PDA

View Full Version : Have analytics killed the NBA's entertainment value?



barreleffact
03-31-2014, 12:30 AM
Analytics have made the game more efficient. The corner three is frequently utilized. Long twos are eradicated. Dunks, threes, and freethrows are all that remain. Team ball movement is preferred to PG heavy control. The basketball world is better than ever as far as efficiency regardless of the talent being dilute to many.

While it is easy to love the level of skill in the game when you see a LBJ or KD, it is also incredibly difficult to watch a full 48 min ball game. I used to love watching games growing up, and now it seems I watch the first quarter and see how the game is progressing, pieces of the second or third and about half of the fourth if the game is close enough. Of course I watch the highlights later and all the ESPN commentary.

IMO the game lacks flash like it used to have. There are no more stars with charisma. Is this because the personalities and lack of sales potential? I highly doubt it due to the marketability of the league. I honestly feel it is in part because of the strategy changes due to analytics. The players we remember most for their play get bad names for their heroics and selfishness. The Kobe's and AI's, the last real showmen that understood the NBA is about entertainment and fun as much as it is about winning. We used to see players go one on five and somehow score, albeit less efficiently and with more losses than wins, but those wins stuck in our minds and the losses were forgiven. We saw heart, desire, passion, real players and not machines. Now, the entertainment is all but dead in the NBA. Never again will we see the hero.

Is the NBA as exciting to you as it once was? If it is less exciting, is it because we just grew up? What is the cause in your opinion? How can the NBA become more entertaining?

tredigs
03-31-2014, 01:24 AM
It's kind of an interesting question.

I'd have to ask you, would you rather your favorite team play more like the Knicks than the Spurs, results included?

Jeffy25
03-31-2014, 01:24 AM
Are you asking if a more efficient game isn't as entertaining or something?

abe_froman
03-31-2014, 01:34 AM
how so?

i think you're just getting old or something,there's just as many stars and just as much flash as always

Chronz
03-31-2014, 01:37 AM
Are you asking if a more efficient game isn't as entertaining or something?

The point he is making is that he misses the creativity of hero ball, that teams becoming more efficient has made them more calculating and thus, less interesting. Which is odd because casual fans love dunks and 3's, at least thats the popular thought anyways, but for die hards, I do miss post play, I miss teams not being able to load up on star players too tho, yet at the same time, I dont miss stagnant offenses, the league and its players adapt to the rule changes regardless. Either way, stats are not to blame, its the skillset with the players involved.

For one, Kobe was plenty efficient and has led some powerful offenses with him hoisting away, so its not like a youngster growing up couldn't play the way Kobe has and be just as successful today, the reason we dont see another star like that is because its damn hard to attain that combination of talent+skill

Jeffy25
03-31-2014, 01:39 AM
To me, flash was never entertaining. I like the progressed style much more. But I imagine I'm in the minority

abe_froman
03-31-2014, 01:54 AM
I do miss post play
now this i agree with

jerellh528
03-31-2014, 02:17 AM
This whole boring nba seems to be a big problem as of late on psd and in the media.

Bostonjorge
03-31-2014, 02:40 AM
It's kind of an interesting question.

I'd have to ask you, would you rather your favorite team play more like the Knicks than the Spurs, results included?

Spurs is the correct answer but they are really boring to watch even in all those finals games. As for the Knicks when the had mike d'antoni and Lynn for that run was pretty awesome or when they had Nate Robinson going off.

Also the warriors team that beat Dallas was coo to watch.

C Al Harrington
PF Captain Jack
SF Richardson
SG Ellis
PG Davis

amos1er
03-31-2014, 02:56 AM
The point he is making is that he misses the creativity of hero ball, that teams becoming more efficient has made them more calculating and thus, less interesting. Which is odd because casual fans love dunks and 3's, at least thats the popular thought anyways, but for die hards, I do miss post play, I miss teams not being able to load up on star players too tho, yet at the same time, I dont miss stagnant offenses, the league and its players adapt to the rule changes regardless. Either way, stats are not to blame, its the skillset with the players involved.

For one, Kobe was plenty efficient and has led some powerful offenses with him hoisting away, so its not like a youngster growing up couldn't play the way Kobe has and be just as successful today, the reason we dont see another star like that is because its damn hard to attain that combination of talent+skill

Wow! Nice post Chronz.

amos1er
03-31-2014, 03:04 AM
The NBA is losing out on a lot without Kobe Bryant. Don't know any player that is nearly as electrifying to watch in this current era. In the 80's we had Magic, Bird, Showtime and the Lakers/Celtics rivalry. In the 90's we had Jordan... nuff said. Then in the 2000's, we had Shaq/Kobe, then Kobe. Quite a golden age of basketball from an entertainment standpoint if you ask me. A very tough act to follow. Durant is the only one I can think of that has a chance to make it into that echelon of players. Watchability factor is what I am referring to of course. There have been many great players who have been awesome to watch from a technical standpoint as well such as Duncan, KG, Nash, Dirk, and CP3.

ThuglifeJ
03-31-2014, 03:13 AM
The problem is these analytics aren't always right to use.. if they were wed want to just shoot all corner 3s since they are best ts% right?.. like many have stated, there's too many variables and factors. Way to many.
I know that's not the thread but just throwing that out there.

Say you have a prime JKidd..his best and most comfortable skill is to work his way inside and feed his cutting Big. So **** what analytics say, stick to what you're good at and beat your opponent..make all the hustle plays, out rebound your opponent, intimidate them if you can.

I'd rather have Kidd run my offense and everyone play off eachother versus some analytic advanced stats garbage system

OKC
03-31-2014, 07:44 AM
I don't see how you think "heart, desire, passion" are qualities that go with entertainment and not with winning.

torocan
03-31-2014, 07:45 AM
Analytics didn't kill variety in the NBA. Rule changes to favor the offense have killed variety in the NBA.

Reinstate hand checking and the 3 point statistical advantage declines dramatically. Drives to the rim become significantly harder.

Remove the 3s defensive rule and the value of great post up and rim defense goes way up.

Reinstate 2 hands on the opponent and you'll see more variety in offenses and more use of sets to break players free, AND more creativity on the part of the "isolation" players.

The rise of the 3 and lay up game isn't the fault of analytics. The rise of the 3 and lay up game is because they made it TOO EASY to score them by taking away the tools of defense.

When a post up player can't even back down an opponent without getting an offensive foul, when even a light brush on a jump shooter is a foul, when points are being given to the other team on ticky tack fouls due to a fear of contact, THAT's when it became obvious that driving and 3 pointers were the *easiest* way to put points on the board.

Even just bringing back hand checking would *dramatically* change the game. And for the better in my opinion.

koreancabbage
03-31-2014, 09:48 AM
rule changes. end of story.

Guppyfighter
03-31-2014, 10:15 AM
The problem is these analytics aren't always right to use.. if they were wed want to just shoot all corner 3s since they are best ts% right?.. like many have stated, there's too many variables and factors. Way to many.
I know that's not the thread but just throwing that out there.

Say you have a prime JKidd..his best and most comfortable skill is to work his way inside and feed his cutting Big. So **** what analytics say, stick to what you're good at and beat your opponent..make all the hustle plays, out rebound your opponent, intimidate them if you can.

I'd rather have Kidd run my offense and everyone play off eachother versus some analytic advanced stats garbage system


This is the post where we find out "ThuglifeJ" is actually pretty uneducated. What a shocker.

Quinnsanity
03-31-2014, 10:31 AM
The problem is these analytics aren't always right to use.. if they were wed want to just shoot all corner 3s since they are best ts% right?.. like many have stated, there's too many variables and factors. Way to many.
I know that's not the thread but just throwing that out there.

Say you have a prime JKidd..his best and most comfortable skill is to work his way inside and feed his cutting Big. So **** what analytics say, stick to what you're good at and beat your opponent..make all the hustle plays, out rebound your opponent, intimidate them if you can.

I'd rather have Kidd run my offense and everyone play off eachother versus some analytic advanced stats garbage system

I've always said that analytics are about maximizing the talent you have on the floor. Yes, corner threes have become popular because they yield more points per attempt than other shots, but obviously if every shot was a corner three defenses would adjust to that and they would lose their effectiveness. Ideally, you want to have a nice mix of interior shots, 3's and a few mid-range jumpers to keep defenses honest. You can't just pick one or else defenses will adjust. The team that has done the best job of this IMO is the Clippers. They've always targeted guys that are great shooters from the specific spots that Chris Paul likes to pass to. That maximizes their return on the 3 point shots they're going to take. If you have a guy like Kidd, maximizing his talents is going to be a different animal than maximizing CP3's. If you run both teams the same way, you just end up fitting a square peg into a round hole. It's not efficient.

What people don't seem to realize is that analytics are neither all-encompassing nor are they the same for every situation. Take a look at Miami and Indiana. Miami realized midway through Year 2 with LeBron that they would be maximizing their talent by playing without a traditional center or point guard. Indiana, on the other hand, knows that their talent is best utilized through a very traditional lineup and offense, as opposed to Miami that runs entirely through their power forward and focuses mainly on long-distance shots. Different approaches for different teams, both have proven to be correct. Analytics aren't about saying "do X, Y and Z and you'll win the basketball game," they're about maximizing the talent you have on the floor by putting your players in the best positions to succeed, which obviously is going to be different by team.

If you guys want to know where this is all heading, just look at baseball. Billy Beane built his first few Moneyball teams (aside from the great starting pitching) around on base percentage. At the time, that typically meant ignoring defense. Oakland loved the Scott Hatteberg's and Jeremy Giambi's of the world because they were undervalued, but the minute the rest of the league caught on, the smart teams starting switching towards defense. Why? Because OBP had become so overvalued that defense was suddenly available for less than it was actually worth. We're going to see something similar in basketball. Eventually, teams are going to become so focused on 3's and layups/dunks that defenses are going to ignore mid-range jumpers entirely. That is going to make mid-range jump shooting far more valuable, because you'll be able to get it for far less money. In that sense, we're probably going to get a mid-range renaissance strictly because teams want to be ahead of the curve on it. Defenses will ignore it so much that the points per attempt on them will skyrocket, making them more valuable. That's the beauty of analytics, they're always evolving as teams figure out what their opponents are doing and adapting.

Shammyguy3
03-31-2014, 11:22 AM
The NBA is losing out on a lot without Kobe Bryant. Don't know any player that is nearly as electrifying to watch in this current era. In the 80's we had Magic, Bird, Showtime and the Lakers/Celtics rivalry. In the 90's we had Jordan... nuff said. Then in the 2000's, we had Shaq/Kobe, then Kobe. Quite a golden age of basketball from an entertainment standpoint if you ask me. A very tough act to follow. Durant is the only one I can think of that has a chance to make it into that echelon of players. Watchability factor is what I am referring to of course. There have been many great players who have been awesome to watch from a technical standpoint as well such as Duncan, KG, Nash, Dirk, and CP3.

Kevin Durant fills that bill quite easily. And although I hate Lebron, he's just as electrifying of a player on the court, he simply does it in a slightly different way

Spacolie716
03-31-2014, 11:24 AM
Also the warriors team that beat Dallas was coo to watch.

C Al Harrington
PF Captain Jack
SF Richardson
SG Ellis
PG Davis

Probably one of my favorite post season series I've ever watched live. Rooting for the Warriors at that time was definitely entertaining for me anyways.

waveycrockett
03-31-2014, 11:54 AM
There are alot of fun teams out there to watch. I mean yeah Kobe is almost done but KD, LBJ, Blake are great to watch.

mdm692
03-31-2014, 12:01 PM
The problem is these analytics aren't always right to use.. if they were wed want to just shoot all corner 3s since they are best ts% right?.. like many have stated, there's too many variables and factors. Way to many.
I know that's not the thread but just throwing that out there.

Say you have a prime JKidd..his best and most comfortable skill is to work his way inside and feed his cutting Big. So **** what analytics say, stick to what you're good at and beat your opponent..make all the hustle plays, out rebound your opponent, intimidate them if you can.

I'd rather have Kidd run my offense and everyone play off eachother versus some analytic advanced stats garbage system
Kidd is a bad example because he is exactly what analytics love. They love PG who can create for others and kidds forte, as you stated, is to feed the cutting big man who will be probably taking the highest percentage shot in all of basketball which is the lay up/dunk. Not only that but that forces the defense to collapse and leave open shooters out in the perimeter leading to the 2nd highest percentage shot in bball which is the 3pt shot. A better example IMO is A.I. If you have Iverson you say **** analytics cause as the PG A.I. will look to shoot or get to the rim first then set up his teammates. Not calling him selfish or anything cause he was a score first PG and with that killer crossover he could set up those long 2's beautifully that analytics hate so much.

albertajaysfan
03-31-2014, 05:15 PM
I've always said that analytics are about maximizing the talent you have on the floor. Yes, corner threes have become popular because they yield more points per attempt than other shots, but obviously if every shot was a corner three defenses would adjust to that and they would lose their effectiveness. Ideally, you want to have a nice mix of interior shots, 3's and a few mid-range jumpers to keep defenses honest. You can't just pick one or else defenses will adjust. The team that has done the best job of this IMO is the Clippers. They've always targeted guys that are great shooters from the specific spots that Chris Paul likes to pass to. That maximizes their return on the 3 point shots they're going to take. If you have a guy like Kidd, maximizing his talents is going to be a different animal than maximizing CP3's. If you run both teams the same way, you just end up fitting a square peg into a round hole. It's not efficient.

What people don't seem to realize is that analytics are neither all-encompassing nor are they the same for every situation. Take a look at Miami and Indiana. Miami realized midway through Year 2 with LeBron that they would be maximizing their talent by playing without a traditional center or point guard. Indiana, on the other hand, knows that their talent is best utilized through a very traditional lineup and offense, as opposed to Miami that runs entirely through their power forward and focuses mainly on long-distance shots. Different approaches for different teams, both have proven to be correct. Analytics aren't about saying "do X, Y and Z and you'll win the basketball game," they're about maximizing the talent you have on the floor by putting your players in the best positions to succeed, which obviously is going to be different by team.

If you guys want to know where this is all heading, just look at baseball. Billy Beane built his first few Moneyball teams (aside from the great starting pitching) around on base percentage. At the time, that typically meant ignoring defense. Oakland loved the Scott Hatteberg's and Jeremy Giambi's of the world because they were undervalued, but the minute the rest of the league caught on, the smart teams starting switching towards defense. Why? Because OBP had become so overvalued that defense was suddenly available for less than it was actually worth. We're going to see something similar in basketball. Eventually, teams are going to become so focused on 3's and layups/dunks that defenses are going to ignore mid-range jumpers entirely. That is going to make mid-range jump shooting far more valuable, because you'll be able to get it for far less money. In that sense, we're probably going to get a mid-range renaissance strictly because teams want to be ahead of the curve on it. Defenses will ignore it so much that the points per attempt on them will skyrocket, making them more valuable. That's the beauty of analytics, they're always evolving as teams figure out what their opponents are doing and adapting.

No point regurgitating, you summed it up very well, great post.

Guppyfighter
03-31-2014, 05:58 PM
There will probably be never be a mid range renaissance the way basketball is set up now.

koreancabbage
03-31-2014, 06:29 PM
Kidd is a bad example because he is exactly what analytics love. They love PG who can create for others and kidds forte, as you stated, is to feed the cutting big man who will be probably taking the highest percentage shot in all of basketball which is the lay up/dunk. Not only that but that forces the defense to collapse and leave open shooters out in the perimeter leading to the 2nd highest percentage shot in bball which is the 3pt shot. A better example IMO is A.I. If you have Iverson you say **** analytics cause as the PG A.I. will look to shoot or get to the rim first then set up his teammates. Not calling him selfish or anything cause he was a score first PG and with that killer crossover he could set up those long 2's beautifully that analytics hate so much.

when they go in. its much rarer than you think. analytics isn't wrong for the most part.

then we are talking about the art of the game. Iverson was beautiful in his moves

Jamiecballer
03-31-2014, 07:43 PM
for the casual fan, yes. the type of player that is most entertaining for the casual fan has proven to be less than ideal for winning basketball.

JasonJohnHorn
03-31-2014, 07:45 PM
There will always be great players who excel at isolation plays. The Heat are a very efficient team on offense and are very entertaining to watch.

The Spurs are a very different kind of team, but just as much fun to watch I think, even if they don't have as many highlights.

I remember as a Pistons' fan from back in the day, watching Laimbeer hit a three at the top of the key had me jumping out of my seat. I'm sure Chicago fans were just as excited to see Jordan drive baseline and dunk the ball.

b@llhog24
03-31-2014, 08:48 PM
Nah. Like all things it comes down to preference.

Sent via Tapatalk

Hawkeye15
03-31-2014, 08:59 PM
I miss certain things about the old NBA. No post play anymore, and the volume scorers were considered much better back in the day, where we know now that isn't the best way to go.

But, I also don't miss brutal offenses of the 90's, no defenses of the 80's, etc.

The game is just as fun for me to watch now as it was when I first started watching in 1984.

beyourself
03-31-2014, 10:42 PM
Why do people love mid range and long 2's so much though? I can understand why fans aren't liking all these free throws because it breaks up the rhythm of the game. Other than that what's so wrong about the way the game is today?

Jeffy25
03-31-2014, 10:50 PM
The NBA is losing out on a lot without Kobe Bryant. Don't know any player that is nearly as electrifying to watch in this current era. In the 80's we had Magic, Bird, Showtime and the Lakers/Celtics rivalry. In the 90's we had Jordan... nuff said. Then in the 2000's, we had Shaq/Kobe, then Kobe. Quite a golden age of basketball from an entertainment standpoint if you ask me. A very tough act to follow. Durant is the only one I can think of that has a chance to make it into that echelon of players. Watchability factor is what I am referring to of course. There have been many great players who have been awesome to watch from a technical standpoint as well such as Duncan, KG, Nash, Dirk, and CP3.

Seriously?

Kobe isn't the most and only entertaining player in the NBA


Durant is the only player who has a shot at reaching that upper echelon of players.....and over here we have Lebron chasing a three peat in the middle of his prime posting the best numbers since Jordan.....and you completely ignore him.


Don't be so transparent.

WadeCounty
03-31-2014, 11:32 PM
The fact that there is no real hero ball is what kills it for me. Hero ball in a sense where it's all scrubs with only one real alpha dog. Teams are either too stacked or are all scrubs for it to be entertaining to watch. People can pretty much look at a roster beginning of the season and immediately guess who is making it to the playoffs and who isn't. Too little competition between players with everyone being so buddy buddy with each other. No real drama, you can't even throw an elbow without it being a big deal in this league.

The refs whistle is another joy kill factor for me. Every time a game magically becomes interesting there is a blown whistle which slows down tempo of the game or the player has to play less defense to stay in the game. They allow one team full contact then switch it up on them by half time. If you're going to allow fouls, allow it for the whole game both teams don't pick and choose.

As a Heat fan, i'm bored of the NBA and only tune in for certain key match ups now and for the playoffs. There is no reason why my team should be losing to the bobcats if they gave it their all 100% each game. But they just don't, there is no heart in the majority of these players and although I understand there are 82 games in a season plus the playoffs and it's difficult to maintain that level of play for every game, thats why they get paid what they make. If I worked half assed at my job as much as these players do I would be out the door by now. Kind of the reason why I valued alonzo so much as a player, even if it was a blow out he would still be trying on defense

asandhu23
04-01-2014, 03:38 AM
Spurs is the correct answer but they are really boring to watch even in all those finals games. As for the Knicks when the had mike d'antoni and Lynn for that run was pretty awesome or when they had Nate Robinson going off.

Also the warriors team that beat Dallas was coo to watch.

C Al Harrington
PF Captain Jack
SF Richardson
SG Ellis
PG Davis

That wasn't the roster.

C: Andris Biedrins
PF: Al Harrington
SF: Stephen Jackson
SG: Jason Richardson
PG: Baron Davis

Ellis: 6th Man.

AIverson
04-01-2014, 03:43 AM
Early 2000s was my favorite era ever, but I still like it. These new age players are really coming into their own, and I love seeing the new surpass the old. The playoffs are as good as ever IMO.

Sssmush
04-01-2014, 06:24 AM
Analytics have made the game more efficient. The corner three is frequently utilized. Long twos are eradicated. Dunks, threes, and freethrows are all that remain. Team ball movement is preferred to PG heavy control. The basketball world is better than ever as far as efficiency regardless of the talent being dilute to many.

While it is easy to love the level of skill in the game when you see a LBJ or KD, it is also incredibly difficult to watch a full 48 min ball game. I used to love watching games growing up, and now it seems I watch the first quarter and see how the game is progressing, pieces of the second or third and about half of the fourth if the game is close enough. Of course I watch the highlights later and all the ESPN commentary.

IMO the game lacks flash like it used to have. There are no more stars with charisma. Is this because the personalities and lack of sales potential? I highly doubt it due to the marketability of the league. I honestly feel it is in part because of the strategy changes due to analytics. The players we remember most for their play get bad names for their heroics and selfishness. The Kobe's and AI's, the last real showmen that understood the NBA is about entertainment and fun as much as it is about winning. We used to see players go one on five and somehow score, albeit less efficiently and with more losses than wins, but those wins stuck in our minds and the losses were forgiven. We saw heart, desire, passion, real players and not machines. Now, the entertainment is all but dead in the NBA. Never again will we see the hero.

Is the NBA as exciting to you as it once was? If it is less exciting, is it because we just grew up? What is the cause in your opinion? How can the NBA become more entertaining?

well, basketball was always a team game. Players like Iverson and Kobe were so great they could at times transcend the team game with their raw ability (for instance Iverson's incredible quickness and speed)

If team's are getting better and more efficient, what you are really kind of saying is that the game of basketball is being "solved." Which is not impossible... basketball is not a perfect game and has some weird flaws, especially regarding player contact and the relentlessly subjective reliance on referees.

The game has also gone through phases before, for instance the rise of the 7 footers and twin towers, the fast running teams, the smashmouth defense teams, where people complained that the game was "solved" and had reached an endpoint.

If the game really is being solved, and starts to just refine itself into minute percentage differences in efficiency and accuracy, where one extra foul call from the refs always decided the outcome, that would in fact be interesting.

But actually, the next wave is probably what people talked about with Anthony Davis, which is big fast quick perimeter defenders where 3 pointers and jumpshots are ferociously defended to an even greater degree. This will in turn give rise to the ascendance of new types of fast shot creators. Also as regards bigs... shots down low from players like Shaq had greater expectation than most open outside 3s, I would imagine (I could be wrong about this). The problem now with post players is that not many of them are very good offensively. Lebron is probably head and shoulders the best "center" in the game right now when he wants to be, and he is an absolute beast in the paint when he catches the ball down low. Also, dominate rebounders take the bite out of fast pace high possession count offensive probability schemes, because teams can get high pct possessions and then frequently recover possession for a second try via offensive rebounds.

but yeah, the edges will continue to get narrower one would think, but you never know when the next phenom or new system will come around and flip the script

IndyRealist
04-01-2014, 10:38 PM
Analytics didn't kill variety in the NBA. Rule changes to favor the offense have killed variety in the NBA.

Reinstate hand checking and the 3 point statistical advantage declines dramatically. Drives to the rim become significantly harder.

Remove the 3s defensive rule and the value of great post up and rim defense goes way up.

Reinstate 2 hands on the opponent and you'll see more variety in offenses and more use of sets to break players free, AND more creativity on the part of the "isolation" players.

The rise of the 3 and lay up game isn't the fault of analytics. The rise of the 3 and lay up game is because they made it TOO EASY to score them by taking away the tools of defense.

When a post up player can't even back down an opponent without getting an offensive foul, when even a light brush on a jump shooter is a foul, when points are being given to the other team on ticky tack fouls due to a fear of contact, THAT's when it became obvious that driving and 3 pointers were the *easiest* way to put points on the board.

Even just bringing back hand checking would *dramatically* change the game. And for the better in my opinion.

This. Today's NBA is not the same game we all grew up with.

Hawkeye15
04-01-2014, 10:57 PM
This. Today's NBA is not the same game we all grew up with.

nor what it our father's, or beyond.

My Dad was a raging NBA fan in the 70's/80s, and just lost interest. And he was a basketball player since age 8, and excelled at it.

If people lose interest in the evolution of a certain sport, so be it.

Crackadalic
04-02-2014, 12:16 AM
It's missing personality. I don't really have a problem with the actually way the game is played outside of a few things.

Nba just lack that meanness like before IMO. Overall defense is much better but I just don't see that tough nose style of play anymore

Sadds The Gr8
04-02-2014, 02:02 AM
The point he is making is that he misses the creativity of hero ball, that teams becoming more efficient has made them more calculating and thus, less interesting. Which is odd because casual fans love dunks and 3's, at least thats the popular thought anyways, but for die hards, I do miss post play, I miss teams not being able to load up on star players too tho, yet at the same time, I dont miss stagnant offenses, the league and its players adapt to the rule changes regardless. Either way, stats are not to blame, its the skillset with the players involved.

For one, Kobe was plenty efficient and has led some powerful offenses with him hoisting away, so its not like a youngster growing up couldn't play the way Kobe has and be just as successful today, the reason we dont see another star like that is because its damn hard to attain that combination of talent+skill
thiis

koreancabbage
04-02-2014, 02:21 AM
It's missing personality. I don't really have a problem with the actually way the game is played outside of a few things.

Nba just lack that meanness like before IMO. Overall defense is much better but I just don't see that tough nose style of play anymore

too much social media. everything they do is scrutinized and put under a microscope. from a tweet to what they were doing at a restaurant. They are less personalized when it comes to their onscreen time because anything they say can lead to huge scrutiny right into their personal lives. Even Kobe's rants have died down. Shaq isn't even as controversial as he was and he's not even playing. people like Stephen A Smith, people who are considered "experts" *barf* are the controversial ones.

its def the rule changes that allows the offensive player more freedom. Would love the hand check rule back.