Is There Really Time For 72 Games?

HANG TIME NEW JERSEY BUREAU — We don’t know all the details of the NBA’s proposal, but we know that the players have a decision to make early next week. And if they choose to accept the deal, we’ll have a 72-game schedule beginning on Dec. 15.

In the league’s news conference on Thursday night, Adam Silver said that the playoffs would be pushed back “roughly a week.” The original schedule ends on April 18, so the revised one would end on or about April 25. That gives the league 132 days to play 1,080 games.

Last week, we noted that a 72-game schedule that started on Dec. 1 and ended on April 30 would have the same pace as a standard, 82-game schedule that begins around Nov. 1. But when you remove 19 calendar days from that hypothetical 72-game schedule, you get a pace about equal to the 50-game, post-lockout schedule that was played in 1999.

And when you take away four days for All-Star Weekend (which was canceled in ’99), you have teams playing slightly more games per week than they did in ’99, when they played some back-to-back-to-backs.

Schedule pace

Season G/Team Total G Days G/Day Team G/Week
Normal 82 1,230 *166 7.4 3.46
1998-99 50 725 90 8.1 3.89
2011-12 72 1,080 *128 8.4 3.94

* Subtracting four days for All-Star Weekend.

As we laid it out last week, a 72-game schedule allows every team to play in every arena at least once. Each team would play the 15 teams in the other conference two times and the 14 teams in their own conference three times.

There are obvious reasons for maximizing the number of games played in the available timeframe. With 72 games, the players would only be losing out on 12 percent (10/82) of their salary, and owners would only be losing five home games of revenue.

But if the players approve this deal, get ready for a schedule with very little time for practice or recovery from aches and pains.


  1. Moyne says:

    I don’t understand why the league and the fans have to be held to ransom by selfish and unbelievably greedy players, why can’t they appreciate where they r now from where they started out,,,, every year it’s the same greed that locks this down, the league should ban the players and get fresh talent, do we really think that there won’t be other talented players that will come up in the years to come,,,, no body should be able to hold the game, league and most importantly the fans to ransom,,,,, have we not learnt from everything that drove the football teams in uk to bankruptcy ? And to have been bought over by foreign billionaires ??? That would be really funny,,,,,!!!

  2. David Stern says:

    This Player mafia needs to end. So, if it eats up the whole season, so be it. Players have way too much power in the current system and they have the ability to gather up at one location and rest of the teams are merely spectators. Small market teams should have a chance too.

  3. wtelfair says:

    Maybe the league will authorize teams to use all 15 players during games to give players more rest during back-to-back-to-back games. Just a suggestion.

  4. FISHY FISHER says:

    End the lock out get the damn money and play some basketball………..

  5. Skizofred says:

    T I M E !!!!

  6. phamie says:

    72 games is not bad, I hope it’s 72. I wish that all the problem will settle as soon as possible because we can’t wait to see our favorite players specially Steve Nash and the Phoenix Suns.

  7. numb3r69 says:

    Let’s go UTAH! No matter it’s 82, 72, or 50, we’re gonna be champions

  8. johnson says:

    Lets go Sixers !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  9. MN says:

    The NBA should offer all of the players the same base salary, with profit sharing based on a player’s value to the team and what his agent can negotiate. That way, the owners and players will realize that they have a responsibilty to each other, the fans, the TV stations, and all involved with the league.

  10. CARLOS_07 says:

    I wonder why the players are mulling the offer of the 51-49 split of BRI? Do they think that this is the worst labor agreement ever? What about the taxes and the concessions that they want? Hmmmmmmmmmmmm

  11. Gary Collard aka LakerGMC says:

    This density of schedule would kill the quality of play and increase injuries, I absolutely hate it. Yes, it’s better than no season at all, but it is vastly inferior to a normal season with normal levels of rest. 1999 would be seriously challenged as the worst in league history.

    • LakersWillWin says:

      I agree, it’s too dense. I would rather see less games and less chance of injury and even more wear on our veteran players. I mean, at this point I would take anything but that just seems like a lot of games to be played in a shorter amount of time.
      Figure it out NBA, lets watch some games!

  12. wiLQ says:

    Couldn’t they simply add a week to the regular season? Here are 4 different scenarios:

  13. DWADE123 says:

    Yes guys please accept the deal for all of your fans out there across the world, If you accept the deal you get to play basketball on a 72 game schedule(That’s a lot of games) And you and your fans will be happy(;

  14. DWADE123 says:

    Yes guys accept the deal I want to se a season

  15. Jack says:

    this is good news for all of us NBA fans around the globe, accept the offer guys and move on..

  16. demented says:

    i just hope there is a season…. we do need games to refresh our minds of the now and not the then… no disrespect to the pioneers of the nba games….

  17. George G. says:

    If they end this lockout, 72 games would be great to have. Of course the schedule will be very tight and veteran teams may have problems on performing good every night.

  18. 72 games is perfect!!! This will give the League and Union a chance to rectify the damages already caused by the lock out. Lets do this and get it over with.