Predictably, the reactions to the rule changes announced by the NBA last week were mainly ones of scorn. The league's intended implementations of zone defenses, an eight-second rule to bring the ball over half-court, and a three-second rule for defenders are all intended to open up the game and discourage the endless isolation plays that have become the stultifying staples of pro basketball.
Of course, many people, especially successful ones, respond negatively to change. Why should Kobe Bryant welcome a scheme that will allow defenses to collapse on him without inhibition? Even the half-hearted pretenses of man-to-man that teams like the Knicks and Heat currently employ are easier for those who prefer to play one-on-five to go against.
The point of the zone, apparently, is to reduce those endless isolations, in which the man with the ball generally dribbles down the shot clock and then tries to create his own shot. It will probably work, at least in the short term. But that doesn't mean the games will get any prettier.
If the zones aren't carved up by the Bryants and Allen Iversons of the world (and they will dismantle many teams' new-fangled defenses, because the lazy pros from, say, the New Jersey Nets, playing a halfhearted two-three against Iverson isn't exactly John Chaney's Temple team confusing the hell out of Penn State with its funky, ornery, matchup zone), they will increase jump-shooting. And a major problem of the NBA is that not enough players can shoot.
Oh, they can drive, and dunk, and dish, but there aren't too many guys who can shoot the basketball out there. That's why Steve Kerr and Dell Curry are still hanging around, and why the NBA scouts scouring Europe are suddenly working harder than ever before in search of shooters who know how to work against the dreaded zone and can an open shot.
So, though the eight-second rule's impact will be negligible, and the three-second defensive rule sounds confusing (isn't the whole point of many zones to camp your big guy under the basket as a sort of safety?), be prepared for the games to get even uglier due to a lack of shooting.
On sort of a side note, with all the hype circulating about a possible Michael Jordan comeback, let me make one more brief point, which is this: Jordan, as great a player as he was, is partly responsible for the malaise that hangs over the NBA today.
No, not because he retired; that had to happen eventually. But because he was a pioneer of the very isolation play that the NBA is trying to get away from today. Yeah, the Bulls played that famous triangle offense (I'm pretty sure any offense would work with the players they had), but Jordan and Scottie Pippen carried the bulk of the scoring, and one must remember the countless times Jordan dribbled down the clock and hit the winner.
So the new generation of players, the ones who grew up watching Jordan, want to... what else?... be like Mike. So Bryant, Iverson, Steve Francis, etc. all demand the ball and try to get everybody else to stay out of the way.
But they're not Michael, there won't ever be another Michael, and he's not coming back. It's about time the NBA did something to give itself a little tweak. Canned dunk highlights can only sustain a league for so long.
300 Washington Avenue, Chestertown, Maryland 21620 | 410-778-2800 | 800-422-1782