Is the NBA hurting the defensive side of the game?

[westkoast]

Is the NBA hurting the defensive side of the game?  Do you think the new rules help the offensive player entirely too much?  And do you feel you are getting a better product by watching higher scoring games?

This came to me while I was reading Scottie Pippen's blog on Kobe's 81 and comparing Kobe/MJ over at NBA.com.  Pip brought up something I thought was an excellent point, which was the fact that the NBA has actually made it easier for guys to score with all the new rules.  Some of those which include no hand checking, very little contact on the perimeter, no more eat pine type fouls when players are going to the rim, and fouls that use to not get called being called frequently.   His point was that the NBA is doing this on purpose to boost scoring to give the fans a better, more high action product night in and night out.

What do you guys think?

[Derek Bodner]

the hand check rules help iso-players far too much, yes.

[Reality]

John Thompson said Wilt would have gotten 200 vs Toronto Raptors.

That does not sound reverant to Kobe.

Maybe he is just a hater.  

[westkoast]

John Thompson said Wilt would have gotten 200 vs Toronto Raptors.

That does not sound reverant to Kobe.

Maybe he is just a hater.

Can you stop thinking about the Lakers for a minute?  This has nothing to do with the Lakers other than Scottie brought up a great point about the league slowly killing off the defensive side of basketball in a blog about Kobe and Michael.  

Second of all, the rules benefit players on the perimeter, not post players like Wilt Chamberlain.

[Reality]

The hand check rule benefits the offense for sure.

Now if the refs would just call it consistently.

Also travelling never being called is a joke.

[westkoast]

Here is the paragraph that sparked this thread...

The defensive rules, the hand checking, the ability to make contact on a guy in certain areas, the ability to come over in the lane to stop guys from getting to the basket, that's all been taken away from the game. There is no contact up on the floor. The way I played Magic Johnson in the '91 Finals, I would have fouled out the first time down court. To compare how someone would have played Michael Jordan, Chuck Daly would send someone to wear him down. Even though he may get 30 or 40 points, they're going to be a hard 30 points. But in today's game, you can't put that physical wear and tear on a guy. It's a free ball type of game. If you are shooting it well, you can score 80, as you've seen because you are going to get to the foul line.

And here is the second part where he speaks on the league and how they are promoting this on purpose

Officials have very quick whistles now because they're promoting scoring. Let's not forget, three years ago, this league was trying to figure out how they could get the scoring back up, how they could drive the fans back into loving the game, and this is what they were building on. They changed the field of rules. Those rules are huge in the game today. They benefit the perimeter guy. Back in the day, you may get one guy to score 40 points in a month. When Michael Jordan scored 40, it was all over the front page of a newspaper. Now you can pretty much have 40 points at halftime. Until the league went and changed the rules and tried to get some of that bully ball out, you couldn't come out and perform like that every night. The game was too physical. You were too sore the next day and you were just tired and physically worn down. The game seems so fun and free now. Guys are making a living just standing out there shooting jumpers.

[Laker Fan]

I have mixed feelings on this subject. The wow side of me loves a good shootout, the fundamentals of basketball side of me loves an effective defense being able to shutdown a team that is all offense, thus exposing their lack of fundamental play on both sides of the ball. The hand check rule opened up outside scoring like nothing else I can think of, the major beneficiaries have been players with the range or capable of developing the range to take advantage of it, players like Iverson, Bryant, James, spring immediately to mind. I do think it has extended the careers of these types of players because getting hammered in the post is no longer a necessary evil; leave it to the big men who live there.

However, the NBA of the 80’s and early 90’s were scoring consistently higher than today’s NBA which has rules in place specifically designed to enhance scoring so really, how effective have the rule changes been? Were these teams that weak defensively or was the free flowing style of basketball before the rule changes more conducive to scoring than we realized? I think it was more the latter. The Pistons of the late 80’s were a BRUTAL defensive squad, and while everyone remembers the Showtime Lakers, they had a pretty effective defense as well.

I guess the overall lack of fundamental basketball has hurt scoring AND defense more than anything. The individual performance and the desire to make the highlight reel, while always part of some people’s games throughout the years, has become more important since the Jordan years, hence you have the Kobe Bryant’s, Vince Carters, Alan Iverson’s, and pretenders like Jason Williams and so forth.

[Derek Bodner]

However, the NBA of the 80’s and early 90’s were scoring consistently higher than today’s NBA which has rules in place specifically designed to enhance scoring so really, how effective have the rule changes been? Were these teams that weak defensively or was the free flowing style of basketball before the rule changes more conducive to scoring than we realized? I think it was more the latter. The Pistons of the late 80’s were a BRUTAL defensive squad, and while everyone remembers the Showtime Lakers, they had a pretty effective defense as well.

2 things:
1) Zones
2) Team defensive concepts are much, much better now than they were back then.

[Laker Fan]

I do agree with those points Derek, however, the zone is a relatively new thing to the NBA "officially" so its impact is not yet as pronounced as your second point, the team defense concept, with this concept your rotations and switch offs are more effective, much more so, than man coverage because one man can blow an assignment and not always cost his team, IF his teammates are doing there job. Yesterday I watched Miami do some brilliant trapping and switches that make your point even more valid. These occasions are however, not the norm throughout the NBA, lack of fundamental basketball, especially poor ball movement on the offensive end, just makes those players or teams that are decent defenders more successful at isolating a player and bringing scores down because shot clocks run close to their limits more regularly than I ever remember them in the past.

[JoMal]

The lack of consistent refereeing is far more of a concern than the change in rules. The "star" treatment of certain players, especially as was pointed out regarding travelling calls, has hurt the development of the game far more then just changing the rules of the game. The NBA has never really had a level playing field when it comes to how the refs have called things.

It is subjective and it encourages certain players to think they are better then others simply because they can get away with things those other players could not dream of getting away with.

[Guest_Randy]

Actually, it's not just being a star player, IMO -- it's your REPUTATION that gets you calls (or the lack of them).

Artest is a good example -- having a reputation as a "defensive stopper" (and he is) means that refs are going to let him away with more contact than other players in the league -- the same is true with some other players who aren't "stars" per se (Bowen, Prince, etc.).  

Reputation DOES gain you favor with the refs -- not saying it's right -- it just does.


As for the hand checking -- I don't like it -- I like basketball to be a game of defense -- not offense.  In pick up games, if you don't like somebody's hand on you then you just slap it off!   :rofl:  

[Skandery]

I actually I have a lot more to say on how the OFFENSE has completely deteriorated over the last couple decades.  

To comment on the subject at hand, I don't think the rules changes are affecting the defensive side of the ball too much.  You always hate to see a bunch of ticky tack fouls called but even in that horrible scenario, its MUCH WORST when the refs aren't consistent.  The "star" factor that rears its ugly little head with most of these non-existent/inconsistent ticky tack fouls is also quite a bother.  Gilbert Arenas scored 30 POINTS!!,....yeah 18 of them were free throws.  And I think that sad institution compromises the effectiveness of a well-prepared defensive team moreso than a "hand-check" rule.

Offensively is where things truly have gone into the crapper.  And I'll blame Michael Jordan as much as the next guy but I think coaches have to share the blame also.  I think that there is a lot of pressure on coaches to show that they are 'tangibly' affecting the success of their teams.  So they succumb to the pressures and start micro-managing as much of the movement (on the ball and off the ball) of all 5 guys on the floor, as possible.  "Well, that there dude sure knows how ta coach, yessiree!"  

People like to talk about the brilliant basketball mind of Mike D'Antoni.  The guy pretty much took a page out of Pre-Iso basketball.  Here's the gist:  get a rebound, give it to your point, let him push as fast as he can, penetrate, dish to the open man, SHOOT, done.  I don't care if that open man is Eddie House, Boris Diaw, James Jones, Shawn Marion, Quentin Richardson, Joe Johnson, Jim Jackson, or Leandro Barbosa.  If the team made the previous shot or the team got back on D, walk it up--screen and roll, DONE!  I mean its so simple a junior high team could do it.  

Nope, nowadays people have to be geniuses like Larry Brown, Rick Carlisle, Eddie Jordan, Pat Riley, Phil Jackson -- Triangle offenses, Rectangular Trapezoidal offenses but if your not into geometry its a Princeton offense, Stanford offense, Dartmouth offense, <insert Ivy league school here> offense.........its a bunch of Bull Hockey and some people are starting to look like idiots having their players run around like chickens with their heads cut off on the way to another 24 second violation.          
     

[westkoast]

The lack of consistent refereeing is far more of a concern than the change in rules. The "star" treatment of certain players, especially as was pointed out regarding travelling calls, has hurt the development of the game far more then just changing the rules of the game. The NBA has never really had a level playing field when it comes to how the refs have called things.

It is subjective and it encourages certain players to think they are better then others simply because they can get away with things those other players could not dream of getting away with.

The reffing has always been inconsistant though.  Has there ever been a time in NBA history that the calls were perfect?  Its hard to always be consistant when you have 20+ refs in the league who see and interpret rules differently.  Much like our board where three posters can see three different games even if they are tuned into the same exact game.

Inconsistant reffing will always be a problem but adding more rules to the game is not going to help that out.

[Laker Fan]

The problem there "Koast is that the new rules have made it easier for refs to call those ticky tack fouls Skander refered to and your point that the refs have their own interpretation of what is a foul and what is not only exacerbates the problem. Brilliant point Skander, Arenas scores 30, 18 from the stripe, a perfect microcosm of the problem some of the new rules created. At the same time, I still believe the hand check rule has opened up scoring from the whole floor and kept guard play outside more frequently and I have always felt a spread floor is a more effective floor.

See, I told you I had mixed feelings about this subject!! Great topic "Koast!

[JoMal]

I'm not talking about the routine inconsistency of the NBA refs, where missed calls are made, or make-up calls are made. It is the inconsistency of favoritism, where players can do exact the same move and one will always get called for it and the other one can literally walk the ball up to the hoop and lay it in with no consequences. It takes away from any integrity of sports that fans should demand, not just in basketball, but other team sports as well.

You talk about rule changes and how they affect the game this season, but what you really want to know is if Artest is doing the handchecking or Kevin Martin, you know Martin will be called for a foul while Artest has an even chance of not getting it called.