How can the All-Star game be more fun and competitive?

by AtlBlzr on Feb 10, 2012 5:59 PM PST

In the spirit of the entertaining but rather exhibition-like style of the upcoming NBA All-Star game. I want to know what your idas are to make it more competive while still keeping the fun factor. Obviously this is hypothetical, but honestly a lot of what we do here on BE is.

The thing I like most about the game in current form is the ability to have so many different player from all over the NBA come together and play in the game. Most of the time there is excitement and fun but very little competition until players realize in the 4th Quarter that they don't want to be seen as losers so then the real game starts.

I would use that but restructure the game to have 2 teams of 8 from each conference - 5 starters and 3 reserves, with 1 coach for each team (coaches selected by team record). Team A for both conferences would be voted in by the fans much like is done right now. Team B would be voted by coaches and players. I think this would give you a very interesting perspective as to who the coaches and players would consider the leaders of the teams.

It would set up a 3 game tournament where on Sunday, "Team A - West" plays "Team B - East" and following that game, "Team A - East" plays "Team B - West". The winners play the final game Monday night which gives the NBA 4 days of ratings.

This format would accomplish 5 things not done by the current All Star Game:

* It would allow more players more exposure and time for individual coaches and players.

* Competition gets ramped up huge as I guarantee Team B doesn't want to lose to Team A.

* The fan element gets spotlighted and really matters.

* We all get to see far more NBA ball at an elite level which I know I'd like a lot.

* More players get in with 32 vs. 24. This allows for more players who can be showcased.

OK that is my idea, what say you?

Tweet Comment 18 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Thoughts

Format should be like this….

West team A vs West team B

East team A vs East team B

Then the winners face off. Why? Because its an West vs East…. No one will watch it if it’s east vs east or west vs west…. You just lost a lot of viewers and interest.

by Hoi on Feb 10, 2012 8:27 PM PST via mobile reply actions

Good idea. Reasons why:

1. More revenue for Turner (Sports) because more broadcast time so more ad time
2. More revenue for the NBA.
3. As Hoi said it showcases more players
So, I hope you’ll argree with Hoi and I because the bigger the better!

by blazeking on Feb 12, 2012 2:09 PM PST up reply actions

I'd put everyone on roller-skates

and release 2 hungry polar bears on to the court.

Insta-fun.

by nikolokolus on Feb 10, 2012 9:10 PM PST reply actions 1 recs

I'm actually intrigued

by the drafting thing they’re doing for the former Rookie-Sophomore game. It’d be interesting to try drafting squads, especially with fan involvement, instead of just going East vs. West. In fact a really radical idea would be to eliminate fan voting for the All-Stars themselves entirely. Coaches or somebody in the know would pick the 24 players, keeping 12 from each conference still. But then instead of playing by conference the players go into a pool from which they’re selected, playground style. Who do you pick first? LeBron? Kobe? Dwight? Lin?

—Dave

by Dave on Feb 10, 2012 9:41 PM PST reply actions

how about instead of 12 per conference,

it’s just the 24 best players in the game.

The idea has been thrown around that the playoffs should be the best 16 teams in the league, regardless of conference. I for one think they could make the whole playoff system way more interesting.

"If you can do a half-assed job of anything, you're a one-eyed man in a kingdom of the blind."

by thankyouforblaze on Feb 11, 2012 3:33 AM PST up reply actions

Nah, let's keep the NBA Playoffs split up by conferences.

Call me old-fashioned, but I prefer having conferences and divisions regionalize the league. More than anything, it helps build area-based rivalries and maintains a structure.

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Feb 11, 2012 5:31 AM PST up reply actions

keep the conferences, yeah.

but i think maybe taking off the last 1 or two seeds of each conference and just having a wild card tournament or something with the 7-10 teams in each conference could be nice, since there are better west teams that just miss out of the playoffs each year that could’ve gotten in if they were in the east.

"Wide, girthy. Just like a Rhino. Sometimes my horns are visible."

by YoniRap on Feb 11, 2012 11:40 AM PST up reply actions

"but i think maybe taking off the last 1 or two seeds of each conference and just having a wild card tournament or something with the 7-10 teams in each conference could be nice"

That’s one of Bill Simmons’ most ludicrous ideas, which is saying something. It’s not only highly impractical, but it’d also be a colossal waste of time.

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Feb 11, 2012 11:21 PM PST up reply actions

ok then just have the bottom 2 seeds in each conference

get occupied by the teams with the next 4 best records regardless of conference. The tournament, given another look, is pretty impractical, but It’d be good to fix this whole imbalance problem.

"Wide, girthy. Just like a Rhino. Sometimes my horns are visible."

by YoniRap on Feb 12, 2012 7:47 AM PST up reply actions

It'd be nice to keep the fans involved somehow, because it's good marketing and makes those dopes ...

watching at the arena or at home feel a false sense of importance. Yet, no matter if the fans collectively vote for ten players who they want to be at the All-Star Game, the playground style drafting by appointed captains could still take place. Instead of guaranteeing that those ten get to start, just guarantee that those ten get to at the game. The coaches could pick the final fourteen participants, although any of them can possibly start.

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Feb 11, 2012 5:29 AM PST up reply actions

1) Do what Dave said, i.e. mimic the new Rookie-Soph format

2) The winning squad gets to pick one guy from the losing squad, and then re-assign him to any NBA team represented by the players on the winning team for the rest of the season.

Phase 1: Collect underpants
Phase 2: ???
Phase 3: Profit!

by HailOden! on Feb 10, 2012 9:45 PM PST reply actions

Too convoluted, sorry.

Entertaining in theory, but not pragmatic.

Practicality is important.

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Feb 11, 2012 5:33 AM PST reply actions

STOP LETTNG FANS VOTE

!!!

by Qyntel Woods on Feb 11, 2012 9:12 PM PST reply actions

Nah, it keeps a lot of them fat and happy.

Gives those folks who vote a false sense of importance, so more power to ’em.

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Feb 11, 2012 11:22 PM PST up reply actions

Do the fans really do a bad job of selecting the starters?

by tingeyga on Feb 12, 2012 7:46 AM PST reply actions

Carmelo Anthony is in the starting line-up

His team is horrible while he’s playing, and now that he’s injured they’re on a 5 game winning streak. so sometimes. at least once a year you get a horrible pick in the starting line-up, but there’s usually only one or two. Like Yao for the past few years, and Jeremy Lin for the next 10 games after this one.

"Wide, girthy. Just like a Rhino. Sometimes my horns are visible."

by YoniRap on Feb 12, 2012 7:52 AM PST up reply actions

How about...

Keep the voting the same way as of right now… But coaches only vote for 5 players. It leaves it to 10 players and for the last 2, there are players that get nominated, those players that are nominated then do some sort of competition in first day of all star weekend and the best 2 gets selected in the all star. Coaches, players and fan votes are split .33%.

by Hoi on Feb 12, 2012 9:26 AM PST via mobile reply actions