I agree with all of that. NBA has become boring with its no defence approach. I was looking into team scoring averages, and comparing it to the early 2000' where defence was much more important and the scoring differences were huge.

This season pretty much every team is scoring over 100ppg with a good number averaging over 110ppg. 15 years ago there were teams struggling to get to 95ppg. Its opened up way too much and is just an offensive spectacle now.

Do players hold back on D to protect themselves from injury - and therefore protecting their multi million dollar contracts?

Ive pretty much lost intetest in watching the NBA now.

Only 5 teams are averaging over 110ppg this season, but 28 of 30 teams are averaging over 100ppg. In 2003, only 2 teams averaged over 100ppg. Thats an obvious shift in focussing more on scoring. Watching the NBA is pretty boring when teams are only engaging on one half of the court.

Been off the NBA for a while now as the effort levels look lazy to me.

I've barely watched an NBA game since the lockout.

I've mentioned on this site before that NBA is basically watching ISO plays every possession and when it's not it's Pick and rolls but it genuinely feels like you have a star player get the ball ignore his 4 team mates and then he puts up a stupid shot (sometimes they go in - and the commentators bang on about how he is unguardable) whilst his team mates have their backs turned to the ball and are already running down the other end of the court.

It doesn't feel like the players are trying to protect their multi-million dollar contracts (and lets face it almost everyone in NBA has made $2m or more) but I think the issue is the schedule and the 82 game season, that won't change but when you have sports science people (that are ruining all kinds of other sports) they are bound to try and discourage any player from overexerting themselves as they have to play 4 games a week for 5-6 months, it's why the average player in today's NBA look like they are wearing pyjamas under their uniform, it's aesthetically ugly.

The ONLY reason to watch NBA is to see your team or to watch Australian/New Zealand players and be biased in hoping they succeed even if they are facing one another and that just ain't basketball

I struggle to be amazed by personal statistics now; back in the day when you saw players like Nash, Bryant, Iverson and Lebron (2007 performance vs Pistons for example) (and even T.Parker for me) you were amazed and in awe. Nash averaged 18 and 10 his MVP year (which is very low in the modern NBA); yet watching him play was magical.

Now players like Westbrook and Harden (with all due respect) and others can rack up assists quite easily without making too difficult of passes or doing anything
ridiculously special apart from the odd crazy pass/rack up easy rebounds too/and get easy points from the FT line and/or bad defence. Feels like their numbers are just a product of ball usage and high ball retention. And I get particularly bored by the love with the 3 point game to the extent I refuse to watch GSW games/Curry highlights.

[Saying that however, Harden's performance yesterday was crazy, although I didn't watch it]

Maybe I just grew up; who knows? Sport probably always feels more magical when you're watching as a kid/teenager.

Agree to an extent with anon above, especially about a lot of NBA teams now running better team offences, but it's important to note that good defensive teams can make it difficult for opponents to play at pace. Some (GSW, Adelaide as examples) actually want oppo to play quick, but that doesn't work for everyone.

More three pointers would open up the court a bit and make it harder to pack in and defend effectively. Plus there are some very team-oriented and difficult to defend offences being run by the smarter teams.

I don't have time to watch entire games so can't judge more than that. We have a TV and League Pass in the office but mostly just watch close finishes to games.

Its only getting worse with teams only really putting in come playoff time when scouting etc is better and the players have more time to lock in

The rules are such to improve the offencive efficiency and in general pace of the game so it is more entertaining, these rules don't help defence at all - no real defensive help, no split line defence, no real trapping; just iso play and even pick and roll is frequently used to create a mismatch for a ball handler.

As Reality said - probably worth watching during playoffs.

Agree.

The americans whinge about players like Delly because he actually plays D.

I like the hustle and scrap of the NBL but still can't quite stop watching the NBA either.

Yeah, it's gotten boring. Absolutely no defense at all.

NCAA and pretty much every decent international league play stronger and more physical defense.

NCAA would be the best league to watch in the world if it didn't have so many timeouts/stoppages.

The idea that you can have 14-16 total timeouts in 40 minutes of play is laughable (but obviously the TV/sponsors are paying good cash).

Europe would be great to watch too if it got more coverage over these ways.

Better than NBA IMO anyway.

At last someone else is saying what I've been thinking for the past few years. The NBA is more about entertainment than about competition. The lack of intensity, the lack of ball movement, the lack of player movement. No wonder NBA players struggle with NBL. They have much more natural athletisism throughout the league, but as has been said earlier, it seems they play too many games to care about them all. I's much rather watch a bunch of kids who are playing for their lives than watch uncontested dunks, wide open 3's.
The NBL teams play to win every game. Its a really good league that jsut needs 3 - 4 more teams to give us more variety. But we can't afford to drop the standard.

History means I continue to watch the Lakers, couldn't really be bothered with other games. Will have it on if there's nothing else to watch

Much prefer college ball and record every game available

NCAA would be the best league to watch in the world if it didn't have so many timeouts/stoppages.

I just finished watching a game from 1990 on VCR. Warriors beat the Nuggets 162-158 in regulation. Not a lot of defense was played unfortunately.

Back to the great games we get to watch in the modern era for me. Can't wait for Bucks v Timberwolves tomorrow.

Much like with cricket where the rules have favoured batting over bowling, NBA has favoured the offends over the defence.

But my one last gripe and this may make me sound like a really old man of 33 but I'm sick and tired of hearing how so many players "are future hall of famers" it feels like most NBA games they are giving that accolade to one or more players and then you watch the player and the lack of defense and you so wish that Charles Oakley was still around to knock them on their arse and talk some trash to them... not enough scary locker room leaders and demand everyone plays to their standards (think Damien Martin or Mika Vukona in NBL)

i love how the logic is
more points scored = less defense played

if you compare eras like that then lets look at other stat categories as well

Since 2000
3pt attempts have doubled
this season = 30 points per game from 3pt line
2000 = 14.4 points per game from 3pt line
(+15.6ppg)
*3pt% has only increased 1% since 2000 so its not like more or less defense has been added to change this*

Pace (possessions in a game)
has gone up by 6 per game (league average)
which means an extra 2 or 3 ppg as well (assume teams are shooting 42%)

so on average thats an extra 18.6 ppg based on increased speed and more 3s attempted and made

Yet the league average ppg has only increased by 10... maybe the defenses have improved as well.. its just not physical, punch up defense
maybe the defense is more about speed, technique, positioning? food for thought

JohnJames

So how to compare eras then?

Close analysis of equivalent games (stage of season, teams' standings) using time sampling/ sampling of possessions at similar stages of the game???

Closer stats analysis??.

Different methodologies would probably yield different conclusions.

well you have to look at the stats deeper than just
Xppg determines defensive output

There are more factors
the NBA offer great tools for data analysis which has shaped the game into a more efficient version

like eg teams shoot 1.5% worse from 3pt line than midrange but the extra point you get negates the -1.5% so teams now take more 3s for the extra point. It is more efficient.

look at Defensive Rebounding, SAC are the worst with 30 D boards this season, in 2001 they would have been tied 11th

but if you look at the league in terms of points off offensive rebounds the numbers are almost identical showing that the higher pace and shot selections make teams more efficient with less offensive rebounding

look deeper into the stats

I will play devil's advocate then and say I disagree that the NBA is boring, because already this season I have seen so many great athletic blocks, only able to be done by NBA players at the rate they are able to do it per game.

Already this season I have seen unbelievable plays, super alley-oop dunks and jams that would smash old time back boards in the days of Shaq' and M.J.

Sure, there are always games where things seem a little more subdued, but the sheer amount of teams and high volume of games means they play more than any other league, at the highest possible level and can do the most amazing things on court!

Boring, nope, amazing but sometimes not quite for the purists, sure...