Reply With Quote
no. Baseball shouldn't do it either.
baseball does and who ever wins the allstar game gets homecourt advantage in the championship series?
no. Baseball shouldn't do it either.
Michael Young Rocks.
That is all.
I like the idea. I say go for it. That would make a fun all star game.
that sucked major balls
but wells (az pitcher) only pitched one inning so they deserved to lose
wells striked out jetter though!!!!
wgaf... scoreboard..
hey did you all see Pujols barehand that badhopper? Suweet!
that'd probably increase ratings for the all-star game and make it more compe ive.
i'd like it to happen sort of but it seems a bit unfair to one team who works hard to have what might have been hca taken away because of an all star game
It's lame. The only thing the NBA needs to change about All-Star weekend is ponying up like 5 million to the winner of the dunk contest to get the best dunkers there.
That, and set up some one on one compe ion so we can see players go mano e mano.
Both good ideas.
I still like Bill Simmons's idea to start a HORSE compe ion.
Yeah, NL really screwed it up tonight...BTW, you mean Webb, right?
yes
I kind of like it honestly...
But it takes a little away from the integrity of the game. The best team should have homecourt. If you have to make your all-star game exciting with cheap gimmicks, then just eliminate the game and give the players a break.
Probably not.
Unlike baseball, basketball is a contact sport and if you had guys playing more intense defense and more contact, these games would likely entail more injuries which is something the league doesn't need. Just imagine a guy like Tim Duncan having his season lost as well as the Spurs if he is injured in the All-Star game.
Another point is why would a All-Star representative on a 15-25 team give a jack whether his team wins the All-Star game if his team had no chance of competing for a playoff spot much less home-court in the Finals? I would think that the only guys who would bust their asses in such a game are those who would benefit from such a ruling.
Besides, baseball has done everything in it's power to shoot itself in the foot ever since the Bud Selig era began. David Stern is too shrewd of a commissioner to resort to the same mistakes.
Actually, more people get injured when they aren't playing as hard. Most sports people will tell you when guys who are used to playing all out are put in a situation where they aren't expected to play quite 100% it's an unusual situation for them and they start doing things out of character, and that's when freak injuries happen.
I would be inclined to agree to a certain point.
Speaking from NBA All-star game history, who was the last player besides Brad Miller in '04 to suffer a major injury in a game? I don't actually know and can't think of any instances off-hand. Maybe someone else does.
I guess the theory is better proven in Pro Bowl.
The NBA all star game is a joke, they don't play "less hard" they just don't play at all. It's basically a slam dunk contest with a clock and scorekeeper.
I would like to see a 16 man single elimination 1 on 1 tournament. Play games to 20, must win by 4 pts....take ball out to three pt. line....all baskets are 2 pts.....One referee...no shooting fouls...just get the ball back or if offensive foul, a turnover.
This was actually done back in the 70's. I think Bob Lanier won the whole thing.
I think it would be fun to watch, and the players could have fun with it....good-natured trash talking, etc.
They could do it over two days and televise the matchups...I think it would be fun.....
some good one on one matchups I would like to watch.....
Tony Parker vs Steve Nash...who's quicker?
Kobe Bryant vs Dwayne Wade....great skills
Tim Duncan vs Shaquille O'Neal....inside battle
Tim Thomas vs Dirk Nowitski....grudge match
Last edited by dav4463; 07-12-2006 at 04:16 AM.
I agree with you on your first point, during the 2003-2004 season brad miller got injured during the all-star game, I was pissed off. If the nba made the game more compe ive I would vote for players on other teams then my own, I do not want to see anymore injuries happen to my team especially during some stupid and pointless game such as the all-star game.
Would make for a more interesting mid-summer game. But I would be pissed if I was the manager of a team with the best record in baseball and could not host the world series because my league lost the all-star game. Of course with the way things have been shaping up between the two leagues thus far this year I am not so sure the NL stands much of a chance against the AL in the finals (home field or not).
me too. who hasn't played horse, and who wouldn't watch the pros do it?Both good ideas.
I still like Bill Simmons's idea to start a HORSE compe ion.
NO. Most polls show people think the MLB shouldn't be doing that either.
The thiought reminds me of those old "nothin' but net" commercials with Bird and Jordan.
Baseball has to do it cause it's boring as . no
It's a ridiculously awful idea. I don't understand why MLB players don't revolt against it. You're saying the advantage in the World Series swings at the end of the bat of some run-of-the-mill All-Star from a team that won't even sniff the post-season?
No. Stupid, stupid, stupid. Do you really want TMac or Garnett or AI or Kobe (heehee) deciding if we will be home or away for the Finals? Ok, so maybe yes on 3 of those because they are in West, but look at AI... you want him hitting a half court shot (ala Olympics) so we have to go to Miami or Detroit or Cleve?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
