NBA Info - April 2026

[Deleterious]

Ooops.  Meant to post this first.

 

[buddha]

The knicks - without kat - beat the bulls by 40.

the great josh giddey had more turnovers than made baskets.

[buddha]

why would anyone pay to watch this slop?

[Deleterious]

At least we have Pelicans-Kings to close the night.

[Deleterious]

 

[Deleterious]

Flagg with 51 tonight. He is the youngest player in league history to score 50.

[buddha]

10 hours ago, Deleterious said:

 

do steve kerr and the players want to take a pay cut to make up for that missed revenue?

[casimir]

The regular season might be too long.  I won't take part in that debate because of the timing of seasons vis a vis with baseball and me being a baseball fan over all other sports.

But I want to see how the players and player's association, and probably some owners, tries to apply the concept of shrinkflation to the regular season.  Because we all know damn well nobody wants to give up any part of revenue even if they reduce the regular season by a dozen or whatever games.  How is that going to go over with broadcasting and advertising and all of that revenue?

[Deleterious]

If a shorter season genuinely improves the quality of play, owners can probably recoup that lost revenue through higher ticket prices. Losing five home dates a year is not that dramatic, and a ten dollar average increase per ticket would likely cover the gap without much pushback from fans.

Local broadcasters like FanDuel would take a small hit with fewer games to air, but national broadcasters would barely notice the difference. Unlike the NFL, where cutting games also cuts weeks of programming, the NBA can fit a shortened season into the exact same calendar window, so national TV schedules stay intact. And if the on court product actually improves, better games drive higher ratings, and higher ratings let the league charge more for advertising, so that revenue stream could end up neutral or even increase.

The real question, though, is whether 72 games actually produces a meaningfully better product than 82, and that part is worth being skeptical about. 

[buddha]

9 minutes ago, Deleterious said:

If a shorter season genuinely improves the quality of play, owners can probably recoup that lost revenue through higher ticket prices. Losing five home dates a year is not that dramatic, and a ten dollar average increase per ticket would likely cover the gap without much pushback from fans.

Local broadcasters like FanDuel would take a small hit with fewer games to air, but national broadcasters would barely notice the difference. Unlike the NFL, where cutting games also cuts weeks of programming, the NBA can fit a shortened season into the exact same calendar window, so national TV schedules stay intact. And if the on court product actually improves, better games drive higher ratings, and higher ratings let the league charge more for advertising, so that revenue stream could end up neutral or even increase.

The real question, though, is whether 72 games actually produces a meaningfully better product than 82, and that part is worth being skeptical about. 

theyre not taking a hit now because of the product, why would they give up the revenue?  people go see teams when theyre winning, not because they love to see well played basketball.

and your last part is the real truth.  players arent going to suddenly be available more if they schedule less games, they'll take more time off.

the salaries are so high that they dont need to play.  theyre guaranteed.  plus these guys are their own brand names now, they lose out if they get injured, what's the best way not to get injured?  dont play.

the teams have invested so much money in them they the teams dont want them injured either.  the teams want them ready for the playoffs, when they make more coin.  as long as they can make the playoffs, they dont care.  the regular season games dont matter.

i dont know how you change that.  its not like that in baseball for the most part.  its not like that in hockey.  they both play huge regular seasons.  nfl isnt comparable.

why is the nba different?  why do nba players beg out of games so regularly why hockey and baseball players dont?  why do nba teams allow it - and likely encourage it - and other leagues dont?

[buddha]

basketball players make so much money so early, there's less incentive.  football players get cut immediately.  baseball players make league minimum for 3 years, then have their salaries controlled by arbitration which is judged mostly by their performance for another 3 years.  hockey players make less money and are locked into their contracts for at least 3 years as a rookie.