Sunday, December 13, 2009

Why I Care About The NBA...And Why You Should, Too

I hate the NBA. The players are selfish and only care about money. No one plays any defense. No one plays any offense, either. Teams simply run isolation plays for their best player and disregard ball movement. There are too many tattoos. Cornrows make men look like women. Why do players wear sleeves on their arms? I don't understand the game, anymore.

I wish I could watch basketball that was all about floor burns and diving into the first row. I wish I could watch teams unselfishly run a discernible offense. I wish I could watch legendary coaches become synonymous with one squad. I wish I could watch basketball in its' purest form. I wish I could watch basketball that seemed like one big shining moment.

I love college basketball. Why would I want to watch the NBA? College basketball has everything I need. I love the full court press. Who cares if ball pressure leads to (unorganized) chaos, numerous turnovers and exposes the (low) skill level of the college game? I love that college teams run a distinct offense. For example, Gary Williams runs the flex offense at Maryland. Announcers have been known to wax rhapsodic about its' effectiveness. You can't help but stand up and clap once a game when that back-pick on the baseline frees the cutter for an open lay-up. Who cares if that same offense often deteriorates into Greivis shooting contested jump shots? Who cares that half the time the ball finds it way inside Maryland doesn't come away with points because of poor finishing around the rim that plagues much of the college game? I love that college kids hustle; it displays heart, character and a love for the game. Who cares that the college game is a proving ground for future NBA players and many of those that lack the drive to succeed are weeded out before they reach the next level? Who cares that some of these kids coast because they are burnt out on basketball but it was the only way they could receive a college education? I love that the athletes aren't just basketball players but student-athletes, too. Who cares if the most talented players view college as a pit-stop before the NBA and only have to pass a semester's worth of classes? Who cares that some were offered money by boosters? Or that a few accepted those offers? Who cares that graduation rates among major-conference college basketball players are terrible and the game makes a mockery of the idea of the student-athlete? Who cares that these early entries have created weakened, inconsistent teams across the nation? I certainly don't. I love college basketball.

I have a confession to make. I don't hate the NBA. You may have been able to reason this out from the title of the post and all those rhetorical questions just now...but for all you idiots out there...I love the NBA. And while I'm not the biggest proponent of school spirit, I still enjoy college basketball. But when compared to the NBA there are only two aspects to college basketball that make it preferable to its' professional counterpart. The NCAA tournament is the perfect blend of gambling and mayhem and creates an excitement that borders on madness. A "March Madness," you might say. Also, the college atmosphere is preferable for watching a game (assuming you are in college) because it's far easier to get good seats and thousands of drunk kids always provide their own form of entertainment and excitement. As for the actual games...well there are reasons those kids are drunk and it's not just that a game provides a nice excuse to get bombed on an otherwise uneventful Tuesday (though that is probably most of it). The play is uneven and inconsistent. The game is played at a slower pace because of the longer shot clock and zone defenses (which also clogs the court defensively). Have you ever tried to sit through an entire Big Ten basketball game? It's almost as bad as watching the Big Ten get stampeded every winter during the college football bowl season (coming soon!). On an aesthetic level, the college game falls short. Way short.

The short version? You should care about the NBA because it's the best basketball around. And it's not close. Some say that the players don't work hard but NBA benches are filled with players who have separated themselves from those now playing in Europe or the D-League solely because of their hard work and determination. And the only way to become a superstar in the league is through the combination of God-given talent and dedication to the game of basketball. There are certainly players who coast or noticeably improve their games in contract years but that is true of any profession. It's no coincidence that upon entering the league small forwards suddenly extend their shooting range to the three-point line and rail-thin power forwards add twenty pounds of muscle to battle down low. Most players take their job very seriously, on both sides of the ball. Defenses became so organized and effective that the NBA took away the hand-check in an effort to increase scoring (which has indeed increased steadily since the 2003-2004 season that saw the borderline unwatchable Detroit Pistons win the championship). But the absence of the hand-check is not the only reason for increased scoring. The other reason is a very simple one; the NBA is flush with talent. The NBA is entering a Golden Age, of sorts. Older stars (Kobe, KG, Duncan, Nash, Dirk) have proven to still be near their peaks and the younger generation (LeBron, Carmelo, Wade, Paul, Howard, Durant, Deron Williams) has arrived in full-force. There are great players everywhere and, just as importantly, a group of great teams at the top of the league. Greatness abounds. And as we know (see last post), greatness is why we watch. The NBA exudes starpower but is that really any different than the other major sports?

March Madness is awesome and I wouldn't change anything about it but does it ensure that the best teams always play for the championship? Too often we see lopsided games late in the tournament where one team is hopelessly outmatched or simply plays poorly. The best team wins some of the time but you certainly can't say greatness is rewarded. To be honest, there are no longer any great college teams (UNC could have been last year if Ginyard was healthy and that was the closest anyone has come since the succession of Battier/Williams/Avery/Brand/James/Duhon/Dunleavy/Maggette/Boozer at Duke seven-twelve years ago). Early entry into the NBA draft has robbed the game of great teams (and oftentimes of great players).

The Major League Baseball playoffs are a complete crapshoot. Greatness certainly isn't rewarded there. The effect of great players is diminished, too. Albert Pujols can be pitched around completely during a playoff series and there is no guarantee the best players will even be in the playoffs. One player can only do so much in the game of baseball and the championship goes to the hottest/luckiest team in October.

Football is following in the footprints of MLB. The Colts won the Super Bowl in 2007 despite having better teams in a handful of other seasons. The Giants won the Super Bowl in 2008 even though the Patriots were one of the best teams ever assembled. The Cardinals made the Super Bowl last year. Enough said. The better teams have plenty of good players but what about the great ones? Chris Johnson is the most exciting player since Barry Sanders and probably won't even play in a wild card game. A great quarterback goes a long way in football but other than that...is greatness really rewarded?

Say what you want about the BCS but it has given us two national championship game classics since its' inception (Miami-OSU, USC-Texas) that would have never been possible otherwise. I'm all for a playoff system but at least the BCS rewards greatness (sometimes).

And that brings us to the NBA. You should care about the NBA because great players matter. Kobe Bryant carried the 2006 Lakers, a team that started Kwame Brown, Luke Walton and Smush Parker, to the playoffs (and within one Tim Thomas offensive rebound of a first-round series victory over the Suns). LeBron James carried the 2007 Cavaliers to the NBA Finals even though Boobie Gibson was the second most important player during the playoff run. Dwyane Wade somehow willed the Heat to the fifth seed in the East last year despite playing with...ummm...who is on that team again? Great players can make a difference even if they are surrounded by below-average players. More importantly, the team that wins the NBA championship almost always has one of the three best players in the league. The list of best players on a championship team since 1980-Magic, Moses Malone, Bird, Thomas, Jordan, Olajuwon, Shaq, Duncan, Wade, Garnett, Bryant (also Billups...dumb). This year is no different. Carmelo Anthony has been getting MVP talk because of his great scoring ability. But Carmelo Anthony will only put the Nuggets into the title hunt if he fulfills his potential as a great player (rebounding and assist rates have dropped, defense still inconsistent). Kobe Bryant and LeBron James are the best two players in the league. The Lakers and Cavs will be right there. Dwight Howard and Tim Duncan (still) are the two best big men in the league. The Magic and Spurs will be right there. The Celtics will need Kevin Garnett to regain a lot (if not all) of his former production to capture the championship. There are only ten players on the court at once. Great players affect the game of basketball more than any other sport. And that is for the better. I don't want to see Joe Johnson lead the Hawks to the NBA finals. I want to see LeBron, Kobe and Wade add to their resumes and display their skills come playoff time. And that happens in the NBA.

There were supposed to be four super-teams this season (Orlando, Boston, LA, Cleveland). None of these teams have lived up to lofty preseason expectations but that is more indicative of injuries/suspensions and the depth of the NBA this year (everybody has talent). The less than gaudy records do not change the fact that there should be four great teams in the playoffs this May (barring injury). And the Nuggets (more consistency, another big man) and Spurs (if anyone other than Duncan starts producing at normal levels) both have the potential to reach that point by the end of the season. Last year the Lakers won the NBA championship. This year they added an All-Star center (Bynum) and improved play from the bench (Farmar, Brown). Last year the Magic won the East. They upgraded their point guard position (Nelson/Williams) and added depth at every position. The Celtics have KG again (who is starting to get his legs back) and Rondo and Perkins continue to improve. The bench will be better, too, once Glen Davis comes back from injury. The Cavs aren't any better (they did win 66 games last year) but still have the single greatest weapon (by far) in any seven-game series-45 or 46 minutes per game from LeBron James. If the Spurs are healthy (and Parker and Ginobili are productive), they have the most balanced team of the Tim Duncan era. The Nuggets nearly beat the Lakers last spring and Carmelo has taken his offensive game to another level (plus addition of Lawson and more JR Smith/no Linas Kleiza). The playoffs will be fascinating and full of great match-ups and outstanding performances. But that is not why you should care about the NBA. You should care about the NBA because we will know who the best team is in June. Not the luckiest or the streakiest...the best. Injuries can play a factor and certain match-ups are bad for certain teams but the best team wins the NBA championship nearly every year. And in today's sports world that is surprisingly refreshing.

NOTE: There was no proofreading or organization to this post. I apologize if the run-on sentences made your head hurt (just trying to even the playing field). Or if my point got lost somewhere around paragraph seven. Quick recap. NBA-good. Lots of great players in their primes at the moment-good. Great players dominate the game-what I want to see. Best team wins-cool. Nice.

No comments: