What Makes a Good All-Star Game?
Following up on my last post, I have always felt that there were 3 factors that impacted the entertainment value of any particular All-Star Game.
- Playground point guard play
- High flying
The competitiveness was what made old-school All-Star games good. Much of that is gone now as guys don’t exert much effort except in the 4th. Even then, you can’t really predict if a game will be competitive just by viewing the rosters.
Then we come to the other two factors. I think what brings entertainment value to an All-Star game is fancy point guard play and high flying. No one wants to watch guys launch 3’s or post-up. The typical NBA fan, if he can’t get a close competitive game, at the least wants to see some ankles being broken or some rim rattling dunks.
I thought last year was easily the most boring All-Star game I had ever seen. Taking a close look at the roster, such an outcome should have been easy to predict.
Among the point guards, you had a 40 year old Allen Iverson, Devin Harris, Mo Williams, CP3, Chauncey Billups, and Tony Parker.
CP3 absolutely put on a show, dazzling the crowd. Iverson doesn’t have it anymore. No disrespect to Harris, Williams, Billups, and Parker, but the four just don’t have the type of handles that are conducive to All-Star Game excitement. You want Stephon Marbury and Allen Iverson in their youth. (It’s ironic because the guys you don’t want leading your team are usually the ones you want to watch in the All-Star Game, atleast for me.)
The high-flying element wasn’t there either. Wade and James seemed to be holding back and Kobe can’t quite get up like he used to. The rest of the wings are grounded. You want a young Vince, Kobe, and McGrady filling the lanes if you are watching an All-Star Game.