Dame and Anthony Davis both come out in support of wanting the in season tourney win.

[Real Men Wear Green]

My only disagreement with that analogy is the Super Bowl became the championship game within a couple of years, and I could see the appeal of seeing the winner of the two leagues facing each other. The in-season tournament will ALWAYS pale in comparison to the playoffs, and I honestly don't see anything the league can do to change that perception. eliteballer is 100% right, the players getting extra money will does nothing from the fans perspective.

Also, I've seen people constantly bring up the soccer comparison. My understanding is when it's a soccer in season tournament, teams are facing each other who rarely, if ever play one another, so that alone provides a clear distinction. With this you're still getting the same 30 teams that have been playing each other every night for decades It's frankly an asinine comparison.

I know fans are usually resistant to change, but this still seems as meaningless and completely unnecessary as it did when they started floating the idea years ago. It just doesn't work, and i can't envision a scenario where it does.

You have reasons to not think it's especially important. Your position is the paosition that for the league is the worst case scenario of fan opinion. But that would only make the effect neutral. It's not like you won't watch due to the tournament. Versus however many fans find it interesting. And what does this possible added attention cost the league? The 7 to 8 mil they pay the winning players? Already we hear players talking about how they want to win it. That will improve the preceptor of these games and even if some of us never get into it it's unlikely that this doesn't make money, which is the real point.

[Kblaze8855]

It’s not just about time and tradition, there needs to be a functional purpose within the framework of the season. You play regular season games to make the playoffs, you play in the postseason to win the championship which is the measure of the best team in the given year. Just picking some games in the regular season and calling it a tournament serves no functional purpose.

You need to look into world tournaments if you think they all serve a purpose. Some are even exhibitions before the season. It’s just something to put on display and say you won. It doesn’t “matter” but none of it “matters”.

The all star game doesn’t “matter” but I remember exactly how several of them ended when they were actually played like games.

Things don’t need stakes to be memorable or worth a watch. We still occasionally talk about the USA blue vs white scrimmage games.

It’s all just basketball on tv. It’s an attempt to add one more thing that might be worth remembering. Bunch of guys going crazy they got half a million on a game winner might do it.

It doesn’t have to have a function. I’m more likely to remember it than whatever unheralded league pass game I’d have been watching.

I’ll watch the final games to see how they play it. I imagine quite a few will. It doesn’t have to “matter” for me to watch it. If players care about winning it it’s likely to have more effort than most regular season games. No reason not to watch.

[Phoenix]

I can't imagine anyone giving a shit about this season tournament beyond this year, but I stand to be corrected. Like SBT said above, it's still the same teams facing each other multiple times a year, only adorning the court and players with tournament garb to make some kind of distinction from a normal drag of a mid-season game in January

If the league wants to re-introduce some concept of pride, start with something obvious like the All-star game. I'd love to see a NA vs World format, for starters. Or are guys so invested in their personal brands that they just won't make the effort and risk getting injured in an exhibition contest? I can't think of a single occurrence where a notable injury took place during the ASG in years past that tangibly impacted a team's title chances.

[SouBeachTalents]

You have reasons to not think it's especially important. Your position is the paosition that for the league is the worst case scenario of fan opinion. But that would only make the effect neutral. It's not like you won't watch due to the tournament. Versus however many fans find it interesting. And what does this possible added attention cost the league? The 7 to 8 mil they pay the winning players? Already we hear players talking about how they want to win it. That will improve the preceptor of these games and even if some of us never get into it it's unlikely that this doesn't make money, which is the real point.

Tbf though this is hardly the measuring stick of if something is an improvement in the sport or not. Switching sports to football, I am not a fan of the extra playoff seed they've added in the NFL, and if it were up to me I'd do away with the 17th regular season game. To me these just dilute the product, but they will for sure make money.

I don't know how many, if any people here follow college football, but the 8 team playoff they're implementing next year COMPLETELY diminishes the importance of the regular season. Now instead of having almost no margin for error, you could lose 2, maybe even 3 games and still make the playoff. Michigan & Ohio State facing off undefeated will barely even matter now, but rest assured, those extra playoff games will make a shit ton of money.

[Kblaze8855]

Tbf though this is hardly the measuring stick of if something is an improvement in the sport or not.

It is to the people who decide what the sport does though. Rest assured if the revenue grows they don’t give two shits if fans like it or not.

Netflix is rumored to be in on the bidding for future tournaments believe it or not.

It appears to be serving its purpose. Something else to sell. Fans think the ratings matter but they don’t. Rights fees matter. How many people watch pays the tv company not the league. They’re set for like ten years no matter what the ratings are.

Gives them quite a while to work out the kinks.

[Real Men Wear Green]

Tbf though this is hardly the measuring stick of if something is an improvement in the sport or not. Switching sports to football, I am not a fan of the extra playoff seed they've added in the NFL, and if it were up to me I'd do away with the 17th regular season game. To me these just dilute the product, but they will for sure make money.

I don't know how many, if any people here follow college football, but the 8 team playoff they're implementing next year COMPLETELY diminishes the importance of the regular season. Now instead of having almost no margin for error, you could lose 2, maybe even 3 games and still make the playoff. Michigan & Ohio State facing off undefeated will barely even matter now, but rest assured, those extra playoff games will make a shit ton of money.

They should make the football playoff 16 teams. If the point is to crown the deserving champion you should err on the side of more teams not less. How can you or anyone else be sure that the top ranked team is better than the 5th when both are undefeated? Let alone that the 4th is better than the 5th. There are over 100 teamscreating a situation where it's impossible to be sure who is better than who when two teams are from different conferences and never play each other. We just assume the power 5 conference teams are better which has the added negative of making it impossible for literally thousands of players to ever have a shot at the championship no matter what they do.

And that really had nothing to do with the topic.

[Full Court]

It’s not just about time and tradition, there needs to be a functional purpose within the framework of the season. You play regular season games to make the playoffs, you play in the postseason to win the championship which is the measure of the best team in the given year. Just picking some games in the regular season and calling it a tournament serves no functional purpose.

Yeah, I agree with this. A bonus will make the players care, but if you want it to catch on with fans, there has to be something more to it.

[Phoenix]

Yeah, I agree with this. A bonus will make the players care, but if you want it to catch on with fans, there has to be something more to it.

It won't make the players care whom the fans tune in for, that's the issue I see. Great that winning the tournament may be a nice 500k payout for the 12th man on the bench, that would mean more to him because his role on his team winning would be largely immaterial. The players the league 'really' want to incentivize to give a shit are the ones making 40m a year and as I said above, they probably blow 500k on a normal off-season weekend in Vegas.

[Jasper]

having multi-millionaires buy into a tourney that has no impact on their career escalates is pretty tough unless some bum at the end of the
bench tells him do it for me , and your pride.....

While the healthy team sits out and waits for the playoffs....

hard to balance IMO

[PeroAntic]

Also, I've seen people constantly bring up the soccer comparison. My understanding is when it's a soccer in season tournament, teams are facing each other who rarely, if ever play one another, so that alone provides a clear distinction. With this you're still getting the same 30 teams that have been playing each other every night for decades It's frankly an asinine comparison.

Wrong, football cup competitions in Europe do involve the lower level teams but that is only in the initial rounds which are a wash anyway, towards the end its all the bigs competing again, who play in the league against each other. A trophy is still a trophy, silverware matters even if its not the top one. In the NBA you have all of these legends who never won anything in their career because there is only one title and it kinda sucks. This would make resumes and legacies more interesting.