Team owners are expected to approve player-resting rules which are designed to cut back on teams benching healthy players for regular seasons games, a source tells Jeff Zillgitt of USA Today. The approval is expected to come in September during the owners next Board of Governors meetings.
Zillgitt adds that the new parameters will be in place by the beginning of the 2017/18 season and there were be consequences for teams that do not adhere to the rules.
Adam Silver previously discussed the issue of player resting, talking about a balance between putting out a competitive product and keeping players healthy.
“There is an expectation among partners that teams are going to act in appropriate ways, [and] find, as I said, that right balance between resting on one hand and obligations to fans and partners on the other,” Silver said at the end of the season.
The specifics of the rules have yet to be reported, but Zillgitt expects a rule against resting healthy players on nationally televised games. Silver addressed this topic back in April.
“When we do have marquee network games, we the league office can do a better job at looking at obviously, the prior night in terms of back-to-back, but also the several days leading up to that game so that players are at peak performance for those games,” Silver said.
The league has since sent out a memo vowing changes to the scheduling of games. The NBA will look to reduce back-to-backs and will eliminate teams playing as many as four games in five nights and as many as 18 contests in a 30-day span. The league will begin a week earlier this year to help reach these goals.
The NBA’s official schedule will be released later today.
so they’ll be “injured” for that game now
Exactly
i can see a scenario where the league requires paperwork from a doc to confirm that injury
Its an unenforceable rule. By the end of the season almost every player has some sort of injury and whose to say that the injury doesn’t warrant a rest. Watch as players will just be “injured” more often
Maybe the league could implement like a Disabled List sort of system. Like if a player is going to rest it’s gotta be for three days and then he’ll be eligible to play.
Or maybe do a team “bye week” like the NHL recently started doing. It’s only like 4-5 days not a full week.
Make it three games not three days (to prevent gaming the system around days off), but I support this idea.
Excellent idea. Definitely prevents resting a guy for one game and fake injury.
Actually, I really like this idea. I’m actually surprised the NBA hasn’t done this yet.
Really the way this is made out to be from the league’s perspective is: “you’re resting players and we’re losing money” so they go and fix the schedule to avoid that. But they should’ve optimized the schedule before their money started being a factor, it should’ve been about player health.
Exactly, it seems like the league only wants to make the schedule more efficient now that money is on the line.
It was never about player health otherwise they would have fixed it a long time ago. The
it was never about player health because resting has never been an issue until recently. now that thats the excuse players are using, the league is fixing it
Hell maybe the league should just shorten its season.
If the League office can catch fire over this and proposes a mechanism to mitigate the problem, how much more should they catch fire to mitigate the player collusion problem, aka, the ring-brat brotherhood.
Some imagine that we’re doomed with this until the next CBA, which is a whole NBA era away–and even if we’re that patient, there’s no telling what concessions players would end up making or not making.
To the contrary, there are potential rules-based solutions that can have some positive effect.
Last time the NBA saw something begin to erode interest in the professional game, the 24-second clock was introduced and it resolved the problem.
This time, re-thinking the game’s overall clock offers us hope to deal with this:
1. Redistribute the game’s 24 minute halves (48 total) to 3 periods of 8 rather than 2 periods of 12.
2. Limit any individual player’s participation to 4 of the 6 periods in any game… 32 minutes max.
In so doing, more of the 240 minutes of any given game, then, gets leveraged so that it makes it significantly more difficult for one or two players to dominate….
Much more, then, like football or baseball where even the highest impact players only are on the field for 50% of the game.
Legislate our way to a better NBA.
It’s in all of our best interests, not the least of which are the players who are crowing for less compacted floor time.
I mean it’s an idea, but what happens if the game goes to overtime or in the playoffs when players want their best players on the floor for more than 32 minutes? Also football is not a great comparison because football careers are generally shorter than basketball careers even though they play half the snaps. I think the solution is there, call me crazy but maybe teams should be allowed to rest their players whenever they want?
yoyo, thanks.
It’s not necessarily the only idea, so I do appreciate that this could just represent a starting place. That’s fine.
What if OT?
Seems natural to simply say that after OT, the time leverage is lifted, and all players are eligible until they foul out.
Counterpoint regarding football misses the point… all due respect. Rather, the point–that perhaps I failed to do a good job making–is that ***within a given game, one player only has about half of the game to make an impact***.
For instance, Tom Brady can only affect the results of a football game for approximately half of any given contest… making it fairly necessary for other players on the team to perform well in that other half of the game.
Moreover, something I neglected to mention too is that when a player is on the floor, he’s one of 5 who may possibly have the ball in his hands at a given time, and can make an impact….
In baseball, only the pitcher has nearly that much control, and he’s only in the game typically for 5-6 half-innings of the 18 half-innings of regulation…
In football, obviously, no player normally even has the amount of control over the outcome of the game that a baseball pitcher does.
So, the nature of the game of basketball makes it that much more vulnerable to become less of a team game, being prone to domination by one or two players per side.
Adding a rule that effectively compels coaches to leverage minutes automatically retards the degree to which players can dominate, and corrodes reason for being interested to collude together on one or two teams–ie, when you put that together with the salary cap environment that already exists.
Hope this makes some sense. It’s getting some discussion on boards that I frequent.
Broadly speaking thats a good idea, and basketball is different in that way.
Overtimes should be shortened anyway; it’s silly to just start a new period after all the hubbub at the end of regulation that got them tied up in the first place. Make it win by 4 and keep the emotions flowing.
The emphasis on nationally televised games puts more pressure on the contending teams’ players than on the tanking teams’ players, making it uneven. The popularity of tanking is messing things up more than top teams’ players resting for the playoffs.
That may help with collusion, but there’s also a chance that if players can’t play their star players for the whole game, they’ll go out and try to get more superstars to play the rest of the minutes. You’re right about the football thing and with ace starters in the MLB, players have less of an opportunity to impact the game. But Tyreek Hill can return kicks, punts, run the ball, and catch the ball. He plays offense and special teams. The Texans lined JJ Watt up at tight end a few times and he caught a couple touchdowns. Your ace may go 5 or 6 innings, but what if he’s dealing and his pitch count is low? You’d want him to throw a complete game. And if he’s in the National League, he’ll probably get 3 or 4 at bats too! I think it just limits the sport when players aren’t allowed to perform to their full capabilities. A kickoff return touchdown is ridiculously exciting, as is JJ Watt catching a touchdown, or a pitcher hitting a homerun. So I’m not enamored with the idea as I think it’d water down the excitement of the NBA. But where I think your idea is very interesting is that it’d be cool to see players who aren’t usually the go to guy, be the #1 guy for once. Like if Steph and KD were benched, I’m interested in seeing Klay Thompson or Draymond Green as the focal point of an offense.
Again, yoyo….
“Adding a rule that effectively compels coaches to leverage minutes automatically retards the degree to which players can dominate, and corrodes reason for being interested to collude together on one or two teams–ie, WHEN YOU PUT THAT TOGETHER WITH THE SALARY CAP ENVIRONMENT THAT ALREADY EXISTS”
To elaborate just a little, there is a point of depreciating returns when a player ***both*** sacrifices some salary that he otherwise would be able to get from his current team under Bird rights ***and*** faces the prospect that his ring chasing is made more problematic by the fact that his elite talent has a governor on the effect he can have.
So, I advocate that it may not be the 100% perfect solution that a CBA revision might, but then, there is no assurance that whatever would come out of the next owners/union fight would result in a 100% perfect solution either… never mind that it is six years away, to boot.
Based on my review from stats on basketball-reference.com, about 50 players in any given season ordinarily will average somewhat more than 32 minutes. So, that number seems to work well to achieve the desired results. But notably, the magic of the concept is as much about concentrating minutes in specific periods as it is about the number of minutes.
It is a solid significant step in the right direction, and in fact, is a step that is consistent with the players’ own desire to better limit their minutes.
Certainly, no change is without opponents and detractors, but I feel this one would be as well-received as one could hope/expect.
I mean I get it man, I understand what you’re saying. But go tell Tyronn Lue he can only play Lebron 32 minutes in the Finals when Curry, KD, Klay, and Dray can play 32 as well. Go tell Gregg Popovich he has to take Kawhi out the game. Sure they can coach around it but that makes no sense. Going to 4 quarters isn’t gonna happen. Lebron played the most minutes out of everyone per game last year at 37.8, which means barely over 10 minutes of rest per game. What you’re suggesting is 32, so who cares about a 5.8 minute difference per game. I’m 1000000% sure Lebron himself would rather play all 48 than have to be limited to 32. So my dude, I understand what you were putting down even before you got condescending to try to explain it further, the Warriors will still have 4 stars!!! What you’re suggesting would put every other team at a terrible disadvantage. Klay plays 34 a game. Steph and KD 33 and 33. The deeper teams would have a ridiculous advantage on teams that have to ride their stars, so you’re rewarding the returning champs!! Who have had stories of collusion, Dray calling KD after game 7, KD taking a paycut to keep more stars!! Instead of making the league more even and increasing parity, you’re rewarding the Warriors with more championships! Cool that your idea is getting attention on other forums because i find it stupid on this one.
There WILL be detractors, upset that they’re losing a few minutes of LeBron or Curry or Westbrook or Harden per game. Yes, I get that.
I’m not so sure that coaches, as a rule, will be among them.
What coaches want primarily is fairness. And the same rule applies equally to all teams, of course.
If you’re looking for a weakness to the argument, in my own assessment, it lies in the fact that it will take a couple or three years before the full effect will be realized, simply as a consequence of how long NBA contracts tend to be–and thus, the associated turnover in team talent.
And, effectively, I think you’re saying that in your second counterpoint there. So, we agree.
But then the discussion becomes, is it better to go ahead and initiate the rule now, and begin the evolution or should we just twiddle our thumbs for six years and hope that the next CBA ends up appreciably addressing the problem?
Don’t miss this–EITHER WAY, you’re enduring the short-term ugliness of what collusion already has been done.
Can we agree?
Man no we can’t agree lol you have terrible ideas and I’m mad I even entertained your stupid idea plus you’re super condescending so get outta here pal
First sign that someone feels they’ve got nothing substantive left to offer a discussion?
Running up the discussion’s initial personal attack of some kind.
No. Nothing condescending there. Making counterpoints does not equate to being condescending in the world where most of us live.
If you feel you’ve hit a dead end, and your pride just refuses to allow you to concede a simple point, that’s on you, not anyone else.
Many of us have no problem with concession, and ironically enough, that in fact is one of the main evidences of…. yes…
Humility.
Check it out pal, if you use words in all caps it’s condescending. Breaking the game down into 6 periods is stupid, limiting players to 32 minutes is stupid, players will still collude, and you’ll still be a loser, how’s that for some more to add to the discussion. You aren’t humble at all so don’t play that, i’m not humble either but i’m not the one lying to try to look good here. Your ideas are dumb!! The NBA will literally never do what you’re suggesting. If you’re tired of players dominating a game go watch a different sport
(see below– avoiding this formatting thing that maybe ends up at about 1 word per line)
Another part of this that arguably makes the game even more interesting is a new area of “strategery” for head coaches to navigate.
Who plays in each period, and in concert with what other players adds to the chess match aspect of the game.
That’s a part I really like, personally, though it’s a secondary benefit.
Some interesting comments in this thread. One issue I’ve yet to see is who are the players the NBA will target? Most nights at least 4 or 5 players don’t play per game. Will there be a list of players a team can’t rest. E.g. Kay Felder sat a lot last season for the Cavs yet. I one complained. I can see this coming back to bite the NBA. Bc then the NBA will be forced to state which players can and can’t sit for a game. Players will then use that info for contract negotiations. Some players will complain about not being in the list of players a team can’t sit and there will be players that are on the list that fans and league will vilify if that same player does have a minor injury they need to take a game off. And what about the players that dress and play for a minute then sit? I feel a quagmire setting in real soon.
“Check it out pal, if you use words in all caps it’s condescending.”
========
hehe…
No, yoyo, you must have missed the memo.
When a site doesn’t allow bold or italics–and especially in the case that the other person in the conversation appears to have completely overlooked a point already made–ALL CAPS is only meant as a way of adding emphasis.
It certainly isn’t to be taken so personally… “pal.”
In other words, don’t be so sensitive, and don’t be so self-deluded that anyone (like myself) considers the opinion of someone who defaults so easily to personal attacks (like you, evidently) as anything but a reflection on the delicate ego of that same person (ie, again, you).
Put another way that, at the risk of sounding condescending, maybe is simpler for you to understand: Either grow the hell up, or save yourself some grief and don’t involve yourself in substantive adult discussions where you end up showing your desperation to save face by engaging in the personal attack thing.
(Oops. That sounded condescending. Oh well. Maybe after taking on a couple of personal attacks, some condescension on my part in response is merited.)
Damn that’s crazy how you know everything and everyone else knows nothing, how do you live in the world with that much knowledge while people like me don’t know anything? You sound really defensive by the way, you should stop playing the victim like you’re being personally attacked, or maybe don’t try to have a “substantive adult discussion” if you’re so sensitive. Look son, you all capped a whole sentence to imply I hadn’t read it. WITH THE SALARY CAP THAT’S ALREADY IN PLACE like I know how to read bud. I don’t have any problem with what you said even though I literally have no support for your idea because it would make the game worse, it’s the way you say things and if you don’t see that then you shouldn’t be talking at all.
*yawn*