Harden...this is why NBA>College overall

Don't get me wrong, I still prefer MSU basketball over the Pistons but you just don't see that in a college game.. or a triple double that often.

There's a basketball court setup on the 10th floor of the Quicken building in Detroit.  Lebron visited yesterday before the Pistons/Cavs game at The Palace tonight

http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2015/02/23/lebron-james-shows-up-at-quicken-loans-in-detroit-photos/

The Pantry wrote:There's a basketball court setup on the 10th floor of the Quicken building in Detroit.  Lebron visited yesterday before the Pistons/Cavs game at The Palace tonight

http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2015/02/23/lebron-james-shows-up-at-quicken-loans-in-detroit-photos/

Knocks down the jumper too. Pressure was on. That's why he is the King.

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:or a triple double that often.

There have been about 14-16 triple doubles in college BB this year, which is not that  far off from NBA numbers. Also, Kyle Collinswoth from BYU has had five triple doubles this season, which is both an NCAA single-season record and more than any player in the NBA this year.

I definitely like the flow of an NBA game better than the flow of the college game.

Take away a few timeouts, shorten the shot clock and hire better refs.

I already saw Trimble do that in an MSU game this year.

and if they lengthened the game by 8 minutes there would be way more triple doubles in college than the NBA. Not to mention you could take an hour nap at any point and not miss anything.

Turtleneck wrote:

There have been about 14-16 triple doubles in college BB this year, which is not that  far off from NBA numbers. Also, Kyle Collinswoth from BYU has had five triple doubles this season, which is both an NCAA single-season record and more than any player in the NBA this year.

348 or whatever college teams vs 30 pro ones or are there 32? Regardless, to be on the same level as the nba as far as triple double numbers go they would need 10 times as many as the nba.

steveschneider wrote:I definitely like the flow of an NBA game better than the flow of the college game.

Take away a few timeouts, shorten the shot clock and hire better refs.

Make the game 4 quarters to fit in more commercials and exciting end of quarter buzzer beaters.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
348 or whatever college teams vs 30 pro ones or are there 32? Regardless, to be on the same level as the nba as far as triple double numbers go they would need 10 times as many as the nba.

No shit, but his claim was that you do not see them that often in NCAA BB. Regardless of the number of teams or players, a single individual has five compared to the league leading three in the NBA. When you control for variance between the NCAA and NBA, obviously the NBA will have far more. But putting that aside, which is not completely wrong to do, his claim was false.

Turtleneck wrote:

No shit, but his claim was that you do not see them that often in NCAA BB. Regardless of the number of teams or players, a single individual has five compared to the league leading three in the NBA. When you control for variance between the NCAA and NBA, obviously the NBA will have far more. But putting that aside, which is not completely wrong to do, his claim was false.

Whatever pal, the NBA outside of the window of March Madness is a far better product.

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:

Whatever pal, the NBA outside of the window of March Madness is a far better product.

The players are more talented, which makes it a better product in that regard.  However, the overall quality of the product sucks relative to previous decades. The NBA is poorly marketed and has become a shell of its former self. All you have to do is go back to the 80s, 90s, and early 00s for a much better product.

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:

Whatever pal, the NBA outside of the window of March Madness is a far better product.

Then please spend more of your time on NBA message boards.

Bizarro Fletch wrote:

Then please spend more of your time on NBA message boards.

this...

don't get between me and MSU sports.

Turtleneck wrote:


The players are more talented, which makes it a better product in that regard.  However, the overall quality of the product sucks relative to previous decades. The NBA is poorly marketed and has become a shell of its former self. All you have to do is go back to the 80s, 90s, and early 00s for a much better product.

Many people would say the exact opposite. Stylistically, today's NBA is way less dependant on isolations and post ups. Playing like the Spurs/Warriors/Hawks is becoming the new normal offensively, and that's a style I much prefer to hero ball.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:this...

don't get between me and UM sports.

What's your username on mgoblog?

Cameron wrote:

Many people would say the exact opposite. Stylistically, today's NBA is way less dependant on isolations and post ups. Playing like the Spurs/Warriors/Hawks is becoming the new normal offensively, and that's a style I much prefer to hero ball.

I have definitely been encouraged by this gradual change - it's certainly making the game more watchable.  But I do wonder how any fan of Tom Izzo basketball (which I know the OP isn't) can stomach watching the NBA regularly.  While I know MSU runs a ton of pro sets, the astounding number of poor shots regularly taken in the pro game (partially due to the short shot clock) is maddening.  I have no clue how Izzo could have coached in that league.

The OP's premise cracks me up.  Of course if pure talent is your primary reason for watching a sport you should watch the pro version. Good for you. Have a field day with all of the awesome stats.  But the primary reason I prefer college sports is the passion associated with them, which just can't be reproduced in the NBA or NFL, IMHO.  I'm sure Bobby Sak agrees.

Bizarro Fletch wrote:

I have definitely been encouraged by this gradual change - it's certainly making the game more watchable.  But I do wonder how any fan of Tom Izzo basketball (which I know the OP isn't) can stomach watching the NBA regularly.  While I know MSU runs a ton of pro sets, the astounding number of poor shots regularly taken in the pro game (partially due to the short shot clock) is maddening.  I have no clue how Izzo could have coached in that league.

The OP's premise cracks me up.  Of course if pure talent is your primary reason for watching a sport you should watch the pro version. Good for you. Have a field day with all of the awesome stats.  But the primary reason I prefer college sports is the passion associated with them, which just can't be reproduced in the NBA or NFL, IMHO.  I'm sure Bobby Sak agrees.

Agreed. Those Celtics v. Lakers NBA Finals were unwatachable.

Bizarro Fletch wrote:

I have definitely been encouraged by this gradual change - it's certainly making the game more watchable.  But I do wonder how any fan of Tom Izzo basketball (which I know the OP isn't) can stomach watching the NBA regularly.  While I know MSU runs a ton of pro sets, the astounding number of poor shots regularly taken in the pro game (partially due to the short shot clock) is maddening.  I have no clue how Izzo could have coached in that league.

The OP's premise cracks me up.  Of course if pure talent is your primary reason for watching a sport you should watch the pro version. Good for you. Have a field day with all of the awesome stats.  But the primary reason I prefer college sports is the passion associated with them, which just can't be reproduced in the NBA or NFL, IMHO.  I'm sure Bobby Sak agrees.

I couldn't agree more and I'm sure Tom would support our views..

however, this isn't tRCMB - so we (you, I and Tom) must endure people who have views different from our own.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:I couldn't agree more and I'm sure Tom would support our views..

however, this isn't tRCMB - so we (you, I and Tom) must endure people who have views different from our own.

Or what?

Bizarro Fletch wrote:

Or what?

or choose to spend time at other Spartan pages where mind-control and the thought police is the norm.

the NBA has plenty of problems of their own, but on-court, the product is way better than college.

24 second shot clock >>>>>>>>>>>>> 35 second shot clock
4 quarters >>>>>> 2 halves. don't get 10+ minutes with teams in the bonus.....

reffing in NBA is way more consistent than college. games are exciting. games have flow. teams score.

40 minute games when teams are scoring 50/60 points is an awful viewing experience.

tig ol bitties wrote:

the NBA has plenty of problems of their own, but on-court, the product is way better than college.

24 second shot clock >>>>>>>>>>>>>  35 second shot clock
4 quarters >>>>>> 2 halves.    don't get 10+ minutes with teams in the bonus.....

reffing in NBA is way more consistent than college. games are exciting.  games have flow.   teams score.

  40 minute games when teams are scoring 50/60 points is an awful viewing experience.

I really liked the flow of the Spurs v Clippers game the other night. It was an awesome 3 hour game.

tig ol bitties wrote:

the NBA has plenty of problems of their own, but on-court, the product is way better than college.

24 second shot clock >>>>>>>>>>>>> 35 second shot clock
4 quarters >>>>>> 2 halves. don't get 10+ minutes with teams in the bonus.....

reffing in NBA is way more consistent than college. games are exciting. games have flow. teams score.

40 minute games when teams are scoring 50/60 points is an awful viewing experience.

I'm not necessarily enthralled by 110-108 basketball games just like I'm not necessarily enthralled by 63-60 football games, so low scoring college games don't really bother me. In fact, I like that every single basket matters in a college game. Too often you see matador defense in the NBA because at the end of the day what's the big deal with giving up a layup to make it 56-50 at the half?

That being said, your point about the officiating (cue Bob) is spot on. The leap from college to pro refs is amazing. Their eyes and ability to make legit calls on a consistent basis is impressive. And I agree about the four quarters helping with the foul situation. I may appreciate good defensive basketball, but I sure as hell don't tune in to watch free throw shooting contests.

Bizarro Fletch wrote:

I'm not necessarily enthralled by 110-108 basketball games just like I'm not necessarily enthralled by 63-60 football games, so low scoring college games don't really bother me. In fact, I like that every single basket matters in a college game. Too often you see matador defense in the NBA because at the end of the day what's the big deal with giving up a layup to make it 56-50 at the half?

That being said, your point about the officiating (cue Bob) is spot on. The leap from college to pro refs is amazing. Their eyes and ability to make legit calls on a consistent basis is impressive. And I agree about the four quarters helping with the foul situation. I may appreciate good defensive basketball, but I sure as hell don't tune in to watch free throw shooting contests.

My favorite era of bball was when hand checking and hard fouls were allowed. I had no complaints with the flow of the game during that era.

So I agree with you, there was a lot to be said about good defensive basketball.

Bizarro Fletch wrote:

Then please spend more of your time on NBA message boards.

That wasn't very nice to say.

Bizarro Fletch wrote:

I have definitely been encouraged by this gradual change - it's certainly making the game more watchable.  But I do wonder how any fan of Tom Izzo basketball (which I know the OP isn't) can stomach watching the NBA regularly.  While I know MSU runs a ton of pro sets, the astounding number of poor shots regularly taken in the pro game (partially due to the short shot clock) is maddening.  I have no clue how Izzo could have coached in that league.

The OP's premise cracks me up.  Of course if pure talent is your primary reason for watching a sport you should watch the pro version. Good for you. Have a field day with all of the awesome stats.  But the primary reason I prefer college sports is the passion associated with them, which just can't be reproduced in the NBA or NFL, IMHO.  I'm sure Bobby Sak agrees.

I am a fan of good basketball. The majority of the time we play good basketball under Izzo so shove it. The poor shots aren't really as "poor" as you think they are. You are used to see college players brick these same shots the pros are making.

See, I'm a fan of the atmosphere and try to make as many live games as I can. I know how much better the college atmosphere is, but in the current state of college basketball, NBA is better. I love them both. Spartans > Pistons. But overall, NBA baby. And this is as I aged...some years ago it was whatever when the Pistons died down..

In the end, basketball is the best damn sport on the planet.

@kenpomeroy
Teams averaging 70+ poss/game…2002: 161, 2005: 73, 2009: 57, 2012: 32, 2015: 13 - and that will probably drop a bit.

tig ol bitties wrote:@kenpomeroy
Teams averaging 70+ poss/game…2002: 161, 2005: 73, 2009: 57, 2012: 32, 2015: 13 - and that will probably drop a bit.

Whoops, that's not right Fletch!