How Many Games Should There be in the NBA Regular Season?

[chicagoceltic]

I would prefer to keep it at 82. That being said, if cutting it down to 72 games meant no/less rest games for players and more games with complete rosters I could get down with that.

Along those lines, now that we have had a 17 game NFL season what do you think of that? Personally I hate the change yet for what it will do to the record books.

[Donoghus]

I would prefer to keep it at 82. That being said, if cutting it down to 72 games meant no/less rest games for players and more games with complete rosters I could get down with that.

Along those lines, now that we have had a 17 game NFL season what do you think of that? Personally I hate the change yet for what it will do to the record books.

It's a place holder. NFL is going up to 18 game season sooner rather than later.  It's inevitable.  Have the Super Bowl on President's Day weekend with the built in holiday on Monday.

[Moranis]

I would prefer to keep it at 82. That being said, if cutting it down to 72 games meant no/less rest games for players and more games with complete rosters I could get down with that.

Along those lines, now that we have had a 17 game NFL season what do you think of that? Personally I hate the change yet for what it will do to the record books.

The players will still sit out and any injury can become more magnified depending on how they do the schedules.  A player may end up missing a greater percentage of the season with the exact same amount of time off.  Or maybe it is a lower percentage missed, but with less games that might be more impactful. 

[Kernewek]

Now this is way too extreme, but I think the '99 lockout season of 50 games had some of the best-regular-season-really-matters games in the lead up to the playoffs.

5 Eastern Conference teams (including the top 3) and 7 Western Conference teams (including the top 2) had identical records to other teams in their conference.

7 of the 8 seeds in each conference were decided by 1 win or tiebreakers.  The outcome of 1 regular season game could shift the majority of seeds up or down 2 spots.

Of course a lot of those regular season games sucked because the season was so condensed (a lot of 4 games in 5 nights, several back-to-back-to-backs were played, scoring took a big hit), but the playoff race was great.  50 games spread out over the appropriate amount of time would probably produce some of the most meaningful regular season basketball.



I really don't want to touch games for historical reasons, but I think the fewer regular season games the better (to a point).

I think you are right, but I think even with your caveat that the regular-season games sucked undersells just how hard the games were to watch and enjoy.

However, if we take the position that this is because the lockout ended unexpectedly (guys coming into camp massively unfit because they presumed the whole season was a wash, etc), you could make an argument for 50-60.

That said, I'm an 82 games person. I like things that take a long time.

[Surferdad]

This is a purely academic discussion since shortening the season would mean loss of ticket sales and likely TV revenue. I guess some folks (me included) are really missing C's games during this ASG break.

[Neurotic Guy]

82.  Every day that there’s a Celtics game is a better day than one without.

[Moranis]

I think they will ultimately add 2 teams and go to 32, which will likely lead to either 4, 8 team divisons or more likely 8, 4 team divisons. It is at that point a schedule reconfiguration makes sense.

So assuming 8 divisions and 16 teams per conference, I'd do the schedule something like this

Other conference 2 games - 32 games total
Other divisions 3 games - 36 games total
Division 5 games - 15 games total

83 game season (maybe 1 of the divison games is on a neutral floor for each team to keep home and away each at 41 and to bring the sport to new markets). 

They could go to 80 by playing 4 division games


If they do 4 divisions it would be

Other conference 2 games - 32 games total
Other division 3 games - 24 games total
Division 4 games - 28 games total

So that is 84 total games

[kraidstar]

I would prefer to keep it at 82. That being said, if cutting it down to 72 games meant no/less rest games for players and more games with complete rosters I could get down with that.

Along those lines, now that we have had a 17 game NFL season what do you think of that? Personally I hate the change yet for what it will do to the record books.

It's a place holder. NFL is going up to 18 game season sooner rather than later.  It's inevitable.  Have the Super Bowl on President's Day weekend with the built in holiday on Monday.

The NFL could add a second bye week in as well and rake in even more revenue.

[keevsnick]

I guess my final answer after waffling on this is I'd be very reluctant to chop much, if anything, off the regular seaosn. My big concern is ticket prices. Its already so expensive just to get into the building for some of these games, if you reduced the regular seaosn by 20% I'd worry prices skyrocket as demand does not decrease.

Si I'd opt to staying at 82.

[celticsclay]

I know they already kind of mean very little to most people, but I do think having at least the concept of historical comparisons alive is worth something. If they started a 60 game season next year pretty much every single all time record holder for points, rebounds, steals and assists and blocks is the leader for eternity (although I guess that is already true for rebounds). That seems a little lame to me.

[Moranis]

I know they already kind of mean very little to most people, but I do think having at least the concept of historical comparisons alive is worth something. If they started a 60 game season next year pretty much every single all time record holder for points, rebounds, steals and assists and blocks is the leader for eternity (although I guess that is already true for rebounds). That seems a little lame to me.

I think it is true for all of the 5 major categories.  There won't be a new all time leader in points, rebounds, assists, steals, or blocks on any of our lifetimes anyway

[Jvalin]

It's only a matter of time before the league expands to 32 teams.

Everyone plays each other twice: 31 x 2 = 62 games

As things stand, there's no parity. Some teams have relatively easier schedule cause they happen to be in weak divisions (and vice versa).

[dannyboy35]

It's only a matter of time before the league expands to 32 teams.

Everyone plays each other twice: 31 x 2 = 62 games

As things stand, there's no parity. Some teams have relatively easier schedule cause they happen to be in weak divisions (and vice versa).

   I wish they could get rid of 6 -8 teams instead of adding.

[dannyboy35]

  I’d get rid of Hornets, Hawks, Clippers, Kings, Nets, Magic, Pelicans, Grizzlies

[celticsclay]

I know they already kind of mean very little to most people, but I do think having at least the concept of historical comparisons alive is worth something. If they started a 60 game season next year pretty much every single all time record holder for points, rebounds, steals and assists and blocks is the leader for eternity (although I guess that is already true for rebounds). That seems a little lame to me.

I think it is true for all of the 5 major categories.  There won't be a new all time leader in points, rebounds, assists, steals, or blocks on any of our lifetimes anyway

I wonder if Halliburton could maybe make a run at assists if he has a super long career. He is definitely not in his prime, has upped his assists every year. He also seems to actually care about getting assists ( was visibly upset when his teammate passed when he could have got a 20 20 assist game). If he could start pumping out some 13 assists a game seasons and stay healthy it seems possible. Still very doubtful but perhaps possible.