Is it me or shouldn't the NBA be a lot more popular?

[DeToxRox]

I was thinking about this for a while now, but the NBA arguably has their biggest sheer number of legimiate starts since Jordan, Magic, Bird when you consider there is LeBron, Kobe, D-Wade, CP3, KG, Duncan, Howard, Yao, etc, yet it seems like their ratings hardly rise and even last year I know of one or two times the NHL on NBC on Saturday's beat out NBA on ABC.

I don't hear a lot of talk about the NBA and their popularity, but here the disparity between the NBA and NHL threads for example, are outrageous, and while I realize the NHL threads have a lot of the same posters, the same can be said on the NBA thread.

Also it isn't just FOFC I notice this, but a lot of other forums as well.

So anyway, I am just curious if I am going crazy or not, but I honestly feel like the NBA is doing a terrible job marketing when there is so much talent out there.

Then again, I can hardly stand watching the NBA anymore because the sheer amount of stars also results in a lot of star treatment that makes games horribly impossible to enjoy.

Thoughts?

[gstelmack]

They may have some stars, but the product on the court is terrible. Travelling / palming are never called, stars get all the breaks on fouls, refs generally suck, shooting skills are JUST starting to come back into vogue.

I mean, the fact that Shaquille O'Neal had an all-star career by foul-pushing guys back to the basket and then dunking it tells me all I need to know about the state of the modern NBA. I miss the Bird-McHale-Parrish Celtics...

[DeToxRox]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

They may have some stars, but the product on the court is terrible. Travelling / palming are never called, stars get all the breaks on fouls, refs generally suck, shooting skills are JUST starting to come back into vogue.

I mean, the fact that Shaquille O'Neal had an all-star career by foul-pushing guys back to the basket and then dunking it tells me all I need to know about the state of the modern NBA. I miss the Bird-McHale-Parrish Celtics...

Yeah I feel that way too, and it's something we'll never see fixed imo.

I am ususally 100% against people who say there was a conspiracy in a game, except for when they mention it happening in an NBA game, then I don't doubt it at all.

[molson]

A think the athletes in the game have grown beyond the sport. If you watch a game from the 80s, you can really see it, it's almost in slow-motion compared to today. Everybody complains about the refs, but I have no idea how the game could be called better. Typically you see collisions, lots of contact on every play, and then the referee has to come up with something on the spot, which will inevitably lead to half of the observers thinking he's a moron or on the take.

I don't understand basketball today as much as I thought I did as a kid - it's just too fast and chaotic, and I don't understand why anyone would ever take a jump shot when you can drive to the hoop, cause a collision, and get a foul called most of the time. But then when I watch a game from the 80s, suddenly I understand what's going on again.

[JediKooter]

I think it's in a rather boring state right now. It seems to be more of a ESPN highlight audition than a basketball game. The really only exciting part of any NBA game these days is at about 4 minutes left in the game during the playoffs.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by JediKooter

I think it's in a rather boring state right now. It seems to be more of a ESPN highlight audition than a basketball game. The really only exciting part of any NBA game these days is at about 4 minutes left in the game during Games 5 through 7 of the playoffs.

Fixed.

[Cringer]

I stopped paying attention to the NBA a while ago. It does nothing for me any more. Like Jedi said, the last 4 minutes in a playoff game are worth catching though. Game #37 of a regular season means nothing to me though.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

They may have some stars, but the product on the court is terrible. Travelling / palming are never called, stars get all the breaks on fouls, refs generally suck, shooting skills are JUST starting to come back into vogue.

I mean, the fact that Shaquille O'Neal had an all-star career by foul-pushing guys back to the basket and then dunking it tells me all I need to know about the state of the modern NBA. I miss the Bird-McHale-Parrish Celtics...

this basically sums up why i think it's not more popular. i get so irritated at the refs i find it hard to watch a lot.

that being said, I enjoy watching the celtics, because they're not so star-focused and "iso play" focused.

i think the era of "isolation play" and "clear out one side and let our star drive to the basket" turned off a lot of people.

There's also other teams that are just flat out fun to watch - the Suns for example.

but by and large yeah - you can watch the last 4 minutes of a game and you don't need to watch the rest of the game unless you're a fan of the sport. and fans of the sport were turned off by all the shitty star-treatment and clear-out play a long time ago.

[Subby]

I think you are going to find widely diverging answers to this question depending on which audience you are polling. It would be interesting to see some hard data, though.

In general, I think the NBA is appropriately popular.

[finketr]

Originally Posted by JediKooter

I think it's in a rather boring state right now. It seems to be more of a ESPN highlight audition than a basketball game. The really only exciting part of any NBA game these days is at about 4 minutes left in the game during the playoffs.

we have a winner..

[JediKooter]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Fixed.

Haha. Good fix.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Subby

I think you are going to find widely diverging answers to this question depending on which audience you are polling. It would be interesting to see some hard data, though. In general, I think the NBA is appropriately popular.

Pretty good answer I think.

[Logan]

Personally, the Knicks being terrible drove me away. And it's not just that they lost...the group of players were despicable, personnel moves were impossible to justify, the coaches (outside of when Herb would get the interim tag) were even hard to root for. Just a horrendous franchise.

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

They may have some stars, but the product on the court is terrible. Travelling / palming are never called, stars get all the breaks on fouls, refs generally suck, shooting skills are JUST starting to come back into vogue.

I mean, the fact that Shaquille O'Neal had an all-star career by foul-pushing guys back to the basket and then dunking it tells me all I need to know about the state of the modern NBA. I miss the Bird-McHale-Parrish Celtics...

Shaq is probably the poster child for where the NBA went off the beam. Since the end of the Jordan era, the game has grown more and more physical and further away from athleticism, technique and hustle. I'm not sure how to fix the league without turning the league into the National Free Throw Association to get the rough play out.

I'm not really sure how to fix it. I really tuned out the NBA for pretty much good the year of Shane Battier's draft class. All the NBA people said Shane Battier was a great college player but he'd never make it as a star in the NBA. I said it then and I'll say it now: if a guy like Shane Battier is considered a weak pro prospect, it says a lot more about what's wrong with the NBA and it says about what's wrong with Shane Battier.

The same thing is being said about Tyler Hansbrough. If the NBA thinks a guy like Hansbrough won't make their league better, there is something wrong with the league.

[Neon_Chaos]

On the flip-side, The NBA is very big outside the United States.

[Noop]

Wow. I see it differently. I love the NBA especially watching great players... the playoffs are so intense down the stretch also.

If you want to see basketball I suggest watching the WNBA because those girls play ball the way it use to be played.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by Cringer

I stopped paying attention to the NBA a while ago. It does nothing for me any more. Like Jedi said, the last 4 minutes in a playoff game are worth catching though. Game #37 of a regular season means nothing to me though.

This is one (of the many) reasons I really can't stand the NBA or basketball in general. I find the last 4 minutes of a game to be excrutiatingly slow. I understand the tactics behind the constant fouls and timeouts, but I find the pace of a close game near the end to be very frustrating. Far too many breaks in the action.

I know I am a hockey slappy, but the last minute of a 1 goal game in hockey is exactly the kind of frantic intensity I like to see in a close game. Basketball offers the exact opposite.

[Alan T]

I think the main reason NBA doesn't interest me any more is simply I am not involved in the sport of basketball at all. I love Baseball, I love Football. I don't really watch Basketball, Soccer, Hockey at all. (I'll watch college bball during the tourneys usually just out of school pride if Tech makes it to the tourney).

I played football and baseball both in school, and still play softball today. Those sports have always been a part of my life. Basketball on the other hand, I only played pick up games as a kid, or during lunch at work. Nothing organized and it was always more of just a chance to get out and play more so than any huge interest in the game.

So now there are a group of players who I for the most part can't relate to at all, playing a sport that I never really was into, changing teams frequently in free agency or trading , and playing on teams that I don't really have a huge die-hard interest for (Even the Atlanta Hawks that I grew up watching, I never really felt loyal to them as I do to my Braves or Falcons).

So thats why I don't care at all about the NBA I guess.

[Pumpy Tudors]

I got ripped a little for saying this here last year, but I knew I was done with the NBA when I watched one of the Boston-Cleveland playoff games and the final 1:05 took 14 minutes to elapse. Five minutes, I can understand. Hell, I'll give them ten minutes. After that, sorry, I'm not really up for that kind of thing again.

Oh, I'm also a Grizzlies fan. That probably makes the NBA unwatchable for me, too.

[DeToxRox]

Originally Posted by Pumpy Tudors

I got ripped a little for saying this here last year, but I knew I was done with the NBA when I watched one of the Boston-Cleveland playoff games and the final 1:05 took 14 minutes to elapse. Five minutes, I can understand. Hell, I'll give them ten minutes. After that, sorry, I'm not really up for that kind of thing again.

Oh, I'm also a Grizzlies fan. That probably makes the NBA unwatchable for me, too.

Oh fuck the black guy likes the NHL more then the NBA! The NBA is done.

[RainMaker]

Well I've had Bulls season tickets for a few years now so I'm a little bias toward the NBA. I'd actually argue that the last couple years have been great with the top teams being led by the biggest stars. Couple things I would change though:

1) Shorten the season by at least 10 games. Too many games that just have no meaning to them.

2) Eliminate at least 4 teams from the league, possibly more. There are just some cities that basketball doesn't work in. You eliminate those teams and the talent on the others gets better. We start getting more teams that have 2-3 legitimate All-Stars in the lineup every night like the old days.

3) Move to a true draft lottery where each non-playoff team has an equal shot at the number 1 pick. This would stop teams from tanking at the end of the season like the Celtics did a few years ago.

4) Bring in good refs that will actually follow the rules. This is the biggest on-court issue at the moment. Officiating in the NBA is horrible.

5) Add in some kind of tournament somewhere during the season. It could be for an automatic playoff birth or pride. Something unique that sets them apart from other pro sports. What about a giant round robin tournament near the All-Star break that gives the winner an automatic bid?

6) I actually think the playoffs should be setup by regions. That way you end up seeing the same teams compete in the playoffs every year and build some rivalries. I used to love the Chicago-Detroit, Chicago-New York rivalries back in the days.

[Noop]

Originally Posted by Pumpy Tudors

I got ripped a little for saying this here last year, but I knew I was done with the NBA when I watched one of the Boston-Cleveland playoff games and the final 1:05 took 14 minutes to elapse. Five minutes, I can understand. Hell, I'll give them ten minutes. After that, sorry, I'm not really up for that kind of thing again.

Oh, I'm also a Grizzlies fan. That probably makes the NBA unwatchable for me, too.

This is one of the few complaints I have about basketball in general because this is not only limited to the NBA. When teams get into the habit of fouling, it can extend a game a lot longer then it should be. I can not think of anyway to get rid of it either because it is an effective tool to get your team back in the game and can make the other team go cold.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by Noop

If you want to see basketball I suggest watching the WNBA because those girls play ball the way it use to be played.

I tried once. The problem is most of the girls can't shoot worth a darn. Otherwise yes, it's much closer. The international game can be fun to watch; I enjoyed the Olympics.

[molson]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

5) Add in some kind of tournament somewhere during the season. It could be for an automatic playoff birth or pride. Something unique that sets them apart from other pro sports. What about a giant round robin tournament near the All-Star break that gives the winner an automatic bid?

I like that idea - maybe award a first-round bye or something. I wish sports leagues would think outside the box in terms of league structure.

[Pumpy Tudors]

Originally Posted by DeToxRox

Oh fuck the black guy likes the NHL more then the NBA! The NBA is done.

To add to this, my favorite NBA player of all time is John Stockton.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by molson

Everybody complains about the refs, but I have no idea how the game could be called better. Typically you see collisions, lots of contact on every play, and then the referee has to come up with something on the spot, which will inevitably lead to half of the observers thinking he's a moron or on the take.

The problem is they don't call enough. I agree with the other poster that they'd probably ruin the NBA for a year to fix it, but they need to start calling fouls on out of control offensive players driving into piles of guys, and start calling fouls on defenders that keep just reaching in on anything.

I have seen discussions about the fact that the players are simply much bigger than they used to be, while the court has stayed the same size. That's causing some of the crowding. But in addition to the Shaq issue, another problem I have is fouls called on defenders who are just standing there, or who jump straight up, and the offensive player jumps into them. Sigh.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

3) Move to a true draft lottery where each non-playoff team has an equal shot at the number 1 pick. This would stop teams from tanking at the end of the season like the Celtics did a few years ago.

everybody tanks. no need to mention one team by name just because you dislike them. how about the EPIC tanking the year lebron was drafted? Or the tanking that is going on now as big-market teams try to line themselves up for the FA class of 2010?

[Pumpy Tudors]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

everybody tanks. no need to mention one team by name just because you dislike them. how about the EPIC tanking the year lebron was drafted? Or the tanking that is going on now as big-market teams try to line themselves up for the FA class of 2010?

Who else had a player blatantly admit that his team was tanking? I don't think anyone is being anti-Celtics just for the sake of being anti-Celtics here.

[stevew]

I dunno about drastic changes but I think the schedule is awful. Back to backs on the road when the home team has been off for 3 days are stupid. I could live with an equal chance lotto tho.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Pumpy Tudors

Who else had a player blatantly admit that his team was tanking? I don't think anyone is being anti-Celtics just for the sake of being anti-Celtics here.

i think we all know there's assloads of tanking going on.

and the salary cap rules are way complicated to try to understand and force weirdass trades.

contrast that with the amount of fun i had watching the Bruins game last night. I have a feeling if I watch all the Bruins-Habs games I just might become a hockey fan again.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

This is one (of the many) reasons I really can't stand the NBA or basketball in general. I find the last 4 minutes of a game to be excrutiatingly slow. I understand the tactics behind the constant fouls and timeouts, but I find the pace of a close game near the end to be very frustrating. Far too many breaks in the action.

I guess a simple question is why is the NBA like this while college is not? Sure, some teams foul other teams. But there isn't the perception that the game is slow or that the rest of the game is meaningless because it's a game of runs and that's accepted. Where's the distinction between college and pro hoops?

SI

[DanGarion]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Well I've had Bulls season tickets for a few years now so I'm a little bias toward the NBA. I'd actually argue that the last couple years have been great with the top teams being led by the biggest stars. Couple things I would change though:

1) Shorten the season by at least 10 games. Too many games that just have no meaning to them.

2) Eliminate at least 4 teams from the league, possibly more. There are just some cities that basketball doesn't work in. You eliminate those teams and the talent on the others gets better. We start getting more teams that have 2-3 legitimate All-Stars in the lineup every night like the old days.

3) Move to a true draft lottery where each non-playoff team has an equal shot at the number 1 pick. This would stop teams from tanking at the end of the season like the Celtics did a few years ago.

4) Bring in good refs that will actually follow the rules. This is the biggest on-court issue at the moment. Officiating in the NBA is horrible.

5) Add in some kind of tournament somewhere during the season. It could be for an automatic playoff birth or pride. Something unique that sets them apart from other pro sports. What about a giant round robin tournament near the All-Star break that gives the winner an automatic bid?

6) I actually think the playoffs should be setup by regions. That way you end up seeing the same teams compete in the playoffs every year and build some rivalries. I used to love the Chicago-Detroit, Chicago-New York rivalries back in the days.

If you add that the teams play to the death, then I'd be all for it.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Where's the distinction between college and pro hoops?

• 8 minutes
• Players are paid above the table
• Posses are bigger

Need any more?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

I tried once. The problem is most of the girls can't shoot worth a darn.

WNBA Median Team FG% last season - .423
NBA Median Team FG % this season - .457
WNBA Median Team 3P% last season - .334 (approx)
NBA Median Team 3P% this season - .366

To be within 3 shots out of 100 overall considering the lack of dunks seems pretty close to me. The difference is pretty consistent regardless of range too.

Oddly enough (to me at least) the ratio of assists per point scored is about the same at the median too, right around 5 points per assist.

Also took a look at a random WNBA game, midseason, NY vs LA a pair of third place teams. Shot about 44% between 'em, combined 56-126.

Random NBA game, midseason, Bos vs Hou, a #2 & a #5, shot 65-142 combined, just under 46%.

Maybe you can tell the difference in 2-3 missed shots a game but I really can't. A more apt knock on the WNBA might be a higher turnover ratio.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by Noop

I can not think of anyway to get rid of it either because it is an effective tool to get your team back in the game and can make the other team go cold.

This one is simple.
Enforce the intentional foul rule. If you intentionally foul the other team, that team gets 2 shots AND the ball.....that would end the end game shenanigans/

[gstelmack]

It was a few seasons ago, and I just watched brick after brick after brick. I haven't tried since.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

everybody tanks. no need to mention one team by name just because you dislike them. how about the EPIC tanking the year lebron was drafted? Or the tanking that is going on now as big-market teams try to line themselves up for the FA class of 2010?

I don't dislike the Celtics, they were just the first example I thought of when it came to tanking.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by stevew

I dunno about drastic changes but I think the schedule is awful. Back to backs on the road when the home team has been off for 3 days are stupid. I could live with an equal chance lotto tho.

That's a real big issue with the league too and why they need to drop the amount of games by 10 or so. Back-to-back road games are devestating late in the season and it usually ends up in a horrible basketball game.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

• 8 minutes
• Players are paid above the table
• Posses are bigger

Need any more?

Maybe that wasn't the best worded post of mine, but I wasn't literally asking "What is the difference between the NBA and NCAA". I think I've got a decent grasp on that question

It is more to the effect of "Why is the perception there that NCAA games should be watched from start to finish as they are a game of runs while NBA game are perceived to just be the last 4 minutes of the game". Also, no one really complains if the last 2 minutes of an NCAA game lasts 10 minutes so why are people all over the NBA doing the same. Where do those perceptions come from?

SI

[whomario]

The season definitely is too long. 50-60 games would be just fine (like 58, the option you get with the NBA sims)

In general the NBA allways suffered from the fact that everybody can play it. Sounds strange, but (i think) Red Auerbach once came up with a statement in that regard. And it´s true, the casual guy out there really doesnt "get" how great the guys are athletically and in terms of skill, too.
I mean, 2 ppg in 15 minutes guys like Ryan Bowen were 15/10 guys in College...

What is a problem with the rules is that they were never intended for guys that big, fast and skilled (the latter gets overlooked because of how athletic defenses have become, but put any seemingly unskilled player in a pick up setting and he´ll blow you away or just watch warmups to a game).

And besides that the NBA lost the balance between perimeter guys and Post guys. Though that´s more my gripe, the general public actually appreciates that.
Perimeter guys literally are put on a Pedestal while Big Guys can´t catch a break. A guy like Yao can´t even make a move forward inside 10 feet with guys flopping left and right.
And on the other hand it´s ridiculous having guys like James, Paul or Wade literally jumping into people and get to the line.

But overall it´s just hard to call for the Refs, it really is incredibly fast with an insane amount of "situations" in a game.

[Big Fo]

I like the NBA Playoffs but unless my team is playing I can't really get into the regular season. I follow the standings and some of the statistics but if my team isn't playing I'd rather play a video game or watch another show if I'm at home. But for me this applies to most other sports, even the NFL nowadays it's hard to sit through a three hour regular season game as a neutral unless it's a great matchup.

There are too many teams like some other people have said, I'd like to see the NBA get rid of three or four so teams would have more quality depth.

It's still a much better than hockey or college basketball of course.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

WNBA Median Team FG% last season - .423
NBA Median Team FG % this season - .457
WNBA Median Team 3P% last season - .334 (approx)
NBA Median Team 3P% this season - .366

To be within 3 shots out of 100 overall considering the lack of dunks seems pretty close to me. The difference is pretty consistent regardless of range too.

Oddly enough (to me at least) the ratio of assists per point scored is about the same at the median too, right around 5 points per assist.

Also took a look at a random WNBA game, midseason, NY vs LA a pair of third place teams. Shot about 44% between 'em, combined 56-126.

Random NBA game, midseason, Bos vs Hou, a #2 & a #5, shot 65-142 combined, just under 46%.

Maybe you can tell the difference in 2-3 missed shots a game but I really can't. A more apt knock on the WNBA might be a higher turnover ratio.

Just to play a little devil's advocate, here's some food for thought.

On a basic level, the difference between a .307 (.457) and .273 (.423) hitter is pretty darn substantial. Or if you want to do percentages ((.457-.423)/.457) is 0.0744, so it's a .300 hitter vs a .277. That's a fairly substantial difference.

SI

[Ajaxab]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Also, no one really complains if the last 2 minutes of an NCAA game lasts 10 minutes so why are people all over the NBA doing the same. Where do those perceptions come from?SI

CBS has effectively killed the end of tournament games with their constant words from the NCAA's corporate champions. At least with the NBA, I know there won't be a commercial at every dead ball. Timeouts? Maybe, but not another commercial.

[BrianD]

The problem with the NBA game is that they have made a contact sport out of a non-contact game. For a long time, offensive players worked to avoid contact and any contact initiated by the defense was an easy foul. Since then, more and more contact has been allowed and it is now hard to differentiate which contact is worthy of a foul and which isn't. For every foul called, people can easily think of 10 situations with more contact and no foul. This falls more on the league than the refs since they wanted this type of play to be allowed.

Rule changes to allow more offense also cause issues for fans of the sport. Illegal defense - even with the recent amendments, lax ball-handling rules, in-bounds at half-court following a timeout. All of these cause issues with the integrity of the league.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Just to play a little devil's advocate, here's some food for thought. On a basic level, the difference between a .307 (.457) and .273 (.423) hitter is pretty darn substantial. Or if you want to do percentages ((.457-.423)/.457) is 0.0744, so it's a .300 hitter vs a .277. That's a fairly substantial difference.

But it's also less influential since there's roughly 125 shots in a WNBA game versus, give or take, half that many in a MLB game.

Put into another perspective, that's roughly the difference between Derek Jeter's average last year and Torri Hunter's average. Similar spread in the NBA this year would be Eric Gordon and Kevin Martin.

If you can perceive as much difference between the two guards shooting as you can the two hitters at the plate, more power to you but I can't. Give me a choice of a set of Atlanta Dream tickets or a set of Atlanta Hawks tickets & I'm at the WNBA game without hesitation.

But that's also a function of familiarity more than on court differences. With players sticking around in the women's college game typically longer than the men's game, plus less international influence I've got a much better likelihood of having some connection to the players than I do with the NBA.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Just to play a little devil's advocate, here's some food for thought.

On a basic level, the difference between a .307 (.457) and .273 (.423) hitter is pretty darn substantial. Or if you want to do percentages ((.457-.423)/.457) is 0.0744, so it's a .300 hitter vs a .277. That's a fairly substantial difference.

SI

apples to oranges comparison. vastly different number of attempts in a regular game. Roughly double, give or take probably.

[sterlingice]

(I know but I had to bring it up and Jon answered it)

SI

[BishopMVP]

Maybe we can make the women's ball even smaller so feminists and WNBA partisans can keep parroting the claim they shoot better than men.

(This isn't meant as a knock on Jon - there are legitimate reasons to prefer a WNBA game over an NBA game, just don't try to tell me they are better in any way, shape, or form.)

[DataKing]

I agree with a good portion of what's been stated here, and like a lot of people, I find college basketball much more enjoyable to watch, even if the NBA obviously has superior talent overall.

For me, the biggest problem I have with the NBA is the type of offense that a lot of teams run. For many teams, offense amounts to "everybody stand around and clear out as much space as you can, and our superstar will create his own shot." That gets boring to watch, really fast, but at the same time you can understand the reason it comes about:

1. Defenses are much more sophisticated and athletic than they used to be.
2. There isn't enough time in the shot clock to run a proper offense against such sophisticated defense.

There's really not much you can do about #1. Most fans don't understand when an illegal defense is called anyways. But you could do something about #2. If I could make one recommendation to Stern, it'd be that they increase the shot clock to 30 seconds. 24 seconds just isn't enough time to run a proper offense against modern defenses. We're talking about professionals here, so the college 35 seconds isn't necessary either, but I think more time is needed.

Of course, this is something that the league would never put in place. A longer shot clock means fewer possessions, which means less stat-stuffing.

[stevew]

I could actually see watching live WNBA being fun. On TV i don't know any of the players, it's just too hard to follow and get in. And the quality of ball is not that much better than an above average mens rec league. In person, I bet it's a lot more tolerable.

And a funny WNBA side story: My brother was relaying to me that he has some friends that are pretty hardcore gamblers, and one of their favorite sports to wager on was WNBA. I guess the sheer amount of data to set lines is nowhere near as advanced as the NBA or NFL. So with a little legwork you can increase your odds. Second hand story, I might be messing up a few details. But the thought of wagering on the Sparks was pretty funny.