Blogtable: Thoughts on NBA, referee’s new agreement

Each week, we’ll ask our stable of scribes across the globe to weigh in on the most important NBA topics of the day — and then give you a chance to step on the scale, too, in the comments below.


BLOGTABLE: Next Team USA coach? | Point guards for 2016? | Thoughts on NBA-refs deal?



VIDEOJoe Borgia explains the changes for next season

> While not yet official, it appears the NBA has reached agreement with its referees through the 2022 season. Is this a big thing, a little thing, or much ado about nothing?

Steve Aschburner, NBA.com: It’s a big thing, because we hear the whining and grumbling that goes on when even the best in the business make calls that some player, coach, executive or owner doesn’t like. Imagine the decibels and frequency of such fussing and fuming if suddenly the league were policed by replacements or newbies. Besides, the completely electronic, eye-in-the-sky, make-every-foul-call-from-Secaucus-replay-center system isn’t quite up and running yet. That’ll kick in around the 2029-30 season.

Fran Blinebury, NBA.com: It’s only a big thing if it didn’t get done and the game was tarnished and diminished by replacement referees. It’s a very big thing if the league and the Players Association can now learn from this experience and get to work on a new collective bargaining agreement to avoid a work stoppage.

Scott Howard-Cooper, NBA.com: A pretty big thing because it eliminates the possibility of a very big thing. Important labor deals should never be shrugged off, just because it came without hard-line comments or a work stoppage. In addition to being a pretty big thing, it’s a good thing.

Shaun Powell, NBA.com: I say it’s a little thing. You can’t dismiss the significance of it because anytime the league can tie up the refs for a reasonable length of time is great. Why risk having the game soiled by inexperienced refs? But it’s not a big thing because, with all the money coming into the league, it was only a matter of time before the refs got their cut. They were in no danger of holding out. Everyone wins in this deal.

John Schuhmann, NBA.com: Big thing. It’s good that the best refs in the world are her for another seven years. It’s comforting that there was never a hint of an issue that would affect the season. And it’s important that the league continues to give these guys what they need behind the scenes as they put them under more scrutiny, via the Last Two Minute reports, in public.

Sekou Smith, NBA.com: I think it’s big enough. Any time you can broker labor peace ahead of a deadline, it’s a victory. And in an effort to make sure that men charged with one of the most difficult jobs in sports (you try keeping up with the tallest and most graceful group of professional athletes on the planet) understand the investment the league has made in them is for the long haul, this goes a long way. I’m not here to disparage replacement referees, but I want to see them under the bright lights about as much as I do replacement players … and that’s never!

Ian Thomsen, NBA.com: It is big. The NBA is seeking to deepen its partnership with referees by pursuing greater transparency and self-reflection. The league wants referees to continue to view themselves as servants to the game to an ever-increasing degree. An extended and bitter contract negotiation would have undermined the big-picture goal; by agreeing to new terms without public drama, the league and its referees can move forward with less acrimony than in previous years.

Lang Whitaker, NBA.com’s All Ball blogI guess it’s something, but I don’t think it’s a big thing. Even if the NBA had to use replacement refs, there are so many replay and review mechanisms currently in place that I’m not sure how much damage they could have done. I guess it does put an end to my feature idea — “NBA Behind the Scenes: I was a replacement ref.”

Comments are closed.