A Radical NBA Reform

There are a lot of people who find the current NBA game less fun to watch than the days of Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, and Larry Bird. They talk a lot about purity of the game and all that, but I think that what most people miss is the scoring. Although average scores are up slightly this year, in general, they've been going down.

Why is that? It's true, today's players don't shoot or pass as well as yesteryear. And the dedication to making one's teammates better is a little lackluster, to be sure.

But I think a huge factor in scoring being low is that the defense is just better. Players are notably bigger and stronger, and coaches really get on them to play defense. Look at photos from the seventies--you'll see Dr. J or George Gervin dunking, and a whole bunch of defenders standing on the ground watching. You'll never see that today. Guys get up in their faces and play tough D all night.

As long as that continues to be the case, I can't see how the NBA will ever have the same kind of non-stop scoring that fans love. Unless you implement my reform: reduce the number of players to four on four.

Anyone who has ever played basketball knows that fewer players means more running, more room for offensive creativity, and more scoring. The size these players are today--and the average size of an NBA player increases nearly every year--there isn't room for ten of them.

Four on four would be amazing to watch. Tons of fun. And the owners would love it: they could carry two or three fewer salaries every year. It would fix a lot of the games economic problems: fewer players to play, more scoring, more focus on the marketable stars.

I've never heard anyone else even dare to mention this idea. It's just too radical to consider. But I'm convinced it's the right one.

And it's not that radical. Basketball used to be nine players per side. Then eight, then seven, then six. The organizers whittled it down over time, because they kept finding the extra players clogged things up and made it hard to score. We have the same problem today, and the same solution is still the best.