Reforming the NBA: Combining European and Major League Baseball Principles

About a month ago, I book marked an article by AC Content Producer Brian McCormick called Fixing the NBA the European Way as the topic of a possible elaboration or follow up. In this article, Mr. McCormick lays out the case for improving the National Basketball Association by reforming its regular and post-season to resemble that of European basketball leagues. While I agree in principle with Brian's argument, I don't think his suggestions go far enough to solving the problems that may keep the NBA from meeting its potential as an international league. I think changes in the league's personnel management and season are required to create a versatile league that will appeal to the most people possible.

The first step in reforming the NBA to make it more interesting is to integrate personnel decisions between the minor leagues and the big league. The NBA Draft should feature six rounds, with the first two devoted as usual to an NBA franchise and the last four devoted to stocking affiliate teams with players with potential that may not make an NBA roster. People may ask how this would be done, considering that many minor basketball leagues don't have the same number of teams as the NBA. The system would be multi-tiered so that every team is guaranteed an affiliation with two teams, regardless of the level. The level of competition in the minor leagues is fairly similar and both major and minor league teams win in this deal. The major league teams get to develop players without having them on their active roster while minor league teams get a better brand of player through this feeder system.

To go along with this point on personnel management, I think that there should be two different age standards for the NBA. In the final four rounds of the draft, a team can select any player over the age of 18. The reason behind this is similar to that of the minor league system in baseball. If a high school senior or college freshman wants to develop through the minor leagues of basketball, they have an opportunity through the draft. However, if players want the opportunity to develop in the collegiate environment, they can choose to go back to school and try their hand in pro ball after they graduate. This brings me to the second age distinction in the NBA, which is that no one under 21 can be promoted through the minor league system or signed as a free agent. In this way, NBA fans are guaranteed more mature players that have presumably gone through college, international play, or the minor leagues on their way to the big time. I think these age rules can help make the NBA a better league.

Now to the meat of what Mr. McCormick discussed in the aforementioned article. The author recommended a European style regular season with 58 games (home and home with every team in the league) and a Cup Championship featuring the top 24 NBA teams from the last season and eight minor league teams that participate in a summer championship series. I think Mr. McCormick is on the right track and not only are the suggestions good but his reasoning is also fairly strong. The author states that the fact that the top 24 teams from the previous season compete for the Cup means that teams that would ordinarily be fighting to the bottom for a lottery pick would have to play hard to the last game. As well, I enjoy the way in which Mr. McCormick devised the Cup Championship series. The first round is divided into eight divisions of four teams, which yields two teams from each division. From there, the second round is divided into four divisions of four teams, which yield the top two teams from each division. From there, it is a best two out of three games for the final eight teams and then a final four winner take all at a neutral site. All in all, I can't disagree with the basic premise of his argument.

However, I would like to add a wrinkle to his notion of which teams should be entered into the Cup Championship. Instead of having the top eight teams from the minor leagues participate, I feel that it should be the top four minor league teams and the top four international teams. These four international teams would be taken from the four major basketball continents (Europe, Asia, Africa, and South America), as determined by a mini-tournament of the top four teams from those continents. NBA Commissioner David Stern has done a lot toward promoting the NBA overseas, including the series of 2006 preseason games played overseas and the promotion of international players in the league. It only makes sense to include international teams in the Cup Championship in order to test their mettle and the mettle of American teams. As well, it will build a strong financial base overseas, with Cup Championship merchandise and advertising that can make the NBA get even richer.

My final point on reforming the NBA is to hold the NBA All Star Game in smaller town locations across the United States. While arenas in Los Angeles or New York may hold more people, one of the most overlooked areas of the NBA marketing machine is in the small towns of America. I'm not talking about doing this in a city of 1,000 but in places like Green Bay, Wisconsin, or Provo, Utah, it would boost the game's reputation at aiming toward basketball consumers away from the coasts and the big cities. Brian McCormick only intended to discuss reforming the NBA in terms of season management so he may agree with some of these points already. However, if we are going to talk about changing the league, we should talk in terms of reforming everything that is wrong in the NBA.