The NBA has recently discussed a few, but very significant, changes to both its regular season and playoff formats. Potential modifications include a shorter regular season, a mid-season tournament and a reseeding in the conference finals. Such changes could dramatically impact the NBA we are accustomed to.
I never have been one for change in sports. I have always thought that if we want to have the same awards for players and teams every single year, we must be consistent. LeBron James should have to experience the same league conditions that Michael Jordan did in order to consider the “G.O.A.T.” conversation. We already have enough difficulty comparing players with the whole “difference in eras” argument. I do not want to have to debate whether or not a certain team or player was better than another based on how many regular season games they played.
In terms of the fan experience, I do think certain aspects of this potential schedule could be somewhat interesting. Here are my “yes” and “no” responses to which changes I could get on board with:
Shorter regular season: No
As previously stated, having a shortened regular season will only add controversy in the debate of comparing historic teams and legendary players. Some would say the idea is for the players (load management) and not the fans. But what do a lot of these players play for? They want to be the best and they want to win. How are we going to access the greatness of these players if the road they take to winning is easier or less strenuous than those of the past. I guess it depends on if you are a person who values results over the process. “A win is a win.” Maybe I am being too stubborn, but I believe if you want to be in the record books, you should get there the same way everyone else has. Ultimately, this is an adjustment for the players, not the fans.
In-season tournament: Yes
This idea has been growing on me. Originally I wondered what is even worth competing for if not an NBA championship, but as I have heard some of the possible rewards, I have become more and more intrigued. One of the suggested prizes was an additional draft pick, according to Marc Stein of the New York Times. An idea like this leads me to believe the result is not quite as valuable as winning an NBA championship, but the prize is worth playing for.
Every sports fan loves a tournament. The upsets and “win or go home” concept adds a dramatic and thrilling feature to the game. And, of course, there are few better feelings than your time coming on on top. In this proposed scenario, you get to experience all the amusements of a normal tournament, there just is not as much to lose. This would be a great addition for fans who tend to only tune in come playoff time. It could really boost league ratings.
Conference finals reseeding: Yes … ?
I am kind of indifferent on this matter. In such a case, when the four conference finals teams are determined, there would be a new “reseeding” regardless of their conferences. I think it is a genius solution to the on-going complaint within the NBA regarding the level of competition between the east and the west. This would also allow for fans to potentially witness certain stars from the same conference compete in the Finals. We also could limit the possibility of one of the conference finals being more entertaining than the last round. This might be the most creative and effective suggestion out of all the proposals.
My only problem with this idea is that it almost disregards the concept of even having two conferences. Then again, the goal is to have the two best teams in the Finals, and this would be a simple method to ensure it. I do think this could diminish the intensity of the semi-finals, but either way, we will still be left with the final four best teams standing.
Heart of a Champion 