Barkley: "This is the worst the NBA has ever been"

[FTBS]

I don't want the NBA championship being decided in the front office. When you have everything come down to a 7 game series it tips the scales too drastically in favor of the team with the most talent. Did Miami "build and get it done over time" or did they just win the free agent lottery in 2010 and create a superteam. Think about how wack that is. Lebron and Bosh sign to a team and - as predicted - they go onto dominate and go the the next THREE finals.

A team can lose 12 games in the post season and still win a championship. That's ridiculous. Where's the pressure? This is supposed to be the PLAYOFFS. The grand stage. There shouldn't be that much room for error. If you make the playoffs a best of 3 you solve all that. There's more pressure on a team to win 2/3 then 4/7. If you're the best prove it. Win when it counts. If you don't give it your best you LOSE. End of story. If you can't you don't DESERVE to be champion.

The playoffs exist so we can crown a champion, not gauge talent. That's what the regular season is for. There's no need to stretch the playoffs over such an extended period of time.

The best should win. It should be surprising when they don't. You gotta have talent to be the best. at the more talented team winning somehow being a bad thing. We have FOs for a reason otherwise it just be one big pick-up game. FOs are key in the other sports too. Miami did cop that L the first year (they would have won if it was best 2 of 3) and were the most maligned Finals loser in recent memory ( rightfully so). They went through something together in addition to their own personal paths to get to that point. That said MIA is the exception, not the rule. They hit a lick. You have a problem with players teaming up then the max individual salary policy is your culprit.

2 out of 3 would actually make things more predictable because wear and tear (both mentally and physically) becomes less of an issue. A big reason the C's were able to win 8 in a row was because they only played 2 or 3 playoff rounds. There is no way they could do that today with four 7 games series. You bemoan the Heat's dominance, do you realize how dominant they would be if they only had to win 2 out of 3? They could just go all out for 2 games and then move on to the next round before the other team new what hit them. No adjustments. No lulls in energy. Lesser chance of injury. Teams wouldnt' have to worry about pacing themselves and injuries and exhaustion would be less of an issue which are all advantages for the established teams. More experienced teams already have an advantage come playoff time, you would pretty much eliminate any chance an upstart would have to wear them down if you went to a best 2 out of 3.

 

[Kill Dat Noize]

2 out of 3 would actually make things more predictable because wear and tear (both mentally and physically) becomes less of an issue. A big reason the C's were able to win 8 in a row was because they only played 2 or 3 playoff rounds. There is no way they could do that today with four 7 games series. You bemoan the Heat's dominance, do you realize how dominant they would be if they only had to win 2 out of 3? They could just go all out for 2 games and then move on to the next round before the other team new what hit them. No adjustments. No lulls in energy. Lesser chance of injury. Teams wouldnt' have to worry about pacing themselves and injuries and exhaustion would be less of an issue which are all advantages for the established teams. More experienced teams already have an advantage come playoff time, you would pretty much eliminate any chance an upstart would have to wear them down if you went to a best 2 out of 3.

The more teams play each other and the longer you stretch out the series, the more it favors the team with the most talent. David wouldn't have beat Goliath if it were a best of 7 cause Goliath would have squashed him the next 6 times.

The Heat played like shyt at least a few times during the playoffs and they still had a championship to show for it. Because if you give a team like that enough chances and enough time to right the ship, eventually they will. It doesn't matter if they don't come out swingin because there's plenty of time to make up for it later in the series.

If you're the best you need to prove it. You need to be prepared to show up at any given time and be able to perform when the pressure is at it's utmost highest. That's what makes a real winner and a real champion, not just the team with the most stacked roster. There's a reason why the NFL trounces the NBA and it's because the best team doesn't always win. The Patriots were better than the Giants the year they went undefeated but they didn't show up when it counted so unfortunately they don't get a 2nd or 3rd... or 4th chance like you do in the NBA. They fukked up so it's curtains. Tough shyt. Giants win.

When it comes to the NBA you know who's gonna win the series the majority of the time before it even begins. That predictability takes away from the suspense and it is that lack of suspense which takes away from the drama. There's very little DRAMA in the NBA playoffs because most of the time it plays out exactly like you thought it would. A best of 3 addresses that problem. Not only that but it's immensely more exciting and it makes each and every game must see.

 

[FTBS]

The more teams play each other and the longer you stretch out the series, the more it favors the team with the most talent. David wouldn't have beat Goliath if it were a best of 7 cause Goliath would have squashed him the next 6 times.

The Heat played like shyt at least a few times during the playoffs and they still had a championship to show for it. Because if you give a team like that enough chances and enough time to right the ship, eventually they will. It doesn't matter if they don't come out swingin because there's plenty of time to make up for it later in the series.

If you're the best you need to prove it. You need to be prepared to show up at any given time and be able to perform when the pressure is at it's utmost highest. That's what makes a real winner and a real champion, not just the team with the most stacked roster. There's a reason why the NFL trounces the NBA and it's because the best team doesn't always win. The Patriots were better than the Giants the year they went undefeated but they didn't show up when it counted so unfortunately they don't get a 2nd or 3rd... or 4th chance like you do in the NBA. They fukked up so it's curtains. Tough shyt. Giants win.

When it comes to the NBA you know who's gonna win the series the majority of the time before it even begins. That predictability takes away from the suspense and it is that lack of suspense which takes away from the drama. There's very little DRAMA in the NBA playoffs because most of the time it plays out exactly like you thought it would. A best of 3 addresses that problem. Not only that but it's immensely more exciting and it makes each and every game must see.

The Heat played like shyt because it's pretty much impossible to play at your best for 16-28 straight games. You get tired. You get bored. Injuries are more likely to occur. However it's a little easier to summon the energy and focus needed for 8-12 straight games. As the playoffs have expanded we have seen fewer and fewer dominant runs. When is the last time we had a team go through the playoffs with only 1 or 2 losses? The Heat would be cruising to a 4peat if you basically cut the playoffs in half like you are suggesting. You talk about dominant and boring. There would be no stopping them if they only had to get up for 2 games per series.

This isn't football and never will be and if you want that you are watching the wrong sport. SB champs are still decided in the front office. The Giants built the perfect team to slow down Tom Brady. Seahawks built the perfect team to stymie Manning. NFL trounces the NBA because of gambling, fantasy, white QBs and it's once game a week so it has an event feel. They would play series too (like ever other major pro sport) if it was feasible. If you are the best you should be able to prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt.

That last paragraph is complete horseshyt. Last years Finals wasn't dramatic and suspenseful? . We have actually had some of our most suspenseful series and biggest upsets in NBA history under the current format. If upsets happen all the time then they stop being upsets.

 

[the white hiphop thief]

The eastern conference is better today than it was in the early 2000s, back when the Nets, Celtics and Pistons were vying for the conference. Back when a team could finish 50-32 and win the entire conference


No matter how bad anyone thinks the NBA is, the early 2000s was even worse, especially the product they put on the floor which was just a miserable brand of basketball to watch.

So youre saying it wasnt the golden age when you had Baron Davis David Wesely amd Jamal Maglorie led Hornets or Carter Alvin Williams and Antonio Davis led raptors

 

[superunknown23]

So youre saying it wasnt the golden age when you had Baron Davis David Wesely amd Jamal Maglorie led Hornets or Carter Alvin Williams and Antonio Davis led raptors

those 82-78 scorelines

 

[Premeditated]

I don't think I've watched one NBA game from start to finish this season. I'll just wait for the WC playoffs and EC semis. I've barely watched any Laker games.

 

[triplehate]

I guess I just don't understand the mind of a casual fan.

Why would a casual fan care about who wins a championship or how long the playoffs take?

Just watch the deciding game, see who wins and call whoever loses over hyped trash

 

[Mantis Toboggan M.D.]

The flops have to go, they really make the game at times.


That said, 12 years ago the 2nd seed in the East had a 49-33 record and was only 1 game out of the number 1 overall And only 4 teams scored more than 100ppg.

shyt was awful

 

[Mantis Toboggan M.D.]

I was watchin a Lakers playoff game vs the Spurs on youtube and on the bottom of the screen they had the final score of the previous game

no lie but the final score was the Celtics 65, Pistons 64

 

[Mantis Toboggan M.D.]

Yes

 

[Kill Dat Noize]

@FTBS

I could see you aren't budging on your argument. Maybe it's out of stubbornness or maybe you just feel that strongly about it. I respect your opinion but I can't even begin to tell you how strongly I disagree with it... just as I'm sure you feel the same towards me.

So instead of debating back and forth on the issue, let me just propose to you a series of questions. Try and answer as honestly as you can. Feel free to throw in a long winded rebuttal but for the sake of our debate, at least humor me for now and answer the questions as straightforward as you can.

1. Would you agree that games are generally more exciting to watch when there is more at stake for both teams? (i.e. a playoff game as opposed to a regular season game or a game 7 as opposed to a game 1)

2. Would you agree that when there is more at stake for both teams, there is also more PRESSURE on both teams to perform?

3. What would you say is more likely? A lower seed beating a higher seed 2 times out of 3, or 4 times out of 7?

4. Which series would you find more interesting and more entertaining? The one where you kinda knew who the victor was gonna be beforehand or the one where you weren't sure who was gonna win and you felt it could go either way?

 

[Sunalmighty]

I think the rules change has something to do with the lack of skill and underdevelopment of players

 

[FTBS]

@FTBS

I could see you aren't budging on your argument. Maybe it's out of stubbornness or maybe you just feel that strongly about it. I respect your opinion but I can't even begin to tell you how strongly I disagree with it... just as I'm sure you feel the same towards me.

So instead of debating back and forth on the issue, let me just propose to you a series of questions. Try and answer as honestly as you can. Feel free to throw in a long winded rebuttal but for the sake of our debate, at least humor me for now and answer the questions as straightforward as you can.

1. Would you agree that games are generally more exciting to watch when there is more at stake for both teams? (i.e. a playoff game as opposed to a regular season game or a game 7 as opposed to a game 1)

2. Would you agree that when there is more at stake for both teams, there is also more PRESSURE on both teams to perform?

3. What would you say is more likely? A lower seed beating a higher seed 2 times out of 3, or 4 times out of 7?

4. Which series would you find more interesting and more entertaining? The one where you kinda knew who the victor was gonna be beforehand or the one where you weren't sure who was gonna win and you felt it could go either way?

1. Obviously games where more is at stake are more exciting.

2. The pressure can vary and different teams respond to pressure differently. Pressure can also build over the course of a series.

3. Here is the big rub. I actually think that a lower seed has a better chance in a 4 of 7. If teams know from the outset that they only have to win 2 of 3 their whole approach coming in is gonna be different AND there is the injury and fatigue angle that you have yet to acknowledge. You are blatantly ignoring this piece. Championship runs end because of age, injury, and fatigue. The fewer playoff games you play the less likely injury will occur and the less fatigue there is. This also benefits older more established players. Or in other words it would fly in the face of the unpredictability that you want.

4. Obviously the series where you aren't sure is more interesting. However there aren't too many of them in basketball even if you go to best 2 of 3. The favorite would still win the majority of the time, if not more. You talked about the Heat's dominance and yet they have provided numerous series were you weren't really sure and it could go both ways. If you make series best 2 of 3 they sweep Dallas in 2011 rather than fall asleep at the wheel in game 2 and eventually losing control over the course of the series. And they run through ever succeeding series because they have no reason to pace themselves or lulls in focus/energy and injuries are less likely.

 

[CASHAPP]

Black republicans from Alabama, that agree with the Zimmerman verdict, marry ugly white women and cross dress for profit and kiss 70 year old White men on the lips on live television while smiling...

fixed