Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 58

Thread: NHL is better than NBA

  1. #1
    Wannabebig Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    41

    NHL is better than NBA

    I can't stand ESPN and their constant non-coverage of hockey, its like the sport is soccer. Hockey is so much harder and better to play than unskilled basketball. Canada, whos with me.

  2. #2
    the stone cold stunner Ironman8's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Palmdale, C.A
    Posts
    2,570
    I try to watch hockey, or any other sport for that matter, and I can't stand them. But the sport I do like to watch is the NFL (go figure).
    You kill me in a dream, you better wake up and apologize....

  3. #3
    maximum electronica orbital's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    917
    I must concur.

    GO CANUCKS GO!!!

    leafs and wild too!
    Man, if he do but live within the light of high endeavors, daily spreads abroad his being armed with strength that cannot fail.

    --Wordsworth

  4. #4
    Selfproclaimed Fancy Pants wibble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,878
    I can get into watching hockey, its a good sport. I don't much care for basketball though. Its pretty much just bouncing a ball from one end of the court to the other and it goes back and forth the whole game. I mean hockey is sort of the same way but it has other things to keep you occupied like the puck sliding around the boards and the checking and fighting. Soccer is my favorite sport hands down though. I could watch that forever.

  5. #5
    Strongman
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    193
    Go back to Canada. NBA is better (NHL playoffs are crazy though).


    And ESPN shows hockey all the time - two OT games on ESPN and ESPN 2 last night at the same time. Not sure what you are talking about...
    Four-Time World's Strongest Man

  6. #6
    Banned Reinier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    south west Holland Europe
    Posts
    8,842
    i dont think you can compare at all. hockey should get coverage though its pretty cool

  7. #7
    Way below radar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Somewhere between cognitive dissonance and the egocentric dilemma
    Posts
    4,375
    NHL is much more fun to watch than NBA...pro b-ball is just a showboating scoring race. Any game where a team can score over 100 points in one contest needs less offense and more defense to make it interesting.

    I played basketball in hs and enjoyed it, but I have no interest in watching somebody else play, nor do I play it anymore myself. I still play hockey every chance I get and will watch pretty much any game that is on.

    I could give all to Time except - except
    What I myself have held. But why declare
    The things forbidden that while the Customs slept
    I have crossed to Safety with? For I am There,
    And what I would not part with I have kept.

    --Robert Frost

  8. #8
    Son of Krypton Majestic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    1,412


    Erm.....ESPN is the only channel that shows hockey....you realize that, right? Without ESPN, the NHL goes back to the days of the original 6, sort of like where Major League Soccer or Arena League Football is right now. Nobody would see it, and nobody would care. And by nobody, I mean nobody in the U.S., and without our support, hockey is doomed (although we've managed to mightily screw it up!)

    That's one of the reasons the NHL is in dire straits.....the league as a whole has a sh*tty television contract, and isn't even on a national broadcast channel (ESPN isn't free...it's on cable, which ALWAYS has lesser ratings than a broadcast network).

    On top of that, the sport's relative lack of popularity leaves each team with a poor local contract, except for the Wings, Rangers, etc.

    Whether or not the games are freely broadcast in Canada is irrelevant....Canada has already proven that with a few exceptions, it doesn't have the capital to compete, even with the inevitable salary cap. (I'm American, but I think that's sad for the league).

    The NHL, as a league, reached its peak of popularity in 1994. Instead of capatilizing on that, they blew it. It's been a downward spiral ever since.

    A league has parity when all of it's talent has been spread evenly (like the NFL, and to a lesser degree, the NBA).

    That's not what the NHL has....the NHL is a league whereby when the games get "tight" (like the playoffs), the rules are set so that sh*tty players can neutralize talented players without using talent, skill, or even heart or dedication.....that's not what sports is about. There are a select million or so fans who think hockey is fine the way is (ever heard of the WNBA?), but 10 million others who think it sucks (again, ever heard of the WNBA?).

    There's probably a bald guy in the league offices right now dreaming of increased fan base and ratings due to rules changes that increase scoring, but I would maybe argue against it, if you can believe it.

    See, the trick is, people have to understand WHY someone is superior to someone else. If some no-talent schmuck of a defender is going to ruin a scoring opportunity for Mario Lemiuex, then it had *BETTER* be because he "outhustled" him, and not because he barely enough talent to skate within 7 feet of him, and whack him on the arm with his stick. That's the state of the NHL right now.

    True hockey is great, especially Olympic Rules hockey. Absolutely love it, but the NHL has problems, REAL problems, and not just financial ones.

    And yes, the NBA has become what professional wrestling always was.....an entertaining show with a predetermined ending (or in the NBA's case, a predetermined "flavor" through officiating). That, and the lottery is fixed, but that's not really news.

  9. #9
    Push powerlifting heathj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    WA, USA
    Posts
    5,234
    ncaa basketball and football beat anything though.

  10. #10
    II MrWebb78's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    The Big Sac
    Posts
    5,954
    i was a huge hockey fan awhile ago, but in northern california its really hard to follow, espn shows maybe a game a week, and FOX shows about 2 games a year.

    the newspaper dedicates a small section the size of a quarter on the last page of the sports page. so its kinda tough to stay interested.

    even in my peak of enjoying hockey, theres still something about the excitement of the nba when 2 good teams are playing, when those last few seconds hit and ya never know who's going to get the game winnin shot off.

    and those of you who say there is no defense in basketball.....isnt the best defense sometimes a great offense?
    A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. - Edward Abbey

    There is a wide difference between speaking to deceive, and being silent to be impenetrable. - Voltaire

    If it can be imagined, it can be done. - Me

    6'2"
    273 lbs.

  11. #11
    Wounded Deadlifter ryan1117's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    1,650
    Hockey needs to get rid of sudden death overtime. I'm so sick of seeing teams get insanely conservative every time the game goes to overtime in the playoffs. The games end up going into 2, 3, 4, or 5 OTs (or whatever that Philadelphia/Pittsburgh game went to in 2000). To make matters worse, they have long intermissions between each OT. All they need to do is settle the games with shootouts. They do it in the World Cup after a short sudden death and nothing can compare to the popularity of the World Cup.
    5-9 170

  12. #12
    II MrWebb78's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    The Big Sac
    Posts
    5,954
    my online journal here can compare!
    A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. - Edward Abbey

    There is a wide difference between speaking to deceive, and being silent to be impenetrable. - Voltaire

    If it can be imagined, it can be done. - Me

    6'2"
    273 lbs.

  13. #13
    Mystic Eric
    Guest
    I love both hockey and basketball but I played bball when I was younger and during high school so I understand the sport. Those that say that the NBA has no defence just doesn't understand the game. Ask any knowledgable coach and he/she will tell you that the NBA defence is awesome. The way they rotate and play help D is just unbelievable. It just seems that the D is lacking because the offense is just so skilled. These guys can literally score at will.

    You can't really compare basketball to hockey. To say that one is better than the other is just personal opinion/preference.

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    White Rock, B.C.
    Posts
    3,664
    Originally posted by ryan1117
    Hockey needs to get rid of sudden death overtime. I'm so sick of seeing teams get insanely conservative every time the game goes to overtime in the playoffs. The games end up going into 2, 3, 4, or 5 OTs (or whatever that Philadelphia/Pittsburgh game went to in 2000). To make matters worse, they have long intermissions between each OT. All they need to do is settle the games with shootouts. They do it in the World Cup after a short sudden death and nothing can compare to the popularity of the World Cup.
    That Phili/Pittsburgh 5OT game was possibly the greatest hockey game I've ever seen. How can sudden death overtime make the game less enjoyable for the fans? Every single shot could end the game/the season...what is more exciting than that? Of course they have to have long intermissions between each OT, the players are clearly going to be tired when they are putting everything they have into the game (which might not happen if you just played a full period or could rely on a shootout).

    Shootouts are a TERRIBLE idea. Honestly, I can't believe you are the one who wrote this post, ryan1117, because you seem like one of the people who knows something about sports on this site. Shootouts come down to who has the better players, or maybe even just the better goalie. For example, do you think the Wild ever could have upset the Avs tonight if the game went to a shootout? Hell no! It would have been over before it started. Sudden death puts everyone on a more even playing field because it just takes one shot to win it.

    As for your World Cup logic that's as flawed as it gets. Soccer is the world's most popular sport, so it follows that soccer's major tournament is going to be extremely popular, regardless of format. Plus, it only happens once every 4 years and is the final culmination of years of hard-fought games in order to qualify. In addition, people have been saying forever that soccer should change its overtime procedure because nobody likes to see a game end on a shootout.

  15. #15
    Simply Devious Rastaman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,595
    Originally posted by IceRgrrl
    NHL is much more fun to watch than NBA...pro b-ball is just a showboating scoring race. Any game where a team can score over 100 points in one contest needs less offense and more defense to make it interesting.

    I played basketball in hs and enjoyed it, but I have no interest in watching somebody else play, nor do I play it anymore myself. I still play hockey every chance I get and will watch pretty much any game that is on.

    You really are the total package, aren't you?
    "The only sin which we never forgive in each other is difference of opinion."
    -Ralph Waldo Emerson


    Word.

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Calgary, Canada
    Posts
    352
    Originally posted by Vido


    That Phili/Pittsburgh 5OT game was possibly the greatest hockey game I've ever seen. How can sudden death overtime make the game less enjoyable for the fans? Every single shot could end the game/the season...what is more exciting than that? Of course they have to have long intermissions between each OT, the players are clearly going to be tired when they are putting everything they have into the game (which might not happen if you just played a full period or could rely on a shootout).

    Shootouts are a TERRIBLE idea. Honestly, I can't believe you are the one who wrote this post, ryan1117, because you seem like one of the people who knows something about sports on this site. Shootouts come down to who has the better players, or maybe even just the better goalie. For example, do you think the Wild ever could have upset the Avs tonight if the game went to a shootout? Hell no! It would have been over before it started. Sudden death puts everyone on a more even playing field because it just takes one shot to win it.

    As for your World Cup logic that's as flawed as it gets. Soccer is the world's most popular sport, so it follows that soccer's major tournament is going to be extremely popular, regardless of format. Plus, it only happens once every 4 years and is the final culmination of years of hard-fought games in order to qualify. In addition, people have been saying forever that soccer should change its overtime procedure because nobody likes to see a game end on a shootout.
    Vido- Overtime CAN get boring at times. I mean, the game tends to get slower past four periods of play. People just get tired. That being said, sometimes it can be the other way around- the players are even more inspired to win! Game Six of Toronto/Philly was one of my favorite games I've ever seen- going to remember that one as long as I live. Shootouts are definetly a bad idea... I mean, it's incredibly anti-climatic. I would vomit if I saw a game seven OT end in a shootout victory. Blah.
    "Let's hope the ship has a captain, in other words, since we're not taking part in what's going on."
    -Noam Chomsky
    "It's like putting pearls on swine. You can dress up a pig... but it's still a pig... isn't it? oink oink oink..oink oink"
    -Henry Rollins
    Push the envelope... watch it bend..
    -Tool
    "In the valley of the shadow of death... I fear no one, because i am the baddest mother****er in the valley!"

  17. #17
    maximum electronica orbital's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    917
    NHL > *
    Man, if he do but live within the light of high endeavors, daily spreads abroad his being armed with strength that cannot fail.

    --Wordsworth

  18. #18
    Pocket Canuck
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Chatham,Ontario
    Posts
    143
    Ahhh, the dreaded hockey v. b-ball debate.
    Since I am one of the only white guys in southern ontario that has never played hockey I get into this one all the time.

    If we were to get rid of change on the fly in hockey, I would be much more impressed by the intensity these guys show. I wanna see a 5 on 5 game of hockey with maybe 2 or 3 subs the entire game like they do in the NBA.

    Hockey is such a sloppy sport. Missed passes left and right, fluffed shots etc. The skill level in hockey has degraded over the past 15 years like I never thought could happen. Who led the league in scoring this year. Well, my man Wayne took 39 games to score 50. what gives????

    I'll take basketball anyday!
    Last edited by Sheik; 04-24-2003 at 08:09 AM.
    --- Sheik ---
    Age-31
    Height - 5'6"
    Weight - 185ish

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    White Rock, B.C.
    Posts
    3,664
    I don't know if the skill level has degraded over the years...that's tough to say because you don't have old-timers out there on the ice in their prime right now. It only took Gretzky 39 games to get to 50 goals, but that doesn't necessarily mean he was THAT much better than today's players. I think the overall quality of the players has actually improved and this, along with the checking and grinding style that is so prevalent in today's game, makes it more difficult for a true superstar like Gretzky to emerge.

    Some might say that the game is being hindered by this clutching and grabbing tight-checking style of play being employed by most teams, most notably those who are or who have been coached by Jacques Lemaire, but there is a positive to this that most overlook. If the game was completely wide open who would have won the first round series between Colorado and Minnesota? 99 times out of 100 it would have been Colorado because they have the more skilled players. However, as a result of the tighter style of game, there is no significant advantage to having a team full of superstars, as was shown in this series. Personally, I would much rather attend/watch a hockey game where the final result is up in the air right to the wire, not pre-determined by who has the superior team.

  20. #20
    Way below radar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Somewhere between cognitive dissonance and the egocentric dilemma
    Posts
    4,375
    Originally posted by Sheik

    If we were to get rid of change on the fly in hockey, I would be much more impressed by the intensity these guys show. I wanna see a 5 on 5 game of hockey with maybe 2 or 3 subs the entire game like they do in the NBA.

    I disagree--they are too different to compare in that way. Hockey is an anaerobic sport...the players are going close to full out so 30-45 second shift is about all you can get out of the anaerobic energy system before you need to recover. Basketball is an aerobic sport (with occasional anaerobic bursts) allowing the player to stay out longer. I've played or tried to play hockey games with 2-3 subs and it doesn't work too well. You get so fatigued that you cannot recover enough to play well and everyone slows down to a crawl or just dumps the puck to get a breather.

    Hockey is such a sloppy sport. Missed passes left and right, fluffed shots etc.
    That's because of the speed of the game and the skill level involved. Having to skate (an unnatural movement) and balance on blades on the ice is a lot different than running (a natural movement that everyone can do) with grippy shoes on a hard court. Also, catching a big ball with your hands takes less eye-hand coordination than cradling a hard pass with a stick. The sport isn't sloppy, just very different and has different flow. The fact that the b-ball goes out of bounds and the puck is kept in bounds by the boards makes the two games very different as well.

    The skill level in hockey has degraded over the past 15 years like I never thought could happen. Who led the league in scoring this year. Well, my man Wayne took 39 games to score 50. what gives????
    Let's see...expansion teams/dilution of talent, bigger/faster players, the reliance on defensive systems like the neutral zone trap and left wing lock, better goaltenders, more interference/obstruction (though they are trying to curb that)...scoring HAS gone down. But bball has the opposite problem. 100 pts. in a single game? *yawn* Raise the rim or something b/c it gets to be like watching tennis trading baskets back and forth.

    I'll take basketball anyday!
    LOL! I've played both and I'll take hockey any day So we're both happy, eh?

    I could give all to Time except - except
    What I myself have held. But why declare
    The things forbidden that while the Customs slept
    I have crossed to Safety with? For I am There,
    And what I would not part with I have kept.

    --Robert Frost

  21. #21
    Pocket Canuck
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Chatham,Ontario
    Posts
    143
    I don't know if the skill level has degraded over the years...that's tough to say because you don't have old-timers out there on the ice in their prime right now
    Old timers out of their prime are at the top league in many major categories, in every position.


    Some might say that the game is being hindered by this clutching and grabbing tight-checking style of play
    YES

    We all saw how exciting hockey could be at the olympics! A couple of rule changes could actually allow skilled players to shine.


    Personally, I would much rather attend/watch a hockey game where the final result is up in the air right to the wire, not pre-determined by who has the superior team.
    They all are. Ask the Globetrotters
    Any team on any given night can beat another.

    Hockey has been a great sport, it just isn't what it once was. It is a shame too.
    --- Sheik ---
    Age-31
    Height - 5'6"
    Weight - 185ish

  22. #22
    Way below radar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Somewhere between cognitive dissonance and the egocentric dilemma
    Posts
    4,375
    Originally posted by Sheik


    We all saw how exciting hockey could be at the olympics! A couple of rule changes could actually allow skilled players to shine.

    Then you're getting into the old debate between European/finesse style of hockey vs. the North American/checking & grinding style of hockey---and you'll find tons of people on either side of that fence. There are good points and bad points to both.

    I could give all to Time except - except
    What I myself have held. But why declare
    The things forbidden that while the Customs slept
    I have crossed to Safety with? For I am There,
    And what I would not part with I have kept.

    --Robert Frost

  23. #23
    Pocket Canuck
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Chatham,Ontario
    Posts
    143
    Let's see...expansion teams/dilution of talent, bigger/faster players, the reliance on defensive systems like the neutral zone trap and left wing lock, better goaltenders, more interference/obstruction (though they are trying to curb that)...scoring HAS gone down. But bball has the opposite problem. 100 pts. in a single game? *yawn* Raise the rim or something b/c it gets to be like watching tennis trading baskets back and forth.
    Expansions/dilution you would think would allow stars to shine even more!

    YES, scoring has gone down. I wouldn't say the goalies have gotten that much better.
    Many of the top goalies were around 10 years ago when hockey was still doing OK.

    Avg scoring in basketball has actually gone down over the past 20 years! Teams in the 80's were averaging 115-120 ppg.


    Its not that I don't like hockey (far from it) it has just gotten so DAMN boring.



    college sports of any kind are much more entertaining to watch...those kids play hard every game, their future depends on it.

    Icergrl, I am not into team sports anymore. I am more of a single sport player. tennis, squash, mountain biking....can't bitch at anybody when I lose this way! I am too damn competitive, but I still play "A division" volleyball every thurs. second round of the playoffs tonight
    --- Sheik ---
    Age-31
    Height - 5'6"
    Weight - 185ish

  24. #24
    Way below radar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Somewhere between cognitive dissonance and the egocentric dilemma
    Posts
    4,375
    Originally posted by Sheik
    [B]

    Expansions/dilution you would think would allow stars to shine even more!
    Hockey is one of those sports where one star can't do it all. If you have a couple of really good players on a line together who have some chemistry and can play together, you'll have a whole lot more offense than a star surrounded by average players.

    YES, scoring has gone down. I wouldn't say the goalies have gotten that much better.
    Many of the top goalies were around 10 years ago when hockey was still doing OK.
    I think today's goaltenders are different because the game is different. Shots are harder, higher, the offense is different...hard to compare.

    Avg scoring in basketball has actually gone down over the past 20 years! Teams in the 80's were averaging 115-120 ppg.
    LOL! That's still pretty damn high!

    college sports of any kind are much more entertaining to watch...those kids play hard every game, their future depends on it.
    Yes, I agree. Too many spoiled pros who whine about not getting enough money/playing time/perks. College sports are still exciting.

    I could give all to Time except - except
    What I myself have held. But why declare
    The things forbidden that while the Customs slept
    I have crossed to Safety with? For I am There,
    And what I would not part with I have kept.

    --Robert Frost

  25. #25
    Son of Krypton Majestic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    1,412
    If the game was completely wide open who would have won the first round series between Colorado and Minnesota? 99 times out of 100 it would have been Colorado because they have the more skilled players. However, as a result of the tighter style of game, there is no significant advantage to having a team full of superstars, as was shown in this series. Personally, I would much rather attend/watch a hockey game where the final result is up in the air right to the wire, not pre-determined by who has the superior team.
    You just quoted the EXACT PROBLEM with the NHL!!!

    (if you read or re-read my post, you'll see that I've already outlined symptoms and solutions).

    I completely agree with your statement about watching a "tight" game, but your solution (eliminating the advantage of talent, by using lame and inferior rules) is completely unacceptable.

    The way to keep a game "tight", as you, myself, and the rest of the world wants, isn't by using artificial means to increase scoring, or by using rules that allow cheating (ahem, 1995 Devils).

    The answer is to do what the NBA did first, and what the NFL later did much more successfully....use an economic system that FORCES the league to in *most cases* spread talent evenly, thereby achieving *parity*.

    The reason 20 different teams in the NFL have a shot at the Superbowl every year isn't because there are rules that allow facemasking, punching an open receiver in the face, or limiting defenses to 4 players on the field.

    The reason 20 teams can compete every year is because there is a salary cap, an EFFECTIVE salary cap that spreads talented players throughout the league. Period.

    End of story.

    The NHL sucks, even when America's Team (the Wings) win. I said it before they started dominating, and I'll say it again. And I'll be right every time.

    You'll find a million people who love the NHL the way it is. You'll find 10 million more who'd love it more if they played by Olympic rules, and had a salary cap. Period.

    As for your remark regarding Minnesota, yes, people in Minnesota are thrilled that their inferior team beat the Avs.....BUT THE REST OF THE WORLD ISN'T BECAUSE THE RULES ALLOW SH*TTY PLAYERS TO RUIN GOOD PLAYS BY TALENTED PLAYERS.

    The best NHL fans (I won't say "hockey fans", but "NHL fans") are in Detroit (i.e. HockeyTown), and I can gurantee you nobody gives a sh*t around here about what's happening in the NHL.

    Yet we still flock to the bars for the NBA finals, and Superbowl.

    The ratings prove it, and like it or not, this is a business, and it's about ratings.

    For cryin' out loud, the NHL isn't even on nationally broadcast television!!! What a sad, sad waste.

    I hope for the league's sake that a "hard-cap" salary limit will be enforced when the collective bargaining agreement expires.

    And they need to set that sucker LOW, and not chicken-out like Major League Baseball did. Jesus, how many teams are even NEAR baseball's luxury tax? 3 teams? The Rangers, Yankees, and Mets? Get real.

    If the salary cap is much more than 35 million, then change won't be swift.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •