The Truth Posted March 23, 2011 Report Share Posted March 23, 2011 do you think 82 games is too much? would you prefer the NBA regular season be shorter or do you like it the way it is? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JYD Posted March 23, 2011 Report Share Posted March 23, 2011 No. It's a long season, but not too much. I think baseball's 162 is way too many, but I think this is adequate. I wouldn't change it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YugoRocketsFan Posted March 23, 2011 Report Share Posted March 23, 2011 They should make it so teams don't play back to back games. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clutch Posted March 23, 2011 Report Share Posted March 23, 2011 (edited) not sure, if they do make it shorter, they better have longer playoff series....basically...the few months of summer without NBA basketball are HELL for me lol so i enjoy long seasons Edited March 23, 2011 by Clutch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChosenOne Posted March 23, 2011 Report Share Posted March 23, 2011 No. It's a long season, but not too much. I think baseball's 162 is way too many, but I think this is adequate. I wouldn't change it. This. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alcstarheel Posted March 23, 2011 Report Share Posted March 23, 2011 I'd drop it to 62 games. 3 games against your division. 2 games against everyone else. I think the season is too long. Games throughout the year need to mean something, not just the latter half which is usually just for playoff seeding.  I think the NFL and NASCAR are so popular because of this. Their seasons are comprised of very few events per team compared to their season length (NFL: 16 games in 5 months, NASCAR Sprint Cup: 36 races in 10 months). The NBA's season has half as many games as the MLB. Actually think about that. The strain that NBAers go through game-to-game, season-to-season compared to non-pitching MLBers is not even close. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChosenOne Posted March 23, 2011 Report Share Posted March 23, 2011 I'd drop it to 62 games. 3 games against your division. 2 games against everyone else. I think the season is too long. Games throughout the year need to mean something, not just the latter half which is usually just for playoff seeding.  I think the NFL and NASCAR are so popular because of this. Their seasons are comprised of very few events per team compared to their season length (NFL: 16 games in 5 months, NASCAR Sprint Cup: 36 races in 10 months). The NBA's season has half as many games as the MLB. Actually think about that. The strain that NBAers go through game-to-game, season-to-season compared to non-pitching MLBers is not even close. The reason I dont like that idea is because it would make injuries such a huge difference maker in the game. With the season being long it allows injuries that are going to happen come and go. If the season is cut by 20 games that is about a month and a half gone off the year, which really would make a huge impact to players recovering from injuries and their teams. Reducing games would make minor injuries major costing teams games which in short season cant really be made up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Truth Posted March 23, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2011 (edited) I'd drop it to 62 games. 3 games against your division. 2 games against everyone else. I think the season is too long. Games throughout the year need to mean something, not just the latter half which is usually just for playoff seeding.  I think the NFL and NASCAR are so popular because of this. Their seasons are comprised of very few events per team compared to their season length (NFL: 16 games in 5 months, NASCAR Sprint Cup: 36 races in 10 months). The NBA's season has half as many games as the MLB. Actually think about that. The strain that NBAers go through game-to-game, season-to-season compared to non-pitching MLBers is not even close.I second this proposal. a shorter season would make regular season games more interesting. unfortunately, I don't think it'll ever happen because it would mean the league and the owners losing money. Edited March 23, 2011 by The Truth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Penny Posted March 23, 2011 Report Share Posted March 23, 2011 No, I love the long NBA season... I don't see why anyone would want less games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastCoastNiner Posted March 23, 2011 Report Share Posted March 23, 2011 Let the pussification of sports continue. Sports are being ruined before our very own eyes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kobe24 Posted March 23, 2011 Report Share Posted March 23, 2011 ^they are trying to lengthen the football season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JYD Posted March 23, 2011 Report Share Posted March 23, 2011 They should make it so teams don't play back to back games.Eh. I agree, less back-to-back's would definitely benefit the players and the league in general, but I think it's hard to avoid completely and would probably lengthen the season a bit. I do agree they make less of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenneral Posted March 23, 2011 Report Share Posted March 23, 2011 Knock it down to 72 games... wouldn't be a huge impact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JYD Posted March 23, 2011 Report Share Posted March 23, 2011 I was reading the Knicks-Magic preview on my BlackBerry, and Stan Van Gundy had an interesting take... "You only play 82 games a year," Van Gundy said. "It shouldn't be hard to go out and play hard and well all the time." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*Swish* Posted March 23, 2011 Report Share Posted March 23, 2011 If you're a basketball/NBA freak, why would you want a season to be shorter? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Truth Posted March 24, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2011 I was reading the Knicks-Magic preview on my BlackBerry, and Stan Van Gundy had an interesting take... "You only play 82 games a year," Van Gundy said. "It shouldn't be hard to go out and play hard and well all the time."lol @ Stan Van. I love that guy, but I doubt he's played much b-ball in his day. If you're a basketball/NBA freak, why would you want a season to be shorter?a shorter regular season could make for better postseason basketball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenneral Posted March 24, 2011 Report Share Posted March 24, 2011 If you're a basketball/NBA freak, why would you want a season to be shorter?So the regular season games actually mean something. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren2ThaG Posted March 24, 2011 Report Share Posted March 24, 2011 (edited) Its fine, time passes fast, we need 82. it's precious like a tight [expletive] Edited March 24, 2011 by Warren2ThaG 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alcstarheel Posted March 24, 2011 Report Share Posted March 24, 2011 The reason I dont like that idea is because it would make injuries such a huge difference maker in the game. With the season being long it allows injuries that are going to happen come and go. If the season is cut by 20 games that is about a month and a half gone off the year, which really would make a huge impact to players recovering from injuries and their teams. Reducing games would make minor injuries major costing teams games which in short season cant really be made up.Less games mean a less rigorous season means less injuries. Â Swish I'm as huge of a basketball freak as anyone, and I'm sure more than most, but general fans don't get into NBA ball because of the long season AND the long-as-butt games. Timeout, 1 minute of play, timeout, free throws, etc. Â I think a shortening of the season plus a speeding up of the games would be good. Â But we all know that the # of games will more than likely increase in our lifetimes and not decrease. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Check my Stats Posted March 24, 2011 Report Share Posted March 24, 2011 (edited) 82 games is fine. 162 in the MLB kinda sucks because you could be playing like 50+ meaningless games if your team is shit, which sucks. In the NBA the earliest your season is usually over is probably around the 50 game mark, unless of course your team is absolutely shit. And even then, supporting your team during a rebuilding phase isn't that difficult. I don't really like baseball, but I can't imagine paying attention to 160 NBA Raptor games. 82 games is what I've grown up with, and what I'm used to. Things I'd like to see added are the 1 for 1 FT system and less foul calls. Edited March 24, 2011 by Check my Stats Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erick Blasco Posted March 24, 2011 Report Share Posted March 24, 2011 So the regular season games actually mean something. They do mean something---live game experience for coaches and players. Sometimes I wish there were more games! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Truth Posted March 24, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2011 Less games mean a less rigorous season means less injuries. Â Swish I'm as huge of a basketball freak as anyone, and I'm sure more than most, but general fans don't get into NBA ball because of the long season AND the long-as-butt games. Timeout, 1 minute of play, timeout, free throws, etc. Â I think a shortening of the season plus a speeding up of the games would be good. Â But we all know that the # of games will more than likely increase in our lifetimes and not decrease.that's another good point. most of these games go at least three hours. they should do it like college basketball where there's just two 20 minutes halves. professional athletes don't need a break every 12 minutes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erick Blasco Posted March 24, 2011 Report Share Posted March 24, 2011 that's another good point. most of these games go at least three hours. they should do it like college basketball where there's just two 20 minutes halves. professional athletes don't need a break every 12 minutes. Can you verify this? Most NBA games are between 2:30-2:45 minutes. How many non-OT games really go longer than 3 hours? 2:30-2:45 is roughly on par with baseball (with more live action) and shorter than football. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Truth Posted March 24, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2011 Can you verify this? Most NBA games are between 2:30-2:45 minutes. How many non-OT games really go longer than 3 hours? 2:30-2:45 is roughly on par with baseball (with more live action) and shorter than football.they never go just 2.5 hours. I know this because the second game of the TNT double-headers always start at least 10-15 minutes late. if they decreased the amount of the time of the games from 48 minutes to 40 minutes, I'd have no problem keeping the number of regular season games at 82. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erick Blasco Posted March 24, 2011 Report Share Posted March 24, 2011 (edited) they never go just 2.5 hours. I know this because the second game of the TNT double-headers always start at least 10-15 minutes late. if they decreased the amount of the time of the games from 48 minutes to 40 minutes, I'd have no problem keeping the number of regular season games at 82. TNT doubleheaders usually start between 8:15 and 8:20 EST which is 5-10 minutes later than conventional start times. Tonight's Knicks game for example lasted 2:23 hours. The game ended at 10:33. On TNT the game would've gone until 10:43 preempting the second game. Even an overtime game tonight, Nets-Cavs, finished in 2:44. Edited March 24, 2011 by Erick Blasco Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.