The NBA

[Blue Horseshoe]

It's actually quite funny how riled up the NBA fans get when people say they would rather watch a college game than an NBA one.

I have no problem with people watching NCAA basketball vs the NBA. The problem that I have, and many NBA fans agree, is the false logic and flawed reasoning about NCAA being "better".

[🏀]

Look, I prefer college basketball. I watch far more of it. I'm just sick of people sh*tting on the NBA game, when they truly have no idea what they are talking about.

+1

Just say: "I like college ball better, and I understand I am enjoying inferior basketball compared to the NBA"

FIFY. It's the same argument with College Football, it's nowhere near as a complete product.

Couple NBA arguments that piss me off:
1.) Star treatment - This myth is debunked every offseason. Star players have the ball more, so they get fouled more. Star players are also excellent at drawing fouls compared to the junker defender playing them.

2.) NBA isn't a team game anymore - If anything, the last few years have shown it's the exact opposite. The average number of shots taken by the top two scorers on playoff teams is somewhere around 25% over the last five years. If the Heat, Lakers, Thunder and Spurs are showing you anything it's that team play IS most important. Not too mention Bill Simmons' book and 'The Secret of Basketball'.

3.) NBA refs are bad - The difference between NBA refs and the NCAA refs is the same as the talent gap between NBA players and NCAA players. It's not even close.

4.) NCAA players play harder - You're an idiot if you believe this. NCAA players show more emotion, sure, I'll give you that. They do not play harder. Every NBA rookie has quotes about how much faster and harder the NBA is.

[4th and State]

I have no problem with people watching NCAA basketball vs the NBA. The problem that I have, and many NBA fans agree, is the false logic and flawed reasoning about NCAA being "better".

Do you consider the reasons listed in my last post to be flawed?  No one can argue the NBA doesn't have better athletes, players, etc., but I would say that NCAA is "better" because I find it more enjoyable.  Not because it's better basketball, but because whatever style is being played in college is more entertaining to me.

[Lennys Tap]

I'd rather watch MU play Centenary than an NBA game. I'd rather watch my high school football team play than the Bears. I'd rather watch my granddaughter's grammar school talent show than a Broadway play. These are my preferences because they involve places and people I care about far more than basketball, football and theater. Nothing wrong with "preferring" college bball to the pros, high school football to the NFL or your kid's plays to Broadway, as long as you don't delude yourself into thinking the basketball, football or acting is somehow "better" because your heart is there. Love your school or the excitement of a one and done tournament? Watch college bball. Love basketball and want to see it played at the highest level? Watch the NBA playoffs.

[GGGG]

Do you consider the reasons listed in my last post to be flawed?  No one can argue the NBA doesn't have better athletes, players, etc., but I would say that NCAA is "better" because I find it more enjoyable.  Not because it's better basketball, but because whatever style is being played in college is more entertaining to me.

I personally think that PTM pretty much destroyed any of your reasons. If you like the college game more then that's fine. Just don't make up bullsh*t reasons that have no basis in reality.

[ChicosBailBonds]

THANK YOU.

People can't come up with a single, basketball-related reason that the college game is better.

It's funny, how we make fun of UW fans for liking "traditional" basketball, but a lot of people here sound the same way with the NBA.

I can.

The 24 second clock means a lot of one on one, or bailout type basketball.  A lot of pick N Roll.  With the 35 second shot clock, you have more diverse basketball options in the college game, more ways to skin the cat.

That's one way I like it better, but no question the talent level isn't on par, but I like the diversity of offensive options at the college game as a result of the shot clock.  A team with lesser "talent" can do well as a result.

[🏀]

I can.

The 24 second clock means a lot of one on one, or bailout type basketball.  A lot of pick N Roll.  With the 35 second shot clock, you have more diverse basketball options in the college game, more ways to skin the cat.

That's one way I like it better, but no question the talent level isn't on par, but I like the diversity of offensive options at the college game as a result of the shot clock.  A team with lesser "talent" can do well as a result.

This I do agree with to a certain extent.

I would hate to see the NBA with a 35 second shot clock though.

[4th and State]

I personally think that PTM pretty much destroyed any of your reasons. If you like the college game more then that's fine. Just don't make up bullsh*t reasons that have no basis in reality.

The reality is the season is very long so NBA guys can't play every game with the intensity college players do.  That is a fact.  Doesn't mean they aren't playing hard though.  You would be a fool to say that. 

Shot clock makes it more of mid-range game.  Definitely changes the game.  That is a fact.

These are the two biggest reasons I like college ball better.  But these have no basis in fact.

[Sunbelt15]

NBA is way better. The problem with it is coaching. Some coaches don't belong. LA's Dantoni for example. He has an aging, veteran team and he decide on a uptempo, run and gun offense. No matter where he coaches, he never teaches defensive schemes. Quoted as saying, "we worked on defense for about 5 minutes." But Mike Brown is fired after 5 games. Most coaches don't play to their strengths and focus on defense. Hell, if it wasn't for Varejao and the role players hustling on defense, Lebron wouldn't of never made it to the playoffs in Cleveland. NBA coaching sucks.

[🏀]

The reality is the season is very long so NBA guys can't play every game with the intensity college players do.  That is a fact.  Doesn't mean they aren't playing hard though.  You would be a fool to say that. 

What is the difference between intensity and hard then?

There is no basis to this point. Just because some gym rat NCAA player like Rontei Clark appears to be running his ass off and sweating the place up doesn't mean he is more 'intense' that LeBron or Durant or Jimmy Butler. They are just that much better.

[Lennys Tap]

I can.

The 24 second clock means a lot of one on one, or bailout type basketball.  A lot of pick N Roll.  With the 35 second shot clock, you have more diverse basketball options in the college game, more ways to skin the cat.

That's one way I like it better, but no question the talent level isn't on par, but I like the diversity of offensive options at the college game as a result of the shot clock.  A team with lesser "talent" can do well as a result.

I think you're "reaching". There's plenty of one on one and pick and roll in the college game too. And unwatchable 40-38 games where teams pass it around the perimeter for 30 seconds before hoisting a wild three that usually misses.

Want to prefer the college game because of loyalties to Indiana, Kansas and Marquette? Fine. And understandable. I hope you'd rather watch your kid play soccer than go to a game between Manchester United and Real Madrid. Just don't try to convince anyone who's only a fan of the "game" that the basketball or the soccer is superior or more aesthetically satisfying. It's not, and that's a fact.

[4th and State]

What is the difference between intensity and hard then?

There is no basis to this point. Just because some gym rat NCAA player like Rontei Clark appears to be running his ass off and sweating the place up doesn't mean he is more 'intense' that LeBron or Durant or Jimmy Butler. They are just that much better.

NBA season is longer, games are longer, they can't physically put into EVERY play like college games.  Is this because college players are in better shape?  Hell no..where are you finding people saying this?  Certainly not from me.  there is more passion, energy, hustle, in your average college game because they don't play the marathon of a season the NBA does.  I don't know why this is so hard to comprehend.

[Warriors10]

The reality is the season is very long so NBA guys can't play every game with the intensity college players do.  That is a fact.  Doesn't mean they aren't playing hard though.  You would be a fool to say that.  

Shot clock makes it more of mid-range game.  Definitely changes the game.  That is a fact.

These are the two biggest reasons I like college ball better.  But these have no basis in fact.

Well for starters your first reason is an opinion.  Intensity may be perceived to be different for different games a la going against the Bobcats vs. going against the Heat but thats no different than differences in intensity between games vs a small D1 school and a game vs. Duke.  I don't know what the difference between intensity and hard is either, but you can't say for a fact that college players are more intense in the regular season than in the NBA.

Your second reason is an opinion has well.  Link me to a study that the shot clock makes the NBA more of a mid-range game.  It isn't because the shooters are better in the NBA?  It isn't because defenses collapse faster in the NBA?  It isn't because there are quick triggers like Nate Robinson in the NBA?  Plus, I wouldn't say the NBA is any more of a mid-range game than college basketball.  I mean look at Michigan this year... Kids just can't shoot like they can in the NBA.

[Warriors10]

NBA season is longer, games are longer, they can't physically put into EVERY play like college games.  Is this because college players are in better shape?  Hell no..where are you finding people saying this?  Certainly not from me.  there is more passion, energy, hustle, in your average college game because they don't play the marathon of a season the NBA does.  I don't know why this is so hard to comprehend.

People here mostly agree the NBA season is too long, but the playoffs is a whole different beast.

[Coleman]

NBA players are obviously more talented, and the level of play is much higher in the playoffs than the regular season.

But nothing competes with the atmosphere of a college basketball game.  From a fan's perspective, college basketball is better in every way.

I've been to lots of Bucks and Bulls games. They are enjoyable, but neither compares to MU in terms of atmosphere. Fans stay in the seats, cheer on occasion, and its nowhere near as loud with as much emotion.

I'll concede the NBA has made improvements from the early 2000s, when they were blasting rap music while the game was being played.

[4th and State]

If you don't think the shot clock in the NBA changes the game I don't know what to tell you.

[🏀]

NBA season is longer, games are longer, they can't physically put into EVERY play like college games.  Is this because college players are in better shape?  Hell no..where are you finding people saying this?  Certainly not from me.  there is more passion, energy, hustle, in your average college game because they don't play the marathon of a season the NBA does.  I don't know why this is so hard to comprehend.

Probably because using terms like passion, energy and hustle are opinions, not facts.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I think you're "reaching". There's plenty of one on one and pick and roll in the college game too. And unwatchable 40-38 games where teams pass it around the perimeter for 30 seconds before hoisting a wild three that usually misses.

Want to prefer the college game because of loyalties to Indiana, Kansas and Marquette? Fine. And understandable. I hope you'd rather watch your kid play soccer than go to a game between Manchester United and Real Madrid. Just don't try to convince anyone who's only a fan of the "game" that the basketball or the soccer is superior or more aesthetically satisfying. It's not, and that's a fact.

First off, why didn't you end your statement with IMO?   

Let's try it this way, Lenny.  In college, you can run an offense like the Swing or the Princeton offense that relies on a lot of passing, cuts, etc that typically requires more time.  In essence you are trying to break the defense down, but not off the dribble necessarily...it takes time...shot clock time.  This would not be impossible to do in the NBA, but much more difficult.  The shot clock FUNDAMENTALLY changes the way the NBA game is played and makes the game different. 

The three point shot is another...you have many more opportunities on that front due to the length of the shot.  The NBA continuation shot is another one, which I find flawed because of the interpretation.

I like the variety of the college game more than the NBA.  They are both basketball, but they are different.  You can choose to love the NBA more all you want, I choose differently.

[Warriors10]

If you don't think the shot clock in the NBA changes the game I don't know what to tell you.

How would moving the shot clock to 35 seconds change anything in the NBA?  The average time of possession is only 11 seconds.  I don't think that would increase if the shot clock did.  (New Orleans is the lowest with the average possession being 12.8 seconds).  The only thing it would change would be the end of the game and holding of the ball, which I think sucks in college because you can waste half a minute.  Even if there is 45 seconds left teams have to foul because they would only get less than 10 seconds on a stop to do something with it.

Plus, the NBA game is more one and one because it can be.  What I mean by that is not only can players in the NBA go one and one, but teams can't double because everyone else on the floor CAN SHOOT.  Defense helps stop the ball, offensive player just kicks it out for a wide open shot.  In college kids can't shoot allowing teams play more help defense and double.

[klyrish]

People can't come up with a single, basketball-related reason that the college game is better.

College bball actually has defense in it. Teams use teamWORK to score points the vast, VAST majority of the time. The kids still have passion for the game because they WANT to get paid millions to not give a sh1t about the sport so they actually try in college.

[flash]

NBA players are obviously more talented, and the level of play is much higher in the playoffs than the regular season.

But nothing competes with the atmosphere of a college basketball game.  From a fan's perspective, college basketball is better in every way.

I've been to lots of Bucks and Bulls games. They are enjoyable, but neither compares to MU in terms of atmosphere. Fans stay in the seats, cheer on occasion, and its nowhere near as loud with as much emotion.

I'll concede the NBA has made improvements from the early 2000s, when they were blasting rap music while the game was being played.

This is a really terrible comparison.  The Bucks are one of the NBA's worst franchises.  MU is a much more popular team in Milwaukee, so comparing the atmosphere really doesn't work.  This would be like me comparing a Depaul vs Seton hall game at All state Area, to a Bulls vs Heat game at the United Center.  Which atmosphere is better?

[MUfan12]

College bball actually has defense in it. Teams use teamWORK to score points the vast, VAST majority of the time. The kids still have passion for the game because they WANT to get paid millions to not give a sh1t about the sport so they actually try in college.

No teamwork. No defense. No passion. Yawn, yawn, yawn. Tired cliches.

You honestly think there's no defense in the NBA? Because nobody slaps the floor, right?

Someone mentioned the "lack of intensity" because of the season length. Could say the same about baseball. Why isn't college baseball more popular? Those kids are so much more intense!

[4th and State]

How would moving the shot clock to 35 seconds change anything in the NBA?  The average time of possession is only 11 seconds.  I don't think that would increase if the shot clock did.  (New Orleans is the lowest with the average possession being 12.8 seconds).  The only thing it would change would be the end of the game and holding of the ball, which I think sucks in college because you can waste half a minute.  Even if there is 45 seconds left teams have to foul because they would only get less than 10 seconds on a stop to do something with it.

Plus, the NBA game is more one and one because it can be.  What I mean by that is not only can players in the NBA go one and one, but teams can't double because everyone else on the floor CAN SHOOT.  Defense helps stop the ball, offensive player just kicks it out for a wide open shot.  In college kids can't shoot allowing teams play more help defense and double.

My point on the NBA shot clock is that it causes more mid-range jumpers.  It allows less time for plays to develop.  I'm not saying to change it.  I'm not saying it's bad.  What I am saying is that it alters the game and makes it different from college. 

[jmayer1]

First off, why didn't you end your statement with IMO?   

Let's try it this way, Lenny.  In college, you can run an offense like the Swing or the Princeton offense that relies on a lot of passing, cuts, etc that typically requires more time.  In essence you are trying to break the defense down, but not off the dribble necessarily...it takes time...shot clock time.  This would not be impossible to do in the NBA, but much more difficult.  The shot clock FUNDAMENTALLY changes the way the NBA game is played and makes the game different. 

The three point shot is another...you have many more opportunities on that front due to the length of the shot.  The NBA continuation shot is another one, which I find flawed because of the interpretation.

I like the variety of the college game more than the NBA.  They are both basketball, but they are different.  You can choose to love the NBA more all you want, I choose differently.

The Princeton offense has been run numerous times in the NBA. How many times does a average team run down the shot clock during a game to under 11 seconds while waiting for the principles of the offense to work (aside from the Badgers)? I don't think I've seen MU do it once that I can remember.

Can you clarify your point on the 3 point shot? Doesn't seem to make sense.

IMO, continuation is called correctly a majority of the time in the NBA, but often missed in the NCAA. Not sure if it's because of the speed and grace of the NBA players makes it look much more like a continuous motion or due to the fact that the NBA refs are that much better, because the rules are close to word to word for NCAA and NBA on that matter.

I have no problem with people liking the NCAA better than the NBA for a variety of reasons, but the NBA is better actual basketball due to the size/skill/speed difference. Much like men's basketball is better than women's basketball.

[klyrish]

No teamwork. No defense. No passion. Yawn, yawn, yawn. Tired cliches.

So because they're tired cliches means that they're not valid points? Never has there been a better example of an I in "team" than with NBA "basketball."

Someone mentioned the "lack of intensity" because of the season length. Could say the same about baseball. Why isn't college baseball more popular? Those kids are so much more intense!

Baseball at any level is the most boring sport on the planet.