The NBA

[GGGG]

nm

[GGGG]

That's just not true

What's not true?  Who runs the Princeton offense?  Who runs the Swing?  Teams run elements of those offenses, but they look more and more like NBA offenses all the time.  And NBA teams add the elements of college offenses as well.

[GGGG]

I don't watch the NBA much...but are these rules still in effect:
a.Free throws: 3 to make 2....
b.If a team has not reached its limit of accumulated fouls, the first team foul in the last two minutes results in possession by the team fouled, and all subsequent fouls result in two free throws..

a. That was for shooting fouls and went away a long time ago - early 80s I believe.
b. yes...something like that.

[reinko]

NBA should play make it-take it.

[jmayer1]

Only people who argue for the sake of arguing would say college is better basketball than the NBA because of minute differences in rules. I would suggest those making that argument should tune into the WNBA since you think basketball played with much less speed, talent, athleticism, and skill is better.

[klyrish]

Well if you want to continue to be ignorant...and think stuff like "laziness = not pressing" as a legitimate basketball thought...go ahead.

I didn't think I needed your permission but now that I know I have it, I will. Thank you. Thank you so much!

[CTWarrior]

The reason a lot of us older guys love Magic and Larry Bird is because they brought competitiveness back to the NBA.  The NBA regular season in the 70s was a lot of coked-up dudes going through the motions.  I think the image of NBA guys not playing defense goes back to the 70s.  It's not that way at all now.

[CTWarrior]

Here's the difference though... people here aren't knocking college basketball by saying that the NBA game is better. We all clearly enjoy the college game, or we wouldn't be here. If given the choice, I'll watch a college game 9 times out of 10. But the reasons aren't because of the play, it's because of tradition/atmosphere/pageantry/etc.

What you are doing is spewing nonsense about the NBA that simply isn't true. They absolutely play defense, and at a high level. There is more iso play, but there's definitely team offense. A shot that takes a college team 8 passes to get, they get in 2 or 3.  It's just the speed of the game, and superior talent on the floor.

Agree with this.

I think you could argue NBA vs college is more talent vs. strategy.  A lot of strategies (like full court pressure) are useless in the NBA because of the talent of the opposition.  Mostly, in the NBA, the best team wins, and while that is as it should be, it takes away some of the excitement.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

NBA
NBA is like an orchestra of the finest musicians. They are clearly the most talented, and they make beautiful music. Even if you don't like classical music, you can respect how good they are. They are almost perfect.

NCAA
Is a rockband playing in a small club. The acoustics might not be great. The crowd is too rowdy to hear that well, and the guitar player makes some mistakes. It's imperfect, and that's part of the fun.

You can enjoy both. You can enjoy one more than the other.

What you can't do is pretend that the orchestra guys aren't more talented musicians. They just are.

Doesn't mean it's more entertaining, but they are better.

[forgetful]

Agree with this.

I think you could argue NBA vs college is more talent vs. strategy.  A lot of strategies (like full court pressure) are useless in the NBA because of the talent of the opposition.  Mostly, in the NBA, the best team wins, and while that is as it should be, it takes away some of the excitement.

I see people say stuff like this all the time, they're better so they can't apply full court pressure.  Or they're better so they have the ball more and should get fouled more.  

That is all logically inconsistent.  If they are better at beating a full-court pressure, they should be better at applying pressure.

If they are handling the ball more and shooting it more it is because they are better and can create more space to get off a good shot.  More space means less contact means LESS fouls.

I love how people on here claim that the NBA has to be better basketball because of skill.  Everyone agreed that the NBA has faster, more athletic more talented players and would beat any college team.

That has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the basketball product.  Basketball is a team sport in its most pure form.  The NBA has team elements, pick and roll, but is largely not a team sport anymore.  Its a star driven league with star treatment, referees have admitted they treat the stars differently.

The world can perfectly coexist with people correctly believing the NBA is better basketball and people correctly believing College basketball is better basketball.  It is not something that can be proven one way or another, so acting all high and mighty telling people that they don't know basketball is frankly childish.  

**Note the reference to not knowing basketball is not remotely targeted at CTwarrior, just wanted to comment on the full court issue so included his quote.

[4th and State]

NBA
NBA is like an orchestra of the finest musicians. They are clearly the most talented, and they make beautiful music. Even if you don't like classical music, you can respect how good they are. They are almost perfect.

NCAA
Is a rockband playing in a small club. The acoustics might not be great. The crowd is too rowdy to hear that well, and the guitar player makes some mistakes. It's imperfect, and that's part of the fun.

You can enjoy both. You can enjoy one more than the other.

What you can't do is pretend that the orchestra guys aren't more talented musicians. They just are.

Doesn't mean it's more entertaining, but they are better.

That's true, but no one's arguing the NBA doesn't have more talent.

[ChicosBailBonds]

What's not true?  Who runs the Princeton offense?  Who runs the Swing?  Teams run elements of those offenses, but they look more and more like NBA offenses all the time.  And NBA teams add the elements of college offenses as well.

We will agree to disagree.  When you said no one runs those offenses, I disagree.  There are schools that run those offenses as their central philosophy, of course they can deviate and put wrinkles in, etc, but there are schools that want to force you to play defense for 25 to 30 seconds before they ultimately attempt to score.  Not every possession, you take what the defense gives you, but there are schools that still play this style.

[Lennys Tap]

We will agree to disagree.  When you said no one runs those offenses, I disagree.  There are schools that run those offenses as their central philosophy, of course they can deviate and put wrinkles in, etc, but there are schools that want to force you to play defense for 25 to 30 seconds before they ultimately attempt to scores.  Not every possession, you take what the defense gives you, but there are schools that still play this style.

So you like watching UW and Georgetown, who run variations of the swing and Princeton rather than the Dukes, N Carolinas, Louisville, etc who run ugly ass pro offenses (pick and roll, drive and dish, etc). Nothing like a good old 40-39 stem winder!

[ChicosBailBonds]

So you like watching UW and Georgetown, who run variations of the swing and Princeton rather than the Dukes, N Carolinas, Louisville, etc who run ugly ass pro offenses (pick and roll, drive and dish, etc). Nothing like a good old 40-39 stem winder!

I like the fact there is enough flexibility with a 35 second shot clock to run different kinds of offense to get the job done.  That's one of the problems, IMO, with the NBA.  By the time they cross the mid court line and start the offense, there is 16 seconds of so....not a ton of time with not a ton of options.  At the college level, if they were to go to that shorter time slot, it would result in poorer shot selection, more sloppy basketball, etc.  The college kids just aren't as good to make that work.

Didn't we score 39 against Syracuse a few weeks ago?

[Dr. Blackheart]

I like the fact there is enough flexibility with a 35 second shot clock to run different kinds of offense to get the job done.  That's one of the problems, IMO, with the NBA.  By the time they cross the mid court line and start the offense, there is 16 seconds of so....not a ton of time with not a ton of options.  At the college level, if they were to go to that shorter time slot, it would result in poorer shot selection, more sloppy basketball, etc.  The college kids just aren't as good to make that work.

Didn't we score 39 against Syracuse a few weeks ago?

Like. If the NCAA goes to 30 then I'd like to see a defensive three second rule as well.

[Coleman]

NBA
NBA is like an orchestra of the finest musicians. They are clearly the most talented, and they make beautiful music. Even if you don't like classical music, you can respect how good they are. They are almost perfect.

NCAA
Is a rockband playing in a small club. The acoustics might not be great. The crowd is too rowdy to hear that well, and the guitar player makes some mistakes. It's imperfect, and that's part of the fun.

You can enjoy both. You can enjoy one more than the other.

What you can't do is pretend that the orchestra guys aren't more talented musicians. They just are.

Doesn't mean it's more entertaining, but they are better.

Your analogy works, but I'd tweak it a little. I'd compare it more to this:

The NBA is like listening to the studio album of your favorite band. Everything is in timing sync and harmony as its supposed to be, it is finely produced to listener expectations, and the song sounds "perfect." Its enjoyable, but somewhat predictable and not as exciting. The sound is commercialized and edited to meet expectations of the studio, producers, radio companies and other mass media. The album's ultimate goal is to sell copies and make money.

The NCAA is like seeing said band live. They might not sound as "good" as their studio album, but its way more exciting, less predictable, and most importantly, more authentic. While there is a profit element involved, it does not directly influence the music as heavily as the studio album.

[Lennys Tap]

I like the fact there is enough flexibility with a 35 second shot clock to run different kinds of offense to get the job done.  That's one of the problems, IMO, with the NBA.  By the time they cross the mid court line and start the offense, there is 16 seconds of so....not a ton of time with not a ton of options.  At the college level, if they were to go to that shorter time slot, it would result in poorer shot selection, more sloppy basketball, etc.  The college kids just aren't as good to make that work.

Didn't we score 39 against Syracuse a few weeks ago?

Again, if you like watching the teams that consistently use the "flexibility" afforded by the 35 second clock (UW, Georgetown, Northwestern, Seton Hall) more than the teams to whom the 35 second clock is rarely an issue (Indiana, Louisville, Duke, North Carolina) that's fine, though I don't share that preference. Most slowball teams (Georgetown is a notable exception) play that way because they have to - limiting possessions is the goal, not running some complex offense that breaks down a defense after 30+ seconds. UW is a great example. Their basic recipe is hold the ball for 30 seconds, take a 3 and hope to rebound it if you miss. If you cut the shot clock down to 30, they'll hold it for 25. Expand it to 60 and they'll hold it for 55. If that's what floats your entertainment boat fine, but don't make it out to be something it isn't.

And yes, we did score 39 against Syracuse (highest scoring team in college basketball scored 50 against them a couple of days earlier). Both games were borderline unwatchable to anyone not decked out in Orange. OTOH, 8 days later Louisville and Michigan played a riveting game for the national championship in which the shot clock was incidental. Coincidence? Hardly.

[ChicosBailBonds]

That's entirely the point.  Some teams play that way because they do have to, because they don't have the athletes or skilled position players to compete in a run up and down type game.  That's one of the beauties of college basketball and how a Harvard can win a game in the NCAAs or how Princeton can beat UCLA, etc, etc. 

You shorten the clock, you take away more upsets, more diversity of play because time is so compromised that fewer and fewer options present themselves. 


39 points can be scored by good teams and teams that aren't quite as good....also not a coincidence.  The implication that someone likes to watch slowdown basketball as a result of poor play or lack of talent was a stretch on your part as we all know even talented teams can score 39 (or 50) on any given night.

I suggest we start a thread that is titled "How did Marquette only score 39 points against Syracuse?"   Then we could have one, "How did an Elite 8 team lose to UWGB?"  And on and on....sometimes the answer is the most simple (they played poorly that game, or shot poorly that game, or the other team shot out of their minds, unless hyperbolic agendas are involved and then anything goes).