RealGM

Hey guys,

So for a class of mine I gotta choose an argumentative essay topic. I definitely want to do something basketball related since I could talk for days about it. So far I got two topic ideas:

Does the "One and Done" rule that applies to basketball players who make the jump from college to the NBA need revisiting?
Now that both have retired, who was the better player? Kobe Bryant or Michael Jordan?


If anyone has any other topic ideas let me know!

Thanks

The role of analytics in the NBA

OakleyDokely wrote:The role of analytics in the NBA

In what sense? Like what would you say would be the argument?

The role of Adam Silver in NBA Officiating

releasing the last couple minutes referee reports

advertising on jerseys

At what point would tanking become actively damaging to the league itself and how close are we to that point?

The game theory of the NBA is easy. Be as bad as you can be for as long as it takes until the ping pong balls bounce your way to allow for at least 3 superstars in the draft or the assets to acquire 3. Fans in Milwaukee crowdsourced a large billboard begging their ownership to lose as many games as possible just 2 years ago. Tanking is an act whereby a general manager of a sports team deliberately constructs a team to lose as many games as possible. The reasons are numerous. Nearly ever NBA superstar in history entered the draft at some point. The contracts are widely seen as the best bargains with the best retention options. The players can't choose where they want to go. They're forced to the teams that draft them to ensure that even lesser markers occasionally have some entertaining players. The draft is in many ways an initiation to the league itself.

So, in a zero sum game where there can only be one Champion why aren't there more teams trying to be bad? How many would be too many? And at what point would the league itself step in?

I honesty don't think you'll find a more interesting basketball debate topic overall than that. I could personally talk about it for days and am a big proponent for draft reform of some kind eventually. Not because of where tanking is but because of where I think it will go in the decades ahead.

Double Helix wrote:At what point would tanking become actively damaging to the league itself and how close are we to that point?

The game theory of the NBA is easy. Be as bad as you can be for as long as it takes until the ping pong balls bounce your way to allow for at least 3 superstars in the draft or the assets to acquire 3. Fans in Milwaukee crowdsourced a large billboard begging their ownership to lose as many games as possible just 2 years ago. Tanking is an act whereby a general manager of a sports team deliberately constructs a team to lose as many games as possible. The reasons are numerous. Nearly ever NBA superstar in history entered the draft at some point. The contracts are widely seen as the best bargains with the best retention options. The players can't choose where they want to go. They're forced to the teams that draft them to ensure that even lesser markers occasionally have some entertaining players. The draft is in many ways an initiation to the league itself.

So, in a zero sum game where there can only be one Champion why aren't there more teams trying to be bad? How many would be too many? And at what point would the league itself step in?

I honesty don't think you'll find a more interesting basketball debate topic overall than that. I could personally talk about it for days and am a big proponent for draft reform of some kind eventually. Not because of where tanking is but because of where I think it will go in the decades ahead.

Damn, this ones a really good one. For sure a lot to say with it

Who is worse: Bayless or SAS

The concept of tradition and integrity verses commercialization and revenue.

For every increase in revenue, players get paid more money. At what point do revenue creating initiatives destroy what the game is. At what point is the pay sufficient?

For example last night the 20 and 40 second time outs were closer to 2 and 4 minutes, which, if the game was closer, would have killed any momentum either of the teams were having and gave players, who may have had to go to the bench, the opportunity to stay on the floor.

Is the NBA simply a business which should put profit ahead of everything regardless of the affect on fair competition, or respect for the game?

I think you should bring up the argument of racism and this rule. The fact that the only two leagues in the world you have to go to school before becoming pro are the two leagues with the most African american athletes can't be looked on as some coincidence.

If you want me to keep it 100, this is White America saying we want these Black men to be somewhat educated before getting big exposure on the National scene. Very racist rule to me.

Hockey, Baseball, Soccer, Tennis, Golf. All these sports you can play right out of high school. Tennis and Soccer you can play pro even earlier. It really boggles my mind that this rule and racism isn't brought up more often .

Treadmill_Team wrote:I think you should bring up the argument of racism and this rule. The fact that the only two leagues in the world you have to go to school before becoming pro are the two leagues with the most African american athletes can't be looked on as some coincidence.

If you want me to keep it 100, this is White America saying we want these Black men to be somewhat educated before getting big exposure on the National scene. Very racist rule to me.

Hockey, Baseball, Soccer, Tennis, Golf. All these sports you can play right out of high school. Tennis and Soccer you can play pro even earlier. It really boggles my mind that this rule and racism isn't brought up more often .

Furthermore, money is a huge reason for this as well. No one cares about amateur baseball, Tennis, Hockey, Soccer or Golf. There's no argument when it comes to college football being the 2nd most popular sports league in America. NBA is probably #2, but you can make a case that no point in the NBA season is as anticipated as march madness. I'd bet March Madness does better #'s than the NBA playoffs.

And there is no debate between MJ and Kobe. I could give you at least 5 players with a better case than Kobe.

Treadmill_Team wrote:And there is no debate between MJ and Kobe. I could give you at least 5 players with a better case than Kobe.

Which 5?

Homosexual Players in NBA History. Then and now. Will coming out be accepted by society during Their Career.

This topic is not common and your teacher might give u extra credit for touching the topic.

There was recently a guy who came out. Plus you have the inigma that was Denis Rodman or a guy like Richard Jefferson who people accused of being gay. There's actually a lot to work with here.

Go for it. Best of luck.

Should Bargnani get another chance

You can talk about how the NBA market has expanded since Michael Jordan had retired with the bulls. What strategies they used to prop stars and sell merchandise, games, persona's etc. And how it may never end as long as this sport and association is alive.

The 4 point line


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Another interesting one might be on the correlation between little guys being the best shoe sellers in the league and all the league's rule changes over the past 40 years to make life easier for smaller players to succeed in a game that had been dominated by size. The introduction of the 3 point line, the increase of zone defences, which were previously illegal, and the elimination of hand-checking allow smaller shooters to dominate where they weren't able to previously. Was this all part of a plan to make the league seem more accessible and relatable to the average fan who isn't a 7 footer?

Does the "hot-hand" actually exist? Tons of stuff on it