Chop Culture: February 2009

The NBA seems to be as popular as ever, but I still think college basketball is better than the NBA. BDF disagrees. We've both listed 10 reasons for our opinions followed by short rebuttals.

First, my top 10 reasons that college basketball is better (followed in italics by BDF's rebuttals):

(10) RECRUITING

College teams have control over the types of players and specific players they recruit. Not all teams can recruit at the same level as programs like UNC, Duke, and UCLA, but any team can pursue any player it wants. In the NBA, on the other hand, the draft dictates which players teams can pursue. The McDonald’s All-America game is a good introduction to many of the future stars of college hoops and the NBA. Following college recruiting is more fun than doing a mock NBA draft six months before the actual draft.

NBA teams can certainly dictate which players they draft. A bad team like the Golden State Warriors probably won’t draft a point guard since they have Stephen Jackson and Monta Ellis. Also the draft guarantees the player is yours, unlike recruiting where teams are competing for players. Not to mention mock drafts are always fun!

(9) PERMANENCE OF TEAMS

College basketball conferences may add or eliminate teams more often than NBA divisions are realigned, but the colleges themselves are not going anywhere. NBA teams are businesses. If they are not making money in one city, they can and will relocate. Just in the 20 years I have been following the NBA, the Vancouver Grizzlies moved to Memphis, the Charlotte Hornets moved to New Orleans, and the Seattle Sonics moved to Oklahoma City and renamed themselves the Thunder. If you live in a college town, it will always be a college town – regardless of how well the hoops team is playing.

Sure, the NBA is a business. If you have a store that sells a good, you want to be in an area where people buy your product. Owners want an arena that is conducive to the NBA experience. In all three of those cases, the team moved because of lack of interest, failure to build a new arena and better situations in the new city.

(8) FANS

There is a legitimate home-court advantage in college hoops. NBA home-court advantages are not apparent until the playoffs. Students are loud, energetic, and often creative in their heckling of opposing teams. The atmosphere at a college game (even at the beginning of the year) is special. I hate when fans rush the court at any sporting event, but it does show how pumped 18-22 year old kids get for college hoops.

I’d say that when the Spurs come to the Staples Center, Lakers fans are loud. It’s less consistent than college no doubt. Also, I am not sure NBA arenas allow many of the props college students use such as giant bricks and enlarged pictures.

(7) PLAYING COLLEGE BASKETBALL IS NOT A JOB

I think college basketball fans (including me) are sometimes too hard on college athletes. In the privacy of my living room, I have told dozens of college basketball players that they suck. Many of these players were UVa players, and for the most part, I was making a true statement. Nonetheless, playing college basketball is not a job. College ballers are student-athletes. There is no players’ union in college basketball. There are no trades. If a player transfers, it is generally his decision to leave. There is an element of purity to college basketball. There are undoubtedly some players getting paid, some parents getting jobs, and some players getting inflated grades. However, I would bet that most schools run a clean program and most schools monitor their coaches and their boosters. I just wish more players would get their degrees.

I’d argue that college basketball is far from pure and much less so compared to college football. The NCAA minimum is passing 6 hours. This means that a “student athlete” needs to pass two classes in the fall and could potentially not even go to class in the second semester if he’s planning on going pro. I’d say many schools follow the rules, but there is not a lot of consistency from school to school. An A at Duke or Vanderbilt is much more difficult than an A at Memphis or Oklahoma State; even for a basketball player.

(6) GETTING TO KNOW THE PLAYERS

I hate when I don’t know players in the NBA Draft, whether they are international players or players straight out of high school. I am in favor of the NBA age limit, even though many college players are one and done. Think about how fun it was to watch Carmelo Anthony, Kevin Durant, Greg Oden, Michael Beasley, Derrick Rose, and O.J. Mayo play college hoops. Each of them only played just one college season. With a few exceptions (Garnett, Kobe, LeBron, Amare), most players that went straight from high school to the NBA either failed miserably (Korleone Young, Kwame Brown, Jonathan Bender, Darius Miles, etc.) or took several years to develop into an all-star caliber player (Tracy McGrady, Jermaine O’Neal, Tyson Chandler, Rashard Lewis, etc.). It is good to see the one and done guys play for one season so we can see how good they really are, but it is even better to see guys stay for 3 or 4 years. I have never been a Florida fan, but it was special to see a team of upperclassmen win back-to-back championships in 2006-07. Tim Duncan stayed for four years, and he is still one of the best players in the NBA. Stephen Curry probably gets a little bit too much attention these days, but I’d rather hear about him and watch him play than anyone in the NBA. There may be less star power in college hoops, but there are also fewer egos.

It’s very rare for a player to stay all four years. The norm has been that players who are good enough for the NBA go early. You wouldn’t want to see Stephen Curry go up against CP3 or Kobe? Now with the age requirement, everyone will know the players in the draft.

(5) STYLE OF PLAY

NBA teams generally don’t run offenses or play defense. College offenses usually run a team-oriented offense as opposed to a triangle or pick-and-roll offense seen in the NBA. The 35-second shot clock is better than a 24-second shot clock. Teams shouldn’t get the ball on their side of half court when they call a timeout after the other team scores. Halves are better than quarters.

There is more emphasis on one on one play in the NBA. All five men on the court must be able to contribute offensively, whether it’s scoring or setting screens. Since there is less time on the shot clock, players can’t pass the ball around as much as in college. This causes players to drive and dish, so there are lots of pick and roll and triangle plays like you said. The players are good enough to create shots on their own, so less of a need for ball movement to get wide open shots.

(4) PARITY

I’ve said before that I hate the word “parity” when talking about sports, but college hoops has more parity than the NBA. Of course, the NBA is a professional league and any team can beat any other team on a given day. However, with the best-of-7 setup in the NBA playoffs, there are only three or four teams capable of winning it all each year. This year, I’d be shocked if any team other than the Lakers, Spurs, Celtics, or Cavs won the title. College basketball, on the other hand, is wide open. Most people would agree that UNC, UConn, Pitt, and Oklahoma are the favorites right now, but there are 15-20 teams capable of winning it all.

I would bet on the Lakers, Spurs, Celtics or Cavs winning the NBA this season, but I would not be shocked if the Magic or Nuggets won either. So that is six teams out of 30 with a good to great shot at winning the championship. That’s 20% of the league. Not bad odds and pretty standard for pro sports. In Division I there are 347 teams. I’d be shocked if a team lower than a 4 seed won this year. That’s 16 teams into 347 for less than 5%. More accurately, let’s count all the teams in BCS conferences and add five extra – 78 teams. With 16 having a shot, that’s 20%, the same as the NBA.

(3) RIVALRIES

Outside of Red Sox -Yankees, there is no rivalry in sports like UNC-Duke basketball. Lakers-Celtics is the only legitimate rivalry in the NBA, and that rivalry is based mostly on playoffs games from the 80s. Just off the top of my head – Indiana-Purdue, Kansas-Missouri, Kentucky-Louisville, Xavier-Cincinnati, Michigan-Michigan State, Arizona-UCLA, Georgetown-Syracuse, Utah-BYU, St. Joe’s-Villanova, and Penn-Princeton are all bigger rivalries than any NBA rivalry other than Lakers-Celtics. Even new rivalries like Tennessee-Memphis, Maryland-Duke, and Gonzaga-Washington are emerging to make college basketball more exciting.

I can’t argue that the NBA’s rivalries are on par with the super rivalries found in college basketball. However, there are several others besides Lakers-Celtics. Just to name a few – Knicks-Sixers, Suns-Spurs, Bulls-Pistons and Lakers-Spurs. There are also many individual rivalries when certain teams with star players face off – Kobe, LeBron, Duncan, Nash, Dirk, Pierce, Garnett, AI, Wade, Chris Paul, Amare and Dwight Howard – most any combination of teams will be hyped as a big game. Duke – UNC is a great rivalry because both teams are usually high ranked when they play. The others you mention are certainly rivals, but do not draw much interest from fans outside the two teams. In the NBA the big rivalries now are between the best teams at the moment. I’d watch Magic-Celtics this season over Indiana-Purdue, even though historically the IU-PU matchup is a better rivalry.

(2) COACHES

The coaches are better in college hoops. There is a reason Coach K turned down a $40 million offer from the Lakers. NBA coaches have no job security and arguably do less “coaching” than college coaches. Again, the NBA is a business and NBA players act like businessman. Most players do not want to be coached fundamentals. The only NBA coaches that have coached their current team for more than 5 years are Lawrence Frank (Nets), Gregg Popovich (Spurs), Jerry Sloan (Jazz), Mike Dunleavy (Clippers – how does he still have a job?), and Phil Jackson (Lakers – left for 2005 season). Many college coaches are legends that have been at the same school for decades – Jim Boeheim (Syracuse), Jim Calhoun (UConn), Coach K (Duke), Gary Williams (Maryland), Lute Olson (Arizona – recently retired), Tom Izzo (Michigan State), and Billy Donovan (Florida). Other college coaches have consistently won at two different major conference programs – Roy Williams (Kansas / UNC), Rick Pitino (Kentucky / Louisville), John Calipari (UMass / Memphis), Bobby Knight (Indiana / Texas Tech – recently retired), and Ben Howland (Pitt / UCLA).

Coach K would have turned down any amount, so let’s not pretend he’d ever leave Duke. The goal of every NBA team is to win the championship. It’s unrealistic to have that goal if you coach at a place like Davidson, Penn or 95% of any other non BCS school. Sure you want to win, but you can be disappointed if you don’t win it all. The expectations are higher in the NBA. With their talent, the Spurs should win championships. Same goes for the Lakers. That’s why their coaches have remained with their team. Teams like Dallas, who had talent but did not produce in the playoffs, had to make a coaching change. More often than not, it’s a combination of player(s) and coach who leave the team.

(1) MARCH MADNESS

The Big Dance. Bubble watch. Upsets. Gus Johnson. Brackets. “One Shining Moment.” Snubs. Skipping class or work. Buzzer beaters. Cinderella. Sleepers. Rooting against Duke. Mid-majors. Live look-ins. Dickie V picking all 1-seeds to go to the Final Four. Jubilation. Teammates locking arms on the bench. Random match-ups. New stars. CBS Sports. Coaches playing their former team. Good guard play. Princeton’s back door pass. Bryce Drew. Tyus Edney. Laettner. Weber State. George Mason. More Gus Johnson.

A good friend once told me that CBS could put 65 teams comprised of 12 year olds and people would still watch. It’s the format that makes it exciting, not the product.

Next, BDF's 10 reasons the NBA is better (followed in italics by my rebuttals):

10. Teams play each other at least twice.

Sure, it’s easier to do that when there are 30 teams rather than 300. Nonetheless, records in the NBA are a more accurate portrayal of how good or bad a team is in comparison to the rest of the league. A team from the Atlantic 10 with 1-4 losses may not be as good as a team with over 10 losses in the ACC or SEC. I do think it is safe to say that if the Bulls had 8-10 more wins than the Bucks, the Bulls are the better team. There’s also never the argument in the NBA about what if team A played team B.

College hoops has plenty of invitational tourneys at the beginning of the year and the top teams generally schedule several ranked non-conference opponents. More importantly, teams have to beat six different teams to win the NCAA tournament.

9. International Players.

There is certainly plenty of talent in college basketball. The NBA takes the best of that talent and adds players like Dirk Nowitzki, Andre Kirilenko, Tony Parker, Pau Gasol and Yao Ming. Imagine Dirk Nowitzki playing for North Carolina during the late 90’s or Yao Ming joining the ranks of Walton and Kareem as great Bruin centers.

I don’t think Yao would have touched Walton’s or Kareem’s records. I agree that there are many great international players in the NBA, but I don’t think that fact alone makes the NBA better than college. For every Dirk and Pau, there are dozens of busts like Darko Milicic and Nikoloz Tskitishvili. Just like American players, international players would benefit from a few years of college hoops.

8. No selection committee.

Sure, the NCAA tournament is phenomenal. But, every year there are 5-6 teams involved in a lengthy debate after the bracket is announced (usually one is Syracuse). Cincy got hosed, Xavier is seeded too high, too many Big 10 teams, should be more than two MVC teams. It goes on and on. In the NBA, the top 8 teams from each conference get into the playoffs. No media rankings, just wins. Plus home court advantage and a best of seven game series. More on that next.

The NCAA Tournament is perfect as it is. They should not increase or reduce the field of 64 (now 65). I agree that there are usually a few snubs, but any team on the bubble can only blame itself if it does not get a bid. The seeds are also not always perfect, but the selection committee often to has to rearrange the bracket to avoid rematches and location problems. A random first round match-up in March is more appealing to me than a 7-game series between the Celtics and the Bucks.

7. Best of Seven Series.

Sure upsets are fun. But in the end, I’d rather see the best teams play. In the NBA the best of seven ensures that the best teams advance. Sure an 8 upsets a 1 every now and then, but it’s no different than an 8 beating a 1 in the second round of the NCAAs. Plus, the NBA 8 seed has to win 4 games, with at least 2 on the road. It also gives good teams a chance to have a bad night and still advance. I can see the argument that NCAA tourney games are all “game sevens”, but the college teams haven’t played 6 games in a row.

I’d rather see an upset than the best teams play.

6. Trades

Imagine last season in early February Connecticut’s A.J. Price goes down with an injury. Needing a point guard, the Huskies trade 2 freshmen and a recruit to Virginia for Sean Singletary. Of course this is preposterous in college, but in the NBA it is a reality. Before the trade deadline, teams have the option of adding a boost to their team. Or, if all hope is lost, teams can trade away big payroll players to regroup for the future.

I’d prefer that my favorite players stay on my favorite team. Most NBA trades are very one-sided, with one team clearing up salary cap space and taking back expiring contracts.

5. More interesting characters.

Ok, this is a little unfair, because college kids can only get so wild and crazy. NBA players are much more animated. This does not make them more likable, but their personalities become part of the story of the season.

The characters in college basketball are the coaches. Players rarely attend press conferences and are rarely allowed to argue with refs, so the coaches deal with the media and the officials.

4. Charging calls.

Like it or not, teams like Duke routinely use the charge as a defensive play. It ruins the game. I am not saying there should be no offensive fouls, but it’s gotten out of hand in college. The NBA did the right thing by instituting a half circle in the lane.

A charge is a defensive play. However, I agree that Duke flops 15-20 times a game and gets the charge call at least 75% of the time. I think refs need to make sure players get their feet set before taking the charge, but I think charges are a good part of the game. College hoops should institute the half circle in the lane.

3. The Draft.

Have a bad season in college? Tough luck, better get some recruits. In the NBA, the worst record means you at worst have the third pick in the draft. Bad teams can get a little better, and smart GMs get (sometimes lucky) steals with late picks. It also goes hand in hand with my next reason.

Bad college teams can recover even more quickly than NBA teams through recruiting. Baylor recovered from a murder scandal in just a few years to return to respectability. Kentucky (and several other schools) quickly recovered from recruiting violations that put them on probation for a few years.

2. Equal footing for all teams.

The NBA has a salary cap. It is a soft cap, but it’s still in place to ensure all teams have equal footing. Take a team like the Cleveland Cavaliers. The 2002-2003 season brought a 17-65 record and the number 1 pick in the draft. The Cavs took LeBron James and a few years later they’re contenders. Colleges are not on equal footing. No one can tell me that kids that play at Memphis have to work academically as hard as kids from Penn. Not all colleges have the same admissions standards or requirements for athletes. At least in the NBA every player has to follow the same rules.

I’m not talking about academics.

1. It is simply better basketball.

A common theme in speeches given by underclassmen declaring for the draft is taking their game to the next level. Only the best of the best make the NBA. Players are faster, stronger and smarter (on the court) in the NBA. College basketball is great. But I can’t help but think - am I a college basketball fan or an NCAA tournament fan? I am beginning to think the latter. Sure the upsets are fun, but do I really want to see teams like Western Kentucky, George Mason and Kent State in the elite 8? I’d much rather see the Spurs and Suns battle it out in a game 7, with the winner taking on the Lakers next round. Call me crazy, but I love this game!

If you only watch the NCAA Tournament, then you are not a true college hoops fan. I watch as many games as I can throughout the season – but, in my opinion, college basketball truly begins after the college football bowls are over. The heart of the conference schedule, followed by conference tourneys, and the Big Dance. The NBA season lasts too long and the playoffs last for over TWO MONTHS! By the time June rolls around, who cares anymore?

In closing, we all know college basketball is better. Selection Sunday is three weeks from Sunday.

Two huge stories have dominated sports talk radio, Sportscenter, and newspaper headlines over the last two weeks -- the Michael Phelps bong incident and A-Rod's steroid use from 2001-03. Some analysts are even comparing the incidents. I don't think these two stories could be any different -- Phelps is a 23-year old swimmer that smoked weed AFTER the Olympics while visiting a friend at college and some asshole took a picture and exploited it for monetary gain. Even if Phelps smoked before the Olympics, the marijuana use does not enhance Phelps's performance -- if anything, it decreases his level of performance. On the other hand, A-Rod was using steroids for the sole purpose of enhancing his on-field performance. A-Rod also denied steroid use in a 2007 interview with Katie Couric. I can't really blame him because he thought he'd get away with it, but I respect that Phelps came clean immediately. Personally, I am tired of hearing about both stories, but the A-Rod story is legitimate news.

In my opinion, the Phelps incident is a non-story that has been blown way out of proportion. By no means do I condone marijuana use. Phelps should have been smarter, especially around people he didn't know. But let me get this straight -- some d-bag from the University of South Carolina sees Phelps taking a bong hit, and -- rather than take note of how cool it is that he is partying with an Olympic hero -- he snaps a picture? And then -- rather than just bragging to friends about partying with Phelps -- he sells the picture to a British newspaper? Stop snitching! The ridiculousness of the story went to another level this week as Richland County (aka my current city of Columbia, SC) sheriff's office has allegedly arrested eight people (http://www.thestate.com/local/story/682695.html). One long-time prosecutor and current defense attorney (who represents one of the arrested students) said throughout his entire legal career he has never seen a search warrant executed for simple possession of marijuana. I feel less safe because my local police officers are exhausting a shitload of resources to arrest some college kids for smoking weed last November. It would be downright embarrassing if they arrest Phelps. The elected sheriff may be pursuing this incident for publicity and votes, but it may cost him votes in the long run.

Michael Phelps is not a cheater. A-Rod is a cheater. Baseball's already tainted image took a hit with this story. Most experts assumed that A-Rod was clean and that he could save baseball by breaking Barry Bonds's homerun record in a few years. Oops. I think this is the biggest baseball story since Pete Rose. A-Rod wants future Hall of Fame voters to look beyond the three steroid seasons and judge him based on his entire career, which should be around 20 seasons after this contract. (By the way, A-Rod has 9 YEARS left on his current contract.) I am sure many Hall of Fame voters won't be able to look beyond those three seasons, and -- more importantly -- most voters won't believe that A-Rod only used steroids for three years. He has absolutely no credibility now. How did we know we wasn't using before 2001 or after 2003?

I am sick of both stories -- but only one is worthy of further discussion.

Chop Culture

Monday, February 23, 2009

Chop Culture's 1-Year Anniversary

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

NBA vs. College Hoops

Thursday, February 12, 2009

Phelps vs. A-Rod

Thursday, February 5, 2009

Ramblings

Search This Blog

Blog Archive

CHOP