NBA: Tuning In

The made for Hollywood soap opera currently being marketed in Los Angeles as a championship basketball operation, is indicative a much broader problem in the modern NBA game.

Whether it be Shaq and Kobe feuding at the prom, the Orlando Magic's and Miami Heat's season tanking because one guy is done for the season, the Blazers unhappy group of all-stars brooding over individual stats or Rick Pitino's inability to take individual talent and make it successful - the symptoms are growing and there is no cure in sight.

Team basketball is in trouble - but individual super stars are alive and well - and rather wealthy.

The game is suffering from a chronic era of specialization. When team's look to the draft or to the free agent and trading block - they now look for specific needs, overlooking the overall skill of the player.

Ben Wallace is one of the worst offensive players in the game today. But his shot blocking and rebounding ability makes him a worthwhile specialist. Guys like Dana Barros, Dennis Scott, Pat Garrity and Brian Shaw are close to valueless on defense - it's like having 4 guys back down the court - but once and a while - and when it counts - they will hit a huge three from the perimeter which changes the game.

Is specialization a good thing for basketball? It is not like these specialists or role players have become insignificant factors in the building blocks for a team - they are demanding and receiving the same mega millions of dollars to basically provide one specific thing. In some cases, they receive semi-super star money and value as well.

Dikembe Mutombo is clearly one of the most intimidating presences in the game. His ability to rebound and block shots continues to be the premium element of his game. He receives 12 million per year plus and is poised to get more. His scoring has never been lower and the Hawks are at the bottom of the East. As a matter of fact, for all the money he has ever received, no team he has played on in his 10 yr career has made it out of the 2nd round of the playoffs. He is a coveted commodity around the league - but only to teams who already have their offensive weapons in place. He is an ultra expensive specialist.

You do win games with defense. But you still have to score points. The best way to succeed in the NBA would seemingly be to have 5 players on the floor as often as possible who know how to do both.

The other piece of the problem is the egos and the needs of the individual performers around the league. The issue in LA is who gets the most touches. It is clearly ridiculous, especially on a team where the two guys in question's combined efforts marched them to a championship last season and set them up as the dynasty to defeat for at least the next 5- 6 seasons.

This is all a far cry from where this observer began watching the game, some 32 years ago. I recall a New York Knicks squad of Willis Reed, Walt Frazier, Dave DeBusherre, Bill Bradley and Dick Barnett. The first 4 are considered NBA stars by 1970 standards. But the key to that team was the fact that they could all basically do everything on both ends of the court. Depending on the opposition, the specific talents that each of them had, might shine through to win a ball game. Reed's inside game, Walt's stealing ability, Bradley's outside jumper... but in the end - it was a team where everybody did everything.

Back than - the 7 footer was a novelty, not a specialist - certainly a project. The two elite giants were Wilt and Russell, followed shortly by Alcindor/Jabaar. They brought a different look to the game - and even though Wilt, for instance, was a bust at the free throw line - they still played a basic fundamental brand of basketball.

So when did this all change and why? When did team basketball give way to the superstar and friends concept?

It changed in the mid-80s and frankly, for the health of the game - it is probably a good thing it did. First with Dr. J, but moreso with the likes of Michael, Larry, Magic and Isaiah - the game took on a new look. The flying dunks, the wrap around passes the pump fakes, spin moves - it all became the trademark of a sport that couldn't hold a candle to the popularity of baseball or football.

The invoking of the three-point line probably helped as well. It created a whole new breed of shooters that trained themselves to camp out on the perimeter and fire up three's.

But as the demand for the MJ's, Larry's and Magic's took hold - teams began to look at building their teams more like a hit television series. (Like the show 'Cheers') A star character, a few supporting cast members to make the plot interesting and an ensemble of unpredictable role players that do the same thing over and over.

So Larry Bird, became the Celtic's version of Sam Malone, with Kevin McHale, Dennis Johnson and Robert Parrish, playing Norm, Cliff and Woody. The team was fun to watch, but you always knew who would "get the girl" at the end - or the scoring title as it were.

Even though these superstars emerged - they did not do it on scoring alone. It was scoring that put them on posters and made the game more suitable for television viewing - but what made the superstars is that they did what needed to be done on both ends of the court.

The rise of this expectation changed the game forever. Team Management now was in search of that one guy - the guy who would get the biggest paycheck and have the highest number of highlights on the evening newsreels - to build a franchise around.

"Now I need a shot blocker and a guy to pull down rebounds and a three point guy.. and I am set.."

Forget about guys who do everything well. They want guys who do one thing phenomenally.

That may have worked if the league remained as it was in the 80's. But in the 90s - expansion of the league, changes in eligibility, a collective bargaining agreement that insures many of the one dimensional role players a specific sum of money no matter how little they contribute to the team (Jim Mcllvane is a good example) has created a watered down effect that has produced less than competitive results.

Teams mired in mediocrity for years while they search for the one guy who will elevate the team through the draft - only to realize that he is not what the "upside" does equate to instant NBA success. Nobody has drafted more talented players collectively in the past 6 years than the Vancouver Grizzlies or LA Clippers. But what the have had in youth and potential, they have lacked in experience and leadership. Super Stars don't magically take shape on a losing team.

Ask Mitch Richmond.

So as the "World Turns" in Southern California, the debate will continue. Is the game of basketball less fundamentally sound because of the need to exploit the singular super star on a given team. It certainly is the marketing plan of the 21st century. Shaq, Kobe, Vince, Iverson and Garnett, are part of a global effort to sell the game. The NBA recognizes that these multi dimensional players are the impetus for tuning in the game and selling the merchandise. That is the key.

And there is no way to market "team basketball" Fans are now looking for the superstar. They want their team to have the big name, big money man who is going to deliver them to the promised land.

So when the Alonzo Mourning's and Grant Hill's go down, the natural assumption is, and not without reason, that the season is over. Although Miami and Orlando still had the likes of Eddie Jones and Tracy McGrady on Staff, the popular consensus is that those teams are now waiting for next season. And it's not without reason - what is left on those teams are supporting casts and role players - and the vulnerability of the remaining squad becomes fodder for media antics and laxative for frustrated fans...

Team basketball may be in trouble. But it is not what sells the game anyway. And that's the name of the game - Follow through on free throws, proper form on jump shots and solid man to man coverage (instead of leaving the guy who you know won't get the ball to score) have been replaced by Television ratings and Merchandise sales.

Fundamental basketball is still alive and well - in the WNBA. Nobody really dunks or fly's through the air - but the ladies know how to play the ball at both ends of the court.

And that's why it is a good thing the WNBA is not playing at the same time as the NBA. Because who wants to tune into a PBS Documentary on 13th Century Portuguese Architecture when you can tune into 'Cheers'?