens are problems, but I'd prioritize them far below things like offensive foul-baiting and flopping, which are inherently anti-competitive and ruin the entertainment value of the game.
The overall takeaway for me was not that players these days are soft and players back in the day were tough, its more that the game has favored offensive players creating contact over time, because it used to be differently balanced (i.e., the player who creates contact gets the foul called on them), and now the offensive is encouraged to constantly create contact, as it will usually be called against the defensive. Kind of like the unwritten rule today that no offensive contact can be a foul unless the defense falls down.
There was also the anomalous point of the grab and hold 90s and early 2000s. You know, the time period where everyone thought the NBA outside Jordan sucked and would soon be obsolete without him. For anyone who wants to go back to 72-76 playoff games based around giant stiffs banging into each other down low, those were your golden years.
Yeah I thought it was interesting because people think "toughness" just means extra physicality across the board, but usually leaning towards the defense. As in, "Harden would get mauled if he tried to shoot the way he does today." Which may I guess kind of be true in that maybe players would be more willing to just outright hard foul him (i.e., if I'm gonna get called I'm gonna get my money's worth). But it's also true that in the past players had to be far more careful about where they could throw their bodies around on both ends of the floor. You couldn't just violate someone's space and expect to not get a foul called. So in a weird sense, at least on offense, players are more physical in today's NBA because they play much more like running backs on the line of scrimmage than quarterbacks trying to nail a slant route. Defense is kind of a mixed bag, but I feel like people conflate players' willingness to punch each other with actual defensive play on the floor. It's pretty clear that you can do things on defense today that would be an instant whistle in the past, such as hugging other players or mauling them off the ball or even just putting a forearm on someone's hip.
Bruce Bowen did his fair share, as well.
~ Buckaroo Banzai
Yeah, I agree with pretty much everything you said. One aspect of toughness that also is often overlooked, is the "mental toughness" to just always be on that defense requires now. Like, I look at NBA classic games from time to time, and to my eyes, basketball looks harder to play today than at any time in the past. While there are stand in the corner artists, even the defense on those guys requires a lot of crashing in, and running out, bumping various cutters running around, and just in general a huge level of hyperawareness.
I wish I could see data on this, but my guess is that the total miles covered by players in a game is higher now than at any point in the past. Anyone who has played pickup knows that there is a type of toughness to be willing to spring up the court on the break, and sprint back on defense, play after play after play. Even in the fast paced 80s though, there was just a lot of standing around on offense, as the defense just overall kind of gave more space, and 1:1 play was more viable (with zone defenses not being allowed), and teams weren't running so many actions to get to those high value spots on the court.
You know, I really wouldn't mind if they just made all moving screens illegal in a blanket, easy-to-enforce way: "A legal screen is one where a player has both feet planted on the floor for at least 1 second prior to significant physical contact with an opposing player. The screening player must have both hands clasped in front of them."
This would cut down on a lot of the moving and just-plain-illegal screens that we see today where players are putting kimuras and arm bars on each other while running around while still allowing much of the play action we see today.
one thing they really should crack down on though is arguing foul calls
they should take a page out of baseball's book with the way they do balls and strikes and basically lower the bar for issuing techs for arguing fouls
right or wrong, no one likes to see that shit, if the officiating gets really egregious there should be a way of litigating that post game but during a game, there should be no tolerance for fucking with the refs
Arguing with officials doesn't slow the game down because its done during the free throw process its just they like to focus on Lebron arguing with the ref than rando pg's free throw process.
{Twitter, Everybody's doing it. }{Writing and Story Blog}
sometimes to the point of not getting back on the other side of the floor cause they're busy litigating the last play
Luka is notorious for this
It doesn't help that rules go unenforced and refereeing isn't a full time job with performance metrics or even regular training
Lebron was a stand in for any star player. Players are always going to argue with refs and NBA refs are pretty biased and shitty so I can't really blame the players.
Plus if they complain after the game the NBA still fines them.
{Twitter, Everybody's doing it. }{Writing and Story Blog}