Ron Baker was a Knick, and now is a Wizard!

[OregonShocker]

Fred said it himself, in one of the links in his NBA thread, that they are two different games. I watched the entire game last night to see Ron play. The Knicks play was terrible, pre-season or not, and I doubt that I will watch another NBA game until the playoffs. Too many other enjoyable things in life to waste my time with the NBA. YMMV

This may actually solidify my point. Most (not all) who side with your opinion are like you; hardly ever watching an NBA game, yet judging on one pre-season performance by players admittedly trying to individually impress. My Son-in-law, a KU grad who goes to a lot of NBA games with me, agrees: you will see at least one play in every regular season NBA game that would make a college teams pre-game highlight film for the next season.

[jazztrane]

My opinion is probably tainted by the fact that the last pro game I watched even part of was the Knicks last night... So I'd side with any college basketball game > NBA at this moment.

[OregonShocker]

My opinion is probably tainted by the fact that the last pro game I watched even part of was the Knicks last night... So I'd side with any college basketball game > NBA at this moment.

That's my point above.

[OregonShocker]

BEST Basketball Players. Not BEST Basketball. That's why I liked the SPURS. They play TEAM Basketball. In PRO baseball, the Royals still play TEAM baseball in a league of Stars. The NFL is still the best PRO league because the TEAMS are still more important than STARS (usually). IMO

This seems to mix up the point. You are right in saying the Royals play better TEAM ball than other teams; but, I bet the WORST TEAM in MLB would feast on the best college WS team. Basketball is similar.

[OregonShocker]

That's not in dispute. It's a style argument. And really it's just a matter of preference. Do you enjoy watching tactical matches more (euro pro/NCAA), or do you prefer to watch a superior technical game (NBA). Most people here are just saying they prefer to watch a tactical style game (whether they think of it along those lines or not).

There's really no right or wrong answer ... it's all opinion.

I agree... but with reservations. Your point is like asking if you want to watch a baseball pitching duel or a slugfest. Personal preference. But style doesn't equal superior play. And clearly the NBA has superior play.

[ShockerPhi]

Another thing the NBA has against it in my opinion is the 80-some game schedule. It's the same thing for me with baseball: It's just hard to care about the regular season when each individual game barely even matters. I love college basketball because 34 games (18 being conference games) makes each game mean something. You can cough up 35 games in the NBA and still make the playoffs and your division doesn't matter at all. College, if you don't win your big games, you might be screwed. Just adds to the level of excitement, plus having to wait 4 or 5 days between games adds to the hype a bit.

Other than that, I still enjoy the NBA some because it is different and I mostly gravitate towards stars, and not exactly teams. Like Curry and Westbrook. Those guys are just fun to watch.

[Cdizzle]

NBA defense is harder than you acknowledge. From Larry Brown, the only title winning coach in both NCAA and NBA: " “When you’re at a college game, in the second half you probably have to make two or three decisions late. In a pro game you probably make 30. And you times that by 100, and then times that by 30, and there’s a huge, huge difference."

I just find it shocking that anyone believes anything that comes out of Larry Brown's mouth.

[ShockerFever]

No, I think I get your point. You're a college fan, not so much a basketball fan. And that's ok. But don't kid yourself into thinking the play in college is better. It just isn't. It's different. I think I could take the last player signed for each team and beat the Villanova Wildcats from last year. And I can't coach.

Are you smoking too much of that legalized substance out in the Oregon woods or something?

Nobody is arguing the fact that NBA players are better than college players. The NBA however is just not an exciting product put on the floor night in and night out. Period. You can watch those Trailblazers till you're red in the face (or more red) over the Shockers. Your loss.

[1972Shocker]

I think more than the level of play or style of play is where does a particular individual have a rooting interest. Whether they have a kid or grandkid in grade school, high school, college or the pros or whether it is their alma mater or the home town (or any other) team they have grown up with those games will always be of more interest than watching a game you have no rooting interest in. And those fans will also be most interested in following the teams that directly compete with their favorite team.

How many Shocker fans would have even considered watching the Knicks last night if it wasn't for Ron Baker.

Most Shocker fans are most interested in following and rooting for the Shockers and by extension following and rooting for and against their direct competition. That is D-1 basketball.

If former Shockers begin filling up NBA rosters then no question the interest in following the NBA among Shocker fans will grow accordingly but would probably never approach the rooting interest in the Shockers (unless of course we return to the dark days of the 90's then all bets are off).

So finding more college basketball fans on a Shocker message board than NBA fans is not really very surprising.

Of course you might have a rooting interest for other ancillary reasons as well such as fantasy sports leagues or betting interest.

[rayc]

I agree... but with reservations. Your point is like asking if you want to watch a baseball pitching duel or a slugfest. Personal preference. But style doesn't equal superior play. And clearly the NBA has superior play.

Actually I think it's more like asking if you prefer to watch a baseball game or homerun derby.

[Shoxthemonkey]

This may actually solidify my point. Most (not all) who side with your opinion are like you; hardly ever watching an NBA game, yet judging on one pre-season performance by players admittedly trying to individually impress. My Son-in-law, a KU grad who goes to a lot of NBA games with me, agrees: you will see at least one play in every regular season NBA game that would make a college teams pre-game highlight film for the next season.

I'm 64. I have watched a lot of NBA over the years going all the way back to Russell, Wilt and the Big O. I don't like what the game has become even though you are correct that the best players are in the pros. Watch who you are shouting down for not watching the NBA. I don't want to sit through a whole game just to see that one highlight play. Many times it never comes.

[OregonShocker]

Are you smoking too much of that legalized substance out in the Oregon woods or something?

Nobody is arguing the fact that NBA players are better than college players. The NBA however is just not an exciting product put on the floor night in and night out. Period. You can watch those Trailblazers till you're red in the face (or more red) over the Shockers. Your loss.

Just seemed to me this was the argument, but that may be due to my recreational smoking choices. ;-) As for "exciting", I'll watch both.

[OregonShocker]

I'm 64. I have watched a lot of NBA over the years going all the way back to Russell, Wilt and the Big O. I don't like what the game has become even though you are correct that the best players are in the pros. Watch who you are shouting down for not watching the NBA. I don't want to sit through a whole game just to see that one highlight play. Many times it never comes.

Sorry; didn't mean to shout down anybody. Perhaps this should've been listed as a second venting point. But, I'm done. I feel better.

[WstateU]

Just seemed to me this was the argument, but that may be due to my recreational smoking choices. ;-) As for "exciting", I'll watch both.

[WSUwatcher]

Another thing the NBA has against it in my opinion is the 80-some game schedule. It's the same thing for me with baseball: It's just hard to care about the regular season when each individual game barely even matters. I love college basketball because 34 games (18 being conference games) makes each game mean something. You can cough up 35 games in the NBA and still make the playoffs and your division doesn't matter at all. College, if you don't win your big games, you might be screwed. Just adds to the level of excitement, plus having to wait 4 or 5 days between games adds to the hype a bit.

As a Spurs fan, I can tell you that two seasons ago one game -- for example, a ridiculous, inexplicable loss to a really bad Knicks team -- made a huge difference, knocking the Spurs literally from a #2 seed and a home series against the Mavs to open the playoffs, down to #6 and a first round road series against the very tough Clippers, who ended up beating them 4-3. So even in the NBA, if you're a serious team you can't assume any given game won't matter (just as in baseball, where the Cardinals would love to have won just one more of the many games they squandered this past season and thus had a chance at a wild-card spot).

Having said that, it's obvious that the college schedule makes for more games that are obviously crucial. But there are still so many things that happen routinely in the NBA that would be noteworthy in college (for example, Tim Duncan's boringly precise long outlet passes) that it's hard for me to believe why anyone would prefer watching Drake or at lot of comparable other teams, in the valley or otherwise. Sure, there's some bad-looking stuff that happens in the NBA. But part of the reason it looks so bad is that excellence is so much the norm.

Meanwhile, back to Baker -- I'm just hoping he lands someplace where he can be appreciated and play for a team worth playing for, which is what it seems Fred was able to do.