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: Kyrie’s 57 or Klay’s 37? | The rest issue … | Brighter future: Knicks or Lakers?
VIDEO: The Starters address the issue of resting players
> It’s a trend now, resting players who are healthy and able to play. Sure, coaches should do what’s best for their team. And yes, fans deserve to see the best players. So what can be done about this, moving forward?
Steve Aschburner, NBA.com: Wait, don’t you know I’m sitting out this “blogtable” question? Two out of three on any given day is a hectic pace and I’m tuckered … OK, here are four suggestions, any of which I’ll happily take credit for if implemented: First, cut the preseason down by 10 days (four tune-up games are plenty) so the regular season can start earlier, sprinkling those days into what used to be four-in-five-night grinds. Second, encourage teams to lighten players’ loads on practice days, travel days and off days. Third, let coaches know that shorter minutes in more games is preferable to zero minutes in some; ticket buyers ought to have a fair chance of seeing both teams’ stars play, say, 24 minutes. And fourth, if all these rest provisions are adopted, mandate that marquee players will play in marquee games (i.e., TNT, ABC and ESPN dates). Those are the nights the NBA sells itself to casual fans and broadens its appeal.
Fran Blinebury, NBA.com: Until both sides — owners and players — come together for the good of player health and the quality of the game and sacrifice a slice of the gobs of money they take in to play a reduced schedule of, say, 66 to 72 games, everything else is just hot air. The solution is simple. But billionaires and millionaires won’t give up a dollar, which is why all we get is yammering and lineups that should make the league ashamed.
Scott Howard-Cooper, NBA.com: Nothing. It’s just a new fact of life. Not a good one once lottery-bound teams start sitting players to make sure they are rested for the offseason, compared to the understandable reason of wanting to be ready for the postseason, but I don’t think anything can be done. I’d love to hear the suggestions. Any attempted clampdown would merely encourage coaches to perfect stretching the truth. “My starting center woke up with a sore back. Prove me wrong. By the way, my starting point guard stayed home because of some pressing personal business that needed his full attention. Call his wife if you don’t believe me.” It creates more problems than it solves.
Shaun Powell, NBA.com: If coaches want to rest players, fine, I guess that’s accepted nowadays. But pulling a Steve Kerr and sitting four-fifths of your starting lineup is over the top. Stop the madness at that point. What’s really weird is players, this deep into the season, rarely if ever practice. Which means they get days off and nights off? Klay Thompson is 25 and healthy and he needs a breather? You can’t put a player out there for at least 15 minutes? Have some respect for the game, at least, and confine your “rest” to one starter per night, if you must. And Adam Silver, please trim the schedule to 75 games, dump the preseason altogether, return to best-of-five for the first round … and convince the owners that less games and revenue is better for the sport (good luck with that one).
John Schuhmann, NBA.com: It really sucks for fans who bought tickets to that particular game to see those particular players. If I lived in Denver and bought tickets for last Friday’s game against Golden State because my kid was a big Stephen Curry fan, I’d be pretty ticked that Stephen Curry didn’t play. Maybe the league can allow fans to exchange those tickets for another game. But resting players will continue to be a smart strategy for good teams who are thinking about the big picture, unless the season is shortened. Fewer games (72 has always been my suggestion) would both allow for more rest and make each game more important.
Sekou Smith, NBA.com: A heavy-handed approach will only make things worse. No coach wants to be told how to manage his team. So the league should stay above that fray and institute some general guidelines for resting players who don’t have significant injuries. You want an age limit? How about no one under the age of 30 gets a night off for rest? I could operate on four hours of sleep for six days before my 30th birthday. Rest later, when you are old and cranky. No rest for players on losing teams, never … EVER! And if the integrity of the game means anything, these teams with the blatant maintenance programs must go back to the camouflage of the “sore back” and “tendinitis” as the serial excuses for guys missing games.
Ian Thomsen, NBA.com: More efficient scheduling can help reduce the wear on players. But I believe this trend of resting players is to be encouraged, actually, because it shows fans that the heart is in the right place — that teams are more concerned with winning games and contending for championships than they are focused on the negative business impact. Isn’t this what fans want — for winning to come first?
Lang Whitaker, NBA.com’s All Ball blog: The only way coaches will be convinced to stop sitting guys is if somehow they realize that sitting these guys, for whatever reason, isn’t what is best for their team. What it reminds me of, to be honest, is the way the Atlanta Braves used to handle resting their players during the stretch run. They’d qualify for the postseason with weeks left, rest guys the last few weeks of the season, then hit the postseason with a roster full of guys who were out of sync and out of rhythm. Resting and focusing on preventative maintenance is great, in theory. But you can’t turn the magic on and off.