RHODEY wrote:nykballa2k4 wrote:I mean, this is the real problem with the NBA.
Inconsistent, or clearly one sided referees is on that top-3 problems.
The other problem is player movement.
It's exciting from a media and short-burst for players to change clothes like that, but from actual "tune in" day to day, if we were not good right now, idk how much I would care to watch because all the players are new to us. Aside from Mitch Robinson and Deuce, everyone here is relatively new.
Why am I going to fall in love with *insert young player here* when there is an 85% chance they won't be on the team before the next presidential election?
Agree about the reffing, player movement though can go both ways. Hart Towns , and Brunson are all relatively new but I certainly care about watching them.
But if you a were referring to new players not locked into long contracts...yeah I get that.
It felt like there were players, not always stars, but players who were etched into their teams for a good 10 year span. Even transient guys like Robert Horry had relatively long stays at their multiple stops.
Charlie Ward was never a great player, but he was a familiar face for years. Little things like that, for me, help build fandom. But I could be in the minority I suppose. The removal of the 7 year contract (or longer) certainly impacts that.
To your point though -- so getting Towns, brunson etc is good for getting you to tune in, but if worked out like the Suns, and two years later you sold them all off, then those fans leave. If you have like 5 players change per year, at least there is some continuity so a fan could be invested in, say, Lavar Postell, even in the aftermath of losing bigger named players. Maybe Herb Williams was washed, but you knew who your 4th string center was for a good long time.