Personally, I'd scrap the in-season tournament, and say this

-Play your four other division teams 4 times (16 games)
-Play your ten other conference teams 3 times (30 games)
-Player your 15 other conference teams 2 times (30 games)

Still a 76 game season, but a bit shorter and a simpler system

I think the non-local broadcasters would actually prefer a reduction in games (because it's not a reduction of their quantity, just more important games), but the deal is locked in for the next 11 years or whatever and teams won’t want to lose the ticket and sponsorship money from losing additional games.

In a hypothetical world, I’d like to see the NBA:

- Add Las Vegas and Seattle, so now we have 32 teams
- Ditch conferences (it’s not critical to my plan, I just don’t care for the conferences)
- A club plays the other 31 clubs once at home and once away (62 games).
- A club has a rival that they play again (now we have 64 regular season games total). Broadcasters will appreciate this being kept in.
- NBA Cup is elimination like March madness. 4 groups of 8 teams play in neutral cities (great opportunity for non-NBA cities!!) to create the "Gather round" vibes. Losers play consolation round game. Each group has a winner for a final 4.
- Final 4 semis and Championship game are played the week leading up to the All Star Weekend, in the All Star city for ultimate gather round vibes.
- Each cup round is 2pts for a win, consolation round win 1pt towards the *regular season ladder*. The games all matter!
- Depending on the year, push the start of the NBA back to a ~December start (ie 3-4 weeks) so that it is a month less of competing with NFL. Nobody in the US cares about the NBA until the NFL is over.
- Push the NBA completion back, depending on the year by 2-4 weeks. So sometime in July. Ie, finish earlier to allow players to play Olympics still, and more end of July for non-Olympic years.

So teams will play anywhere between 66 and 69 games between regular season and Cup. That’s ~13-16 less games played for around the same length of season (non-Olympic years) which can help remove those back-to-back games.

More games are likely to be broadcast across the season nationally given some slots wait until after the NFL season is over.

Everyone’s a winner?

I should be clearer at the start - reducing games (and not length of the season) would not be a reduction in games for the national broadcasters. The games would however, be more important and valuable*

So broadcasters would probably like a reduced number of games in a season.

A major argument is comparison with historical stats but now that so many stats are irrelevant it might actually even things out a bit.

In terms of the product, absolutely. Financially, it will never happen.

I'd keep the number of games assuming that is non-negotiable, but designate a certain number of them to be ineligible to players tagged or suiting as a starter. They can be called NBA Next games or similar. Maybe 12 of those and 70 normal games. Gives scrubs a chance to show themselves above the G-League tier, maybe prices are dropped a little so at least some games are more accessible. Messes with records a bit, but any change to the game count will do that.

Seven game playoff series seems absolutely dour too. Nice to get these great, heated match-ups but they're just savaging teams who don't get an easier road in. Rockets-Warriors and Nuggets-Clippers were both very intense. Would've been great for neutral or opposing fans though.

A maximum of 28 playoff games (30 if you include play-ins) for a schedule with 82 regular season games already. So essentially 30% of the year are playoff games. Compare that to AFL/NRL where if you win the first week then make the grand final you play three finals in addition to 23 games in the season - (13% or 17% in total).

Eventually there will be a business case to reducing regular season games (and shifting to avoid NFL season a little), just not in the next decade given the broadcast deal is done.

The stats are hyper inflated these days because of game style and such, so personally I don't see a new stats era being problematic but I suppose others might.

I agree, I would favour as a starting point best of 5 series for all playoffs except for a 7 game finals series just to reduce it a little bit.

Speaking of NBA, shoutout Alex Sarr for making all NBA rookie team honours

Ket, great post describing the schedule you envisage for the NBA but isn't Las Vegas a very popular neutral venue for all things NBA but not regular-season/competition stuff. Would giving it a team take away from that neutrality

IMO, it smacks a little of how we feel when all our "good" basketball stuff goes to Melb (exaggeration, I know, but that's how a lot think). And really, that's just preaching to the converted. I would leave Las Vegas out of your otherwise, well thought out plan.

Now, if you have a plan for turning Melbourne into a Las Vegas (or Brisbane, which already has a head start with its aka, BrisVegas), I am all for it.

Las Vegas is an expansion no brainer.