By PAUL MADAVI                  August 15, 2001
Chicago, IL

When Michael Jordan retired at the end of the 1998 season, the NBA was at the same time relieved and terrified. Jordan's final triumph was the storybook ending that the league had craved. Jordan brought what Magic Johnson and Larry Bird had not. While Magic and Larry did raise the NBA to new levels of national popularity, their careers ended in less than magnificent fashion, succumbing to HIV and crippling back pain respectively. Jordan left on top (again), and with him went the single most recognizable athelete in America since Babe Ruth. Then came the strike, and the popularity that took so long build plummeted, as the Knicks and Spurs slugged it out in perhaps the ugliest NBA Finals ever.

Then Larry came back, leading the Pacers to the Finals, and "magic" returned to the L.A. hardwood, as Shaq and Kobe and Phil dazzled the league. And now even MJ is talking about coming back (let's hope to God he doesn't). The NBA is like that, always holding onto the past. Why not? The Celtics and Lakers would score a combined 280 points on a good day. The Lakers and Sixers, by far the highest scoring series since the early ninties, could only muster close to 200. Who doesn't miss seeing the same stars year in and year out? (Besides Utah fans.) And as of the upcoming season, who won't miss good old man-to-man defense? 

And as much as the NBA misses it's "glory days," the men in charge keep pushing further and further away from it. Here are a few of the forces, all of which occured in the past 15 years (a mere fraction of the League's history) that have and will change the NBA forever:

Free Agency. Nothing changed the NBA quite like free-agency. It blows my mind that Orlando ever let go of Shaq. Patrick Ewing decided not to end his career in New York, and Scottie Pippin left the Bulls. Even Hakeem left his longtime home. Big name stars are leaving teams with more frequency than ever. Not only that, but people like Todd McCollough are leaving NBA Finals-bound teams like Philidelphia for money and time in places like New Jersey. The constant flux of players makes it almost impossible to have team unity the way it was present with the Lakers and Celtics of old. Team play, locker room chemistry, and fan base security are all affected.

The Rise of the Athlete. NBA players, without a doubt, are stronger, faster, taller, and quicker than ever. As a result, nobody knows what a hook shot actually is. Often, players rely on their athletic skills to overcome their lack of basketball skill. Here's an example: if John Stockton played as many minutes as Payton or Kidd, he would blow their numbers out of the water. That's because he knows all the tricks, and all the basics of the game. He is by no means the fastest guard, or the strongest, nor can he leap four feet in the air. But Stockton has knowledge, and knowledge is a lost force in the NBA. Less educated, and more talented players have turned many NBA teams (Bulls, Clippers, etc... ) into glorified High School teams, offering little discipline, lots of leaping.

Intense Defense. It all started with the Pistons, who physically beat their opponents. Eventually, their opponents got sick of it, and they started to beat the Pistons, and soon everybody was beating everybody else. Then Phil Jackson put 4 guys on the floor, all 6-7, and all very long and quick, and told them to press. That lead him to 6 championships. Now, everybody's doing that as well. The focus on defense, in addition to the new levels of athleticism that have entered the league, have made it increasing hard to score (especially given the lack of actual skill in many players). Want evidence? Take a tape of any of Lakers/Celtics Finals in the 80's, and then watch the '01 Lakers/Sixers Finals, and compare the defenses. Add to this the benefits of zone defense, and I'll be glad to see games hit 85 points.

Now, I'm not suggesting that the NBA outlaw free agency (good luck if they tried), or force draftees to go through four years of college to develop their skills to a point where they match their athleticism (try getting that past the Player's Association), or that they make rule changes to relax defenses (who knows - the league seems to artibrarily change rules anyway). But if the NBA really wants to gain the golden glow it held in the 80's and mid 90's, they might want to think long and hard about the (inherent) value of the game of basketball, versus the (monetary) value. For quite some time now, the game as been changed to adapt to players, starting with Wilt, and then Michael, and now any hot-headed 18 year old who thinks he deserves millions of dollars. I'd argue that if you take care of the players, educate them about the game, about teamwork, and the value of being part of a community, then the game will eventually take care of itself, without rule changes, or moving 3 points lines, or anything else like that. The New NBA, like the new everything else in America lacks one very valuable virture: patience.