Author Topic: Very much in favor of the 65 game rule  (Read 1200 times)

DefenseWinsChamps and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Very much in favor of the 65 game rule
« Reply #15 on: Today at 09:20:51 AM »

Online aefgogreen

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 638
  • Tommy Points: 79
Obviously this is an extreme example, but what if a team is 60-2 with a player and 5-15 in the 20 games he missed.  Should that guy not be the MVP?
Yeah obviously that player should win the MVP. The question is really does the 65 game rule encourage enough players to take fewer rest days to compensate for the times when a deserving player is deemed ineligible.

For MVP, I dont think the rule is really necessary. But for All-NBA teams I think the tradeoff is probably worth it.
I would keep the rule for MVP as well.  I think it's a big part of the reason that Wemby and Jokic have been playing every game.

Re: Very much in favor of the 65 game rule
« Reply #16 on: Today at 09:30:02 AM »

Online DefenseWinsChamps

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6967
  • Tommy Points: 825
This rule wouldn't be an issue if players and teams hadn't decided to throw away the regular season. The intent of the rule is not to penalize players that got injured for more than 79% of the season. It was to penalize players that intentionally rested, took games off, and disappointed fans for more than 20% of the season.

The NBPA agreed to the terms of this in the collective bargaining agreement. They made their bed. Now they need to lay in it.

I'd probably be all for a shorter season if that's what the players want, but players need to stop acting like victims of a greedy and unfair league all the time.

Re: Very much in favor of the 65 game rule
« Reply #17 on: Today at 10:32:58 AM »

Online aefgogreen

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 638
  • Tommy Points: 79
This rule wouldn't be an issue if players and teams hadn't decided to throw away the regular season. The intent of the rule is not to penalize players that got injured for more than 79% of the season. It was to penalize players that intentionally rested, took games off, and disappointed fans for more than 20% of the season.

The NBPA agreed to the terms of this in the collective bargaining agreement. They made their bed. Now they need to lay in it.

I'd probably be all for a shorter season if that's what the players want, but players need to stop acting like victims of a greedy and unfair league all the time.

I'd definitely be in favor of a shorter regular season.  I think it would eliminate load management as the regular season is less grueling and every game would carry more importance.  Obviously, in person revenues would suffer, but I think ratings may increase as the games matter more.