Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

blogst t1_j0l6av2 wrote

Reply to comment by rye_domaine in Heat place literally every player on injury report after receiving NBA fine ahead of Mexico City game by XXmynameisNeganXX

I mean, look at it from the league’s perspective though. Their job is to do what’s best for the game, not individual players or teams. A huge problem for fans of the NBA is that at any point, the all-star player you came to see could be “out” for that night’s game for a rest day. Imagine going onto stubhub and paying a small fortune to take your kids to see Lebron play once in your/their lifetime, he’s not on the injury report, but then he never gets in the game - it’s infuriating as a fan and feels like a middle finger from millionaires to the working class.

The real answer is that the league should either cut the number of games (will never happen because although it may seem like I’m “on the side” of the league, I also realize they’re beholden to greedy billionaires who would never leave revenue on the table for player safety) or lengthen the season to provide for more rest days. But until that happens, it’s in fans’ and the league’s interests to acknowledge that players randomly sitting out for unannounced rest games is a problem and discourage teams from doing it.

2

ZeekLTK t1_j0lbdq0 wrote

The main issue is that not every game is important, which is why players take games off. NFL doesn’t have this problem because there are only 17 games and you have to win as many as possible to make the playoffs, so rarely is a team in position to let their best players sit out a couple times. And if they are, they either have one of the best or worst records in the league and it typically only happens last week or two of the season (aka minimal impact).

IMO if NBA can’t/won’t reduce the number of games, then they should use a format similar to Latin American soccer leagues. Have two parts of the season (Apertura and Clausura) that each have their own champion and then those champions play for the title at the very end. This would make all the games more important because instead of an 82 game single season there would be two 41 game mini-seasons (or realistically less than that to make room for extra playoff games) which would mean sitting out a couple games could actually be the different between making the playoffs or not, which is typically not the case now with so many games on the schedule, and is why they do it so often.

This split format would also kind of curve tanking because they could set it up so that it only looks at the worst record out of the two for the lottery or something so a team could potentially secure a lottery pick in the Apertura and then actually try to win in the Clausura, as opposed to simply trying to be terrible the entire year for the same outcome, which is what they do now.

8

F1Dan88 t1_j0lbs3n wrote

I flew to St. Louis to see the Cardinals at home for my first time in 2006. A week earlier Pujols hurt his oblique and was out for a month. He was my favorite player and I was bummed I didnt get to see him. I wholeheartedly understand wanting to see your favorite players, but you aren't buying a ticket to LeBron James. You are buying a ticket to the Los Angeles Lakers. And in your example you got to see what you paid for. In the example from this article, the Heat won the damn game, which is the goal. Fining a team who fielded a winning squad against another NBA team for their coaching and roster decisions is a massive overreach and sets a dangerous precedent. The players aren't slaves who "must" play whenever the league wants them to.

6

ATL-East-Guy t1_j0leehr wrote

There are plenty of people who are fans of players and not teams. Most folks have their team, and then their favorite players.

Maybe you were a Cavs fan and are ride or die for Lebron so when the Lakers come to town you shell out big. Maybe your kid loves watching Steph shoot threes but lives in Atlanta.

Plenty of scenarios where a person would want to go watch a single player.

4

odiezilla t1_j0lemmf wrote

I’m sorry, but basketball is vastly different. People can and do absolutely buy tickets to see individual superstars as opposed to teams. Not to say certain franchises aren’t popular draws, but nobody ever gave a damn about coming out to see the Cleveland Cavs or Philadelphia 76ers. You went to see Lebron and Allen Iverson do spectacular things.

4

timothythefirst t1_j0lhz2g wrote

The nba is as popular as it is because since the early 80s they’ve marketed star players over teams. David stern openly said that. And because of that, there’s TONS of people out there who will tell you “I’m not a lakers fan, I’m a lebron fan”, and it’s always been like that.

Baseball has always done the complete opposite of that and not marketed their stars well at all and just rely on teams to capture their local fan base, so it makes sense to hold them to a different standard.

Plus hurting your oblique and missing a month straight is completely different than a star basketball player taking a rest day. No one gets mad at basketball players when they sprain their ankle and miss multiple weeks because that’s an actual injury that you can’t or at least shouldn’t play through. It just pisses people off to see “rest” on the injury report. It’s just like how if you called into work because you had covid they’d understand and tell you get well soon but if you call in and just say “I’m in the mood for a rest day” they’d look at you crazy.

2

abqcurl t1_j0lf90c wrote

Just went to a Cardinals game at Wrigley this summer. Of course I was hoping to see Pujols and Molina play but the only day we could go was a day game after a night game. Figured both of them would be resting, especially when I saw they played the previous game. I was actually hoping for the Cubs to tie or take the lead in the late innings so maybe Pujols could pinch hit.

1