David Stern has been commissioner for way, way, waaaay too long. There is too much controversy and conspiracy in the NBA and he is the figure-head for it. Somehow the NBA instead of becoming more transparent to clear its image, it keeps getting more hush-hush. The fans know less and less about the inner workings of the NBA and there shouldn't be a reason to hide something unless you have something to hide. I dislike "star calls" and no accountability for the refs, coaches players not being able to talk about the refs, not televising the lottery drawing, etc. the list goes on
Here's what I would do if I was commissioner, Along with some more zany suggestions just for fun :)
here's my big headline rule change.
Buzzer beater shots will now be counted if the player is "in the act" of shooting. instead of if the player has contact with the ball when the red light goes on. in almost all cases they should be in the air and do nothing else but shoot. If its a set shot, the referees have to determine if the player was in the act of shooting when the buzzer sounds (kind of like continuation calls after a foul).
why do this: simply put, I hate great shots not counting. A great shot should be rewarded for being made and not waived off because "oh the tip of his finger is touching the ball" We've seen this happen to Danny Green, Kawhi, and many others. Also, this would eliminate human error for the clock. prime example: The Derek Fischer ".4" shot should have never counted under the current rules. The clock started somewhere between .6 and .8 tenths of a second late. He never got off that shot in time, that's a fact not speculation. Was it a great shot? yes. I think it should count under the new rules.
Also I don't like players just standing there at the end of games as well as offensive players having to just tap the ball or something else. I think it should be a last play where a player should be able to get a shot and the defense should keep trying to play for that reason. I think it would be good for the game
new rule: Team Captain. I don't love players complaining in front of refs faces all the time. So let's make 1 player on the court be similar to a head coach. one player may state cases for other players. Everyone else "assistant coaches" should shut the hell up. This would allow calmer players to discuss calls rather than players prone to getting technicals and ejections. Captains would be assigned like a Presidential descendant chart.
example. 1. Timmy 2. Tony 3. Manu 4. Bonner 5. Diaw 6. Patty Mills 7. Danny Green 8. Kawhi That way at any one time there would have to be at least one designated captain on the court. If 1-5 isn't on the floor then 6 is considered captain and so forth.
New rule: Coach challenge, they can challenge any call they want to, even no calls. If they are incorrect or the call can not be overturned, you are charged a timeout and allowed no more challenges. If you get it right you can keep challenging up to 4 times in a game(1 for each quarter, you use all 4 whenever you'd like). reason: blown calls or bs calls can change the outcome of a game.
A little bit Zany Rule: Out of bounds should be treated like soccer. where it only counts if the ball is out of bounds. I say zany because that presents a whole set of dynamics to the game that would be hard to predict.
Overtime Foul Rule: For each overtime period played, all players that had not fouled out in regulation will be given an additional foul up until 10 fouls. if by some crazy chance teams get to 5 overtimes players will start fouling out.
reasoning: I just want to see great players playing their hardest in an evenly matched game=great basketball
2 more things i would want. Something to give guards better opportunity to defend. Something to discourage/reduce flopping (I'm not referring to embellishing fouls. I'm referring to faking something happening entirely). I don't know how to fix them. I am open to suggestions. (however, i am not opposed to people preferring the new high octane offense low defense of basketball. I just miss the old days of super defenses)
One of the first things I would do as commish. is to bring back credibility and transparency to the fans. I would want a full-fledged investigation of all of the inner-workings, especially the refs. I would then probably still get rid of several refs based on the previous incidences and public view *cough Joey Crawford *cough. Hire new refs with clean backgrounds good for the image.
The lottery would be completely televised as well as confirmed by an independent party as being legitimate.
Players and coaches will be allowed to complain about refs/other things in the NBA and not be fined. However, there will be accountability of statements. As in, the referees will be able to answer back publicly to accusations. Basically if you make bad statements you can and will be made a fool of publicly. As well as the media being held responsible for their words. The NBA will exchange in an open dialogue about complaints as well as address bogus statements made by "journalists" for shock value. We won't address crazy articles, rather important ones that people talk about and cause a lot of speculation.
Any Person Age 18 and up are eligible for the draft. I don't like Colleges getting free money from players. For the Gm's that complain about the talent-readiness, don't draft them. Also, most prospects won't make the jump from highschool to the nba anyways.
Miscellaneous Structural Changes
The NBA lottery: the bottom 14 teams will be given equal chance at winning the lottery, there will be drawings for the top 3 picks. the rest will be in order. so if you get last place the worst pick you could get is 4. Yes i realize some teams just out of the playoffs will get a great pick. But that will happen statistically twice every 7 years (top 2 out of the playoff teams). It would create a more competitive environment for the bottom teams to try to make the playoffs having no incentive to tank. I also think it removes teams "stuck in the middle" I don't like watching teams suck really bad to have a chance at getting good. what really happens most of the time is teams that suck to "win the lottery" end up sucking really bad for a long time. I want the NBA to be hotly contested where many teams have a legitimate chance at winning every year. This year it was realistically 4 (Spurs, Heat, Bulls, Thunder) I'd prefer 6-9 teams every year.
All-star game- I don't want the fans voting players in, I think it should be a mix of their peers and coaches. Fans can vote on the MVP. But i dislike deserving players getting snubbed because of fan bias. Especially since people count all-star appearances in consideration for Hall of Fame.
Also GM of the year: shouldn't be voted by just fellow GM's. Seeing as how Buford has never won it. It seems we've got some sore losers in the group.
3 point contest: will be determined by some mathematical equation of percentage and number of 3's made. The top players (and last years winner) will be selected. I hate certain players being promoted over others. I want the game to dictate greatness and stardom and then be enhanced by marketing not the other way around.
I want to re-emphasize this: The NBA should promote players primarily on skill and let the marketability come later. I think the game should speak to itself to attract viewers. Good players like Spurs players get ignored and a bad rep because along with the national media the NBA's media/marketing doesn't do enough to promote them. LA and New York aren't going to cover the spurs. Somebody should have their backs, as well as Bobcats, Bucks, etc.
Dunk contest: fan voting should count as half and judges count as half for the final 2. give a cash prize for more competitiveness. (this actually goes for all all-star events)
Every team gets a nationally televised game: even if the best we can do is NBATV
Removal of divisions meaning anything for playoffs: I think its dumb that teams get automatic bid for winning the division.
1-16 playoff bracket: if it is same conference teams playing format is 2-2-1-1-1. if east west coast team playing 2-3-2. Except in the finals I want 2-2-1-1-1. I think too much advantage is given to the team with 3 home games in a row. It would happen early to avoid travel. Also i think it would allow the best teams a better chance at making farther. also it would allow teams with records better in the west to play in the playoffs instead of crappy record eastern conference teams. Yes two West or East teams could play in the finals. Its the championship may the best team win. side note: It totally would be a Spurs Thunder final this year. I think we could beat the heat if they were in our bracket.
Zany rule: Lottery teams play a best of 1 playoff. the winning team gets an extra 5% chance at getting the number 1 pick. The trophy would be called the Charles Barkley Championship Trophy.
Zany rule: If you beat a team in the playoffs, you get to bring one player of your choosing with you to the next round. However, it must be an original player of said team. Example. We beat clippers get Chris Paul. thunder beat us, they cannot bring Chris Paul. it's NBA street you guys! :)
idk how people would feel about this rule: if every team played 90 games instead of 82, every team would play eachother 3 times. meaning there would be a season series winner for every matchup, and no team would benafit from playing a weak team more in a conference
I had a few more rules but can't remember them right now. I might edit later. Anyhoo, this is what I would do as commish/ruler of the NBA. How do you like the changes? What would you do?