Let us have a moment of silence for the 2011 NBA Lockout. After 149 days, countless failed negotiation meetings and overhypedstreetball tournaments, fans will finally be rewarded with basketball. The proposed 66−game season — 16 games shorter than normal — will begin on Christmas Day with a showdown between the Boston Celtics and the New York Knicks. Fans couldn't be happier.
But do not let the NBA suck in your interest once again without chewing on some putrid food for thought. After all, inherent greed engendered the lockout in the first place. Owners and players were divided regarding issues like revenue sharing and the salary cap. Considering the economic turmoil facing our country and the world at large, disputes between overpaid athletes and heirs/extremely wealthy businessmen who happen to own sports franchises seem petty. Why doesn't everyone associated with the NBA simply tar and feather all Occupy Wall Street participants?
Rather than focusing on the constituents whom they entertain, owners were concerned with the size of their wallets, and players had the exceedingly difficult task of deciding whether to play for foreign teams as an outside source of income. Meanwhile, stadium workers found themselves out of work, local businessmen and politicians fretted over economic impacts of closed arenas and fans agonized over the impending loss of an entire season.
Last season unfolded like a Spanish soap opera, replete with exaggerated villains (the Big Three), unlikely heroes (Dirk Nowitzki and co.) and a possibly senile father figure (Mark Cuban). Needless to say, fans were enraptured as the plot thickened and twists arose. So expectations were high for the 2011−2012 season, but the lockout effectively careened hopes off−course.
The lockout was a rude awakening. Blissfully uninformed fans became repulsed by the fiscal politics of a business that builds idols, legends and everlasting memories for so many supporters. Have you ever watched the countdown of the best NBA playoff moments on YouTube? It's a semi−religious experience for a true basketball fan.
Aside from the greed, the aspects fans will miss least about the lockout are the repetitive, asinine updates that inundated sports networks and websites for almost five months. No one wants to see one picture, much less a thousand, of a downtrodden David Stern, his sunken eyes peering out listlessly from behind horn−rimmed spectacles.
Now, I'm not protesting this season of basketball. In fact, I happen to regard basketball as one of the — if not the No. 1 — most entertaining spectator sports. Few other sports see such tremendous athletes in gritty, high−paced battle for 48 straight minutes each night. Not to mention the propensity for exciting moments: buzzer beaters, half−court hurls, slam dunks, emphatic blocks, etc. Plus, basketball is one of the only sports where teams do not always languish in mediocrity. Instead, one player can change the face of a franchise (see: LeBron James, Dwyane Wade, Derrick Rose, etc.).
In particular, I can't wait to see the new storylines unfold: Can the Heat make good on their guarantees? Will the new−look Knicks contend? Can the Mavs defend their title?
I love basketball too much to make a grandiose personal stand. Yet, I do think owners and players alike should be punished for their selfishness. I will continue to watch basketball, but I pledge to abstain from paying for any tickets or merchandise for the remainder of the season. Do not expect owners to be burdened by my insolence — guys like Jack Nicholson and Spike Lee will continue to support their teams no matter the circumstances. At least I can sleep soundly at night knowing that I am not patting owners and players on the back for mending a broken relationship.
--
Zach Drucker is a senior majoring in international relations and Spanish. He can be reached at Zachary.Drucker@tufts.edu.
