Dc311 wrote:I guess it is also a personal issue with me.
Dc311 wrote:I guess it is also a personal issue with me.
koberulz wrote:That's not a reason, it's a poor justification for not actually having a reason.
Pdub wrote:Random thought:
What if this was a ploy to try and increase the interest in the nba? They were making progress, then it's take it or leave it, they left it, lawsuit, lawsuit settled and an agreement right around thanksgiving and opening day on christmas?
Dc311 wrote:I don't have to answer to you just so you can feel good about yourself princess.
shadowgrin wrote:Not really.
koberulz wrote:I can't off the top of my head think of an example of it not being true.
The NBA regular season would run through April 26 and require teams to play at least one set of back-to-back-to-back games if a new labor deal is ratified in time to start on Christmas.
The league posted an outline of what the schedule would look like on its Twitter pages Sunday. The plan is a 66-game regular season, ending about 10 days later than usual. The last possible day of the NBA finals would be June 26, two weeks later than the championship series ended last season.
Teams would play 48 games within their conference and 18 non-conference games. No team would play on three straight nights more than three times.
Back-to-backs might also be played during the second round of the postseason.
Dc311 wrote:koberulz wrote:I can't off the top of my head think of an example of it not being true.
Well then I find it's an indication that the positions you hold are probably incorrect and certainly worth re-examining.
Over the next couple of months, fans, experts, coaches and general managers will all be asking: Which sort of team — old, young, filled with holdovers, stocked with free agents — might benefit from this compressed schedule? And which teams will suffer?
The only honest answer is: We don’t really have any idea. Smart people around the league have theories, but they happily admit that those theories have no proof, and that many of them would apply in an 82-game season. Dig into the data from 1999 — our one-season sample size — and you won’t find anything definitive, other than teams played very slowly overall and missed more shots than ever.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests