Game Day: Bring on the underachievers!!!

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 19, 2008 11:00 AM CST Comment 39 comments

Ept_sports_nba_experts-808045604-1227024062_medium

Wolves fans, I suppose it could be worse. You could be rooting for a team that is off to a less-than-overwhelming start after picking up a previously-injured free agent star who may or may not have stabbed his old team in the back and who is lead by a Hollinger All-Decline Team pick and an absurdly high paid 2nd scorer.

As you can see from the picture above, the 76ers are also one of the poster children for poor NBA attendance. They are currently 28th in league attendance at 12,758 fans per game. Of course, as anyone who has been to an NBA game lately can tell you (or as anyone with League Pass can tell you), there's no way on God's green earth that over 12k fans are showing up at some of these games. Our Beloved Puppies are reportedly ranked 24th in league attendance at 14,509 fans per home contest. Horse plucky. I didn't see 10k fans at last Saturday's Portland game even thought the attendance was listed as being over 12k. Ball Don't Lie has more on NBA attendance woes:

The financial crisis has had an impact on all professional sports teams in some way, but it sure feels like the NBA may have been hit harder than anyone over the last couple of years. Just two seasons ago, the league broke its own attendance record ... now you read stuff like Mushnick's column.

What happened?

When you look at the attendance figures one thing is clear: fans want to see a winner. The Magic (ranked 20th, after six home dates) are the only team in the bottom third of the chart that has a winning record. Winning would cure a lot of teams' concerns, but I don't think that is the overriding problem.

I just think the NBA game has gotten stale in a lot of markets.

When I go to games, even ones that are packed in other cities, I don't see a lot of fans decked out in their team's gear, I see a lot of yuppie businessmen who have decided that the NBA game is the place to be seen. They could care less what happens on the court, as long as they can glad-hand the rest of the "important" people.

As someone who used to attend about 20-25 games a year, I was a little shocked by the apathy in the building during the Portland game (which was my 1st home game this season). It was over produced and the only "energy" in the building was the result of drunken or dancing fans and piped in noise. A good product certainly helps but the dog-and-pony show has become so prominent and forced at NBA games that it's almost like watching pizza shop animatronics...although maybe not quite as entertaining:

We talked about it at the Portland game: the NBA cannot maintain its current financial and attendance course. Back in August I wrote a post entitled If I Ruled the World. You can read it here. It puts forth a few suggestions about how I would change the NBA. What would you do to make the game and league better? Something needs to give.

New Wolves editor/reporter Jonah Ballow had an interesting note on the team's site today:

Most teams do not have the luxury of featuring a player that averages 22 points and 10 rebounds a game. Al Jefferson is an extremely talented big man that rarely receives the type of national recognition he deserves. The center averages more points than Dwight Howard, Carlos Boozer, and LaMarcus Aldridge. Jefferson also hauls down more rebounds per game than perennial all-stars: Tim Duncan, Chris Bosh, Kevin Garnett, and Amare Stoudemire. On his way to a career season, Jefferson shoots 51 percent from the field and just under 80 percent from the free throw line. True basketball fans recognize the talent Jefferson possesses but until the Wolves start to compile wins, No. 25 will fly under the national radar.

Did you catch it? "The center." This is the first time I can remember anyone associated with the team calling him a center. We've talked about this issue before. Click here to read about Al the 4 vs Al the 5. Remember that at this time last year we were listening to the Iron Ranger prattle on and on about how nice it would be to have a shot blocking center line up next to Big Al. Oh Theo, where have you gone?

Remember, there's a plan, people...there's a plan. (If you say it enough you may start to believe it.)

Wrapping this bad boy up, I'm guessing the Wolves will put up a good showing in the 1st quarter followed by even play throughout the 2nd, 3rd, and part of the 4th. They will then proceed to score between 14-16 points in the 4th while Philly grabs the victory. This leaves yours truly with a choice: watch yet another version of a game I've already seen too many times this year, or go on line and play the greatest video game of all time, Left 4 Dead:

It's a tough choice: kill video game zombies or watch the evil zombie creation of head zombie Kevin McHale. No matter what he screws up...he will always be back.

You can read the Sixer take over at our sister site, Liberty Ballers.

0 recs | Comment 39 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Checking out the NBA standings....

OMG that Clippers are 1-9 and they’ve already had 8 home games. Going along with the point in your article it is much more demoralizing to have your starting lineup of all veterans making big money and in general be guys were are excited about… yet still not be very good than be rebuilding. Unless that rebuilding goes on for a decade ( see Wolves,Timber).

by Pants_ on Nov 19, 2008 11:41 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

speaking of piped-in noise...

When I was living in Toronto I used to get to see 2 Raptors games a year in New Jersey. Now that was depressing – not only was there no one in the stands, but they piped in cheering. That’s right – whenever a Net would make a nice play, you’d hear this crazy applause and yelling, yet no one in the crowd would have anything to do with it. The Toronto announcers spent those games in hysterics. At least the Wolves haven’t yet stooped that low.

by plinytheelder on Nov 19, 2008 12:42 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

That's Funny...

Although think of the possibilities. “M-V-P” chants for Big Al. Wild applause when the jumbotron catches a glimpse of McHale in the seats (complete with a gracious-yet-modest wave of the hand). Maybe some funky air conditioning at the opponents’ end of the court, Minnesota Twins/Metrodome style (or so they’ve been accused).

I always thought the Nets had the most obnoxious, um, whatever those guys are who yell at the crowd to fire them up. I’m not sure if he’s still there, but he was terrible.

by jianfu on Nov 19, 2008 2:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

even more possibilities

let’s be even more imaginative here people!

maybe the piped in crowd noise could eliminate the need for fans altogether. and we could replace the teams on the court with some kind of hologram or other technical gimmickry, which would be programmed to simulate a team playing defense.

of course this is a slipperly slope into potentially dangerous ontological territory, but even if wolves fandom collapsed from being into nothingness it couldn’t be much worse than the current state of things.

by secretarykissinger on Nov 19, 2008 3:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

If they're going to do it...

….at least get a real hype man. Cut the crap with the Wally look-alike and get some guy who can talk some smack.

The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 19, 2008 3:41 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Shorter Schedule

You brought this up in your fix-the-NBA post, and I’d agree with it. At the higher levels, and specifically the NBA, basketball shows the least amount of competitive balance than any other team sport. Quite simply, it’s very, very difficult to find quality players that possess the perfect blend of size, skill, and athleticism to dominate. And given the nature of the game, where you can funnel so much of what you do through your best players, a team that has a Shaq-in-his-prime, or a Duncan, (or, given competent management, KG in his prime) simply has a huge advantage over the competition.

Anyway, if you accept this, then the 82 game season is unacceptably wrong and really only serves to sell more tickets. This isn’t baseball where you need a ton of games before the wheat separates from the chafe; it’s typically evident quite early on who the best teams are. And eventually the games become rather meaningless and/or depressing (i.e., Wolves v. Thunder come January or so). Occasionally seeding battles and/or those “3 teams tied for 2 playoff spots” races occur, but they’d happen in a short season, too.

Frankly I wouldn’t mind seeing them cut the schedule in half. I think this would serve to give the regular season a little more urgency, making the games attractive in of themselves, but it would also make them more rare. Arenas would likely be a bit more full.

At the very least, I’m sure there’s a better balance point of shorter schedule that would A) not irritate the owners who probably value every one of their 41 home games B) better recognize the competitive balance nature of the game (that is, long enough for the best teams to emerge, short enough to not get dull, and maybe even short enough to allow more “surprise” teams to break through, and C) take advantage of the basic supply-demand principles so that better crowds are there.

by jianfu on Nov 19, 2008 12:48 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

You mean you don't enjoy...

…a mid-season 2nd half of a back-to-back in OKC?

I think they’ll have to freeze the salary cap and get rid of a few teams. If they take away 4 teams that’s 48 players on the market right away. Have a draft based on the records of the past 5 years and let the 10 worst teams in the league draft from this pool with 2 rounds. The rest go to free agency and you let teams carry an extra spot on the roster.

I really think they need to go to a fixed day schedule…where you know they play on Wednesdays, Fridays, and Sundays (Saturdays during football season).

The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 19, 2008 1:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

And While I'm at it...

going on and on about the competitive imbalance of the NBA, shifting gears a bit, I’m surprised there isn’t a much larger uproar over the recent decisions of the NCAA and FIBA to adopt a more NBA-style court. Both are moving their 3-point lines back further, and FIBA’s even going to ditch the trapezoid lane in 2010.

WTF?

First, the NCAA and FIBA features a more balanced level of competition than the NBA for a lot of reasons, but a large one is the playing surface. A shorter 3-point line encourages more skill and action out of the wings, which is a great neutralizer in and of itself. And the trapezoid lane of course creates a more fast-paced and egalitarian style of play.

Second, in my experience, if you ask most fans which style of elite-level basketball they find most entertaining, most will say either NCAA or FIBA first, and NBA second, sometimes a far second.

So despite all this, the governing bodies with the superior floor setup are choosing to be more NBAlike? I don’t get it. A real travesty, IMO.

I can’t find FIBA’s reasoning. As for the NCAA, the committee just seems like they’re doing something just to do something (one coach on the committee even cited, as a benefit, that it would revive the oh-so-exciting mid-range game).

by jianfu on Nov 19, 2008 1:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I can’t speak to the trapezoid lane issue – have they said why they want to change it? This is the first I’ve heard of it. I do know that playing on a court with that lane, for a north american team, is a mindf*** – I went to Europe with my HS team and that lane contributed to our mediocre record – I remember thinking it unfair that FT rebounding basically became a free-for-all.

I am happy to see the NCAA move the 3pt line back though, simply because that shot, as it was, was extremely easy. I find it takes away from the balance of the game when teams decide, logically, that the vast majority of their shots should be 3s, because at that short distance the reward is so much greater. I think moving it back a little (it’s still much closer than an NBA 3) will balance the game out, reward the truly excellent shooters (instead of the mediocre ones who took advantage of the easy short distance), open up the game even more (giving post guys more room to operate), and yes, bring back the mid-range game somewhat. Maybe it’s my age, but I’m a big fan of the mid-range game, I think it requires a specific skill set that most players are losing, and I would be glad to see it back in some form.

by plinytheelder on Nov 19, 2008 2:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Rule Changes...

I’ve done a little more looking since posting. As far as I can tell, there’s been a huge demand to standardize the game; most people really just don’t like the non-uniform floors. FIBA and the NBA actually have met in the past to address the issue. Anyway, it appears the rule change is an attempt to remedy this by FIBA. (As you can guess, my preference would have been the other way around, but it seems the NBA’s clout won on this won.)

As for the trapezoid, you brought up my only complaint about it: FT rebounding can be a bit too flukey. I like its effect on rebounding during play, but FT rebounds just “seem” like the defense’s domain (i.e., if you don’t make your FTs, you don’t deserve to keep possession). But that’s how I grew up; I suppose I could change perspective.

We’ll have to agree to disagree on the 3-point line, probably. I’m not convinced the college line is too close. The 3-point % of the best college shooters usually aren’t markedly different than what you see in the NBA. And I don’t have a problem if it opens up the shot for more players. I think it still requires a good amount of skill to be accurate enough to be effective with it. Besides, more than anything else, 3-point shooting is maybe the biggest “Cinderella maker” come tourney time.

And as for mid-range jumpers, I’m not sure if it’s as much a generational skill deficiency as it is an almost natural response to the mid-range jumper being a comparatively inefficient scoring option. I guess I really didn’t mean to disparage it—there’s nothing aesthetically ugly about it or anything—just that it’s probably more of an evolution-type phenomonon. I’m not convinced we’re going to see a ressurection of the shot with the NCAA rule change.

by jianfu on Nov 19, 2008 2:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah I don’t mean to diss the trapezoid lane, if only for the fact that it lets me use the word “trapezoid”! I haven’t given much thought to it though, why does it create a more fast-paced/egalitarian style? I especially agree with the overall thrust of your post – that if any standardization should be occurring it should be away from the NBA. One thing I’d like to see them get rid of is defensive 3-second violations – I mean what is that anyways? Or the unwritten rules, like always giving the guy who drives the lane the benefit of the doubt over the defence. This accounts for the stupid phantom calls Brandon Roy gets every time the Blazers play the Wolves.

As for the 3-pt line, I guess I just think that at that distance (i.e. the old college distance) it’s not a difficult enough shot to warrant getting an extra point. I mean it almost got to the point where it made more sense, if you had a breakaway, to pull up for the 3. And there are even some colleges that do this: Grinnel College in Iowa, for example – maybe not the best example, since they’re not exactly UNC…but their coach has some kind of crazy rule where at least 80% of their shots have to be 3s, and if not they have to run sprints at practise. Those guys are fun to watch, they score something like 150 points a game, but I always feel like it’s kind of gimmicky.

I wasn’t aware that the college and NBA %s were so close…but couldn’t this just be because only the best of the best make it to the NBA? It could just be subjective on my part – I personally find the old college 3 a pretty easy shot to make, but can barely get the ball to the rim from the NBA distance. Maybe this just means I’m a weakling, but every time I try to hit an NBA 3 I have a new appreciation for just how strong NBA players are. I think you’re definitely right about the Cinderella maker aspect though, it’s fun to see teams like Davidson compete with Kansas.

You’re probably right about the disappearance of the mid-range game too, I mean it’s not like we see lots of it in the NBA with the longer 3-pt distance. I’m just being nostalgic I guess, I hate the fact that one of my all-time favourite players, Alex English, just wouldn’t be as good today as he was way back when, because all those 15-foot jumpers just don’t make as much sense anymore.

by plinytheelder on Nov 19, 2008 3:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Well, the trapezoid lane essentially A) forces the bigs to not only start further from the hoop than than they do in the NBA (which by extention usually requires them to have a little more skill to play: shooting and ball handling are equally important as size and strength as you can’t camp down low, catch, and turn for a layup) and B) due to the lane narrowing the further you get from the hoop, smaller players have a bit easier time crashing the boards, as they can start from a better angle than they do in the NBA.

All in all the idea is its egalitarian in that it tries to neutralize size to a certain extent and it encourages a faster pace as it spaces the floor and limits the effectiveness of the throw-it-low/one-on-one post play strategy.

(Incidentally, I think Al Jefferson could play with this lane; he can shoot, and he handles well enough to get where he needs to; he usually receives the ball a good distance away from the paint. It’s the Eddy Curry types who couldn’t play.)

Back to the mid-range game, I think it’s best attribute is it actually encourages a type of passing/movement game we don’t really see much any more. Now, “good ball movement” tends to be limited to either hitting a cutter in stride, or swinging it around on the perimeter. (Drive-and-kick is obviously key in the modern game, but that doesn’t usually get the commentators all that excited). The mid-range game, which utilized more of the floor for finding shots, demands better ball movement than that.

by jianfu on Nov 19, 2008 3:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Edit...

The mid-range game, which utilized more of the floor for finding shots, demands ~~better~~ more varied ball movement than that.

by jianfu on Nov 19, 2008 3:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

maybe FIBA and the NBA can compromise and go for a rhombus ;)

by plinytheelder on Nov 19, 2008 3:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

That'd be cool...

Plus, “rhombus” is still fun to write/say.

by jianfu on Nov 19, 2008 3:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

More points!!!

I’m all for bringing it in. I’d also like to see them widen the rim by about an inch. Run, run, run, run, run. 3 ball, 3 ball, 3 ball, 3 ball. Layup, layup, layup, layup. Slow basketball is the worst invention ever. :)

The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 19, 2008 3:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Drunken and dancing Fans

Call me a skeptic, but its worse than it seems. I was at the Portland game, too. There’s little doubt in my mind that both the shoeless dancer and the “drunken” man caught on camara in the white shirt were not fans inspired on the spur of the moment but planned events by the Wolves Marketing department. I’ve seen the drunken dancing man act before at other events and it always ends with either fallen shorts or a “flash” of the jiggling belly complete with man-breasts. Its a take off of the girl in the front row of the audiences at a rock concert who is seeming caught spur of the moment revealing herself topless on the big screen. It gets the corwd going everytime, yet if you’ve seen the show in other cities, its always the same girl at every show doing the exact same thing at the exact same moment in the concert. Choreographed entertainment and bored fans fall for it every time.

by Andy B on Nov 19, 2008 2:53 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I'm pretty sure....

…dancing guy was legit. He walked right past our box on the way up to his seats and he was a little too enamored with his prize water bottle to be a plant :)

I wouldn’t be surprised if the Wolves were doing a little guerilla marketing all around the areana and Block E. I had a guy come up to me at O’Donnovan’s who was a little too worked up about how cool of a game was going to happen across the street at 7pm. He also told me that some guy was outside selling tickets for about $25. Coincidence? Maybe, but I’ve never seen a random stranger get that excited about having someone else buy tickets before. Who knows? Maybe he was with one of the scalpers.

The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 19, 2008 3:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Please win tonight Wolves...Step out of Mediocrity for one night only.

or you can Lose to be One Step Closer to Either Drafting Ricky Rubio/ or Stephen Curry with that first pick.

by Tony_O on Nov 19, 2008 3:31 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

isn't tonight witt's last game?

by secretarykissinger on Nov 19, 2008 3:38 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Boy...

…at 1-9 you’d be hard pressed to think he could last longer. The only thing keeping him alive would be that Papa Glen probably doesn’t want to pay for 3 coaches at once (Casey is still on the books).

The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 19, 2008 3:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Simple Solution...

bring Casey back.

by jianfu on Nov 19, 2008 3:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

maybe they can just get Case to come back

and finish out his contract ;)

by plinytheelder on Nov 19, 2008 3:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I would love that...

…he was screwed. I don’t care about all the shit about Ricky Davis not listening and him losing control of the locker room with a bunch of jokers (and KG) in it….he had a .500 record with crap and he handled guys like Foye and McCants better than Witt. It could be something of a healing moment for the club. Kind of flaky, I know, but it would be a big break with the country club and…well, it will never happen so I’ll stop talking about it.

The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 19, 2008 3:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

OK so who do you guess will start?

My guess:
Foye (been playing way more than bassy anyway)
Miller
Gomes (I think they may try Brewer’s energy off the bench)
Love (since Gomes is in a SF and Collins isn’t the choice)
Big Al

by wolfen on Nov 19, 2008 3:49 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I don't know who starts

but here’s who I think should end: Ollie Foye Love Jefferson. Flip a coin for the 5th.

by plinytheelder on Nov 19, 2008 3:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

i don’t understand the fascination with ollie. what does he offer that bassy doesn’t?

by wolfen on Nov 19, 2008 6:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

kind of tongue in cheek I guess...

…I thought that when he and Foye were in together against the Nuggets it was pretty near the best backcourt the Wolves have had all year. Agreed on Telfair, whom I like very much…I think Wittman played Ollie instead because of his size (against Billups). Anyways he played very well, admittedly for a rather short spurt.

by plinytheelder on Nov 19, 2008 9:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Iguadola

He may be overpaid, but he’d fit a big time need for the Wolves.

by jianfu on Nov 19, 2008 4:03 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Guys like that...

…worry me. I can’t quite put a finger on it but…well, it’s just a gut feeling thing.

The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 19, 2008 4:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Put it this way...

I’d have loved to have him before he signed that contract. Now? Probably not, no. But he’d still be a great fit.

Maybe someone like USC’s Demar Derozen or Memphis’ Tyreke Evans could bring a lot of what Iguadola does to the table to the Wolves, and leave your gut feeling ok, to boot.

by jianfu on Nov 19, 2008 4:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed...

…I think that contract has a lot to do with it.

The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 19, 2008 4:23 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Also,

as we do whenever Brandon Roy or Danny Granger play the Wolves, is it too unfair to expand whenever possible. As in: Corey Brewer over Thaddeus Young.

(Probably unfair. No GM hits all the time. Still fun to do though, in a torturous, what-hasn’t-this team-messed-up sort of way.)

by jianfu on Nov 19, 2008 4:07 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

re: attendance

Just to briefly loop back to the matter of attendance, no sport can grow when most of its games and playoffs are locked up behind pay tv firewalls. Now that we have digital broadcasting and stations can b’cast multiple signals, there’s no reason why Congress shouldn’t mandate local b’casts of all pro sports games of teams who’ve received any kind of public subsidy, i.e., arenas, parking ramps, etc.

If you want to build the game, you want as many people as possible to see as many games as possible. Requiring complex cable packages (locally you need FSNo, TNT, ESPN — am I missing anyone?) is ridiculous. I have no desire to have a full basic cable package but the NBA truly seems to think I should cough up what? $400-500 a year just to watch their games on TV WITH advertising?

by TMiss on Nov 19, 2008 5:17 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I really am surprised....

….that more cities don’t require some sort of local broadcasting deal with new stadium money. The Wolves have a fair amount of games on Channel 45 but as soon as the digital switch happens, there’s no reason why they shouldn’t have at least that many games state wide.

The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 19, 2008 5:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

yeah TMiss this doesn’t address the issue you’re bringing up (I agree with you by the way, greedy bastards), but just in case you didn’t know, you can get about half the games this year on 45, those are the half I’ll be watching hehe

by plinytheelder on Nov 19, 2008 5:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

BTW:

TMiss stands for The Mississippifarian and you can read his excellent blog here. It’s a political blog so we don’t link to it on the main page but it is an aggregator with extras.

The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com

by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 19, 2008 6:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

extras

in this case meaning loads of profanity.

Haven’t missed a game on 45 yet, and I gotta say digital is my HD. Compared to the dreadful quality b’casts before digital, these games have been easy on the eyes.

Listened to tonight’s game on the radio so it was kinda hard to tell how good our d was, but we certainly seemed to be able to score.

by TMiss on Nov 19, 2008 10:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs