NBA continues to make All-Star Game worse in attempt to fix it

If you follow the NBA, there are tentpole conversations. Foul baiting, 3-pointers attempted, style of play, lack of defense, the state of the All-Star Game, lack of the league marketing the new stars, TV ratings being down, the definition of a superteam, whether Rudy Gobert is overrated or not, among others. It can be very tiring because every season the same points are regurgitated. I'll try to change that, but by the title of this piece, you should know that it's not by not talking about one of those conversations that's trending.

Voting for the 2025 NBA All-Star Game began today in the same style it's always been in: you can pick 10 players, 5 from each conference (two backcourt players, three frontcourt players), the starters being determined by fans (50 percent), media (25 percent) and players (25 percent) voting, and the reserves by coaches. When it's all said and done, which players will be competing against which? Well...

Subscribe to The Whiteboard, FanSided’s daily email newsletter on everything basketball. If you like The Whiteboard, share it with a friend! If you don’t like it, share it with an enemy!

Another new format!

I was inspired to write about this topic last year when the NBA changed the format for the All-Star Game back to East vs West, after briefly experimenting with the two players with the most votes picking out their own teams (which I will refer to from this point forward as the "Captain's format"). At the time, I thought the move was horrible, but understood why it was happening (coming off bad ratings and a new TV deal to negotiate, the league needed to light a spark for the game).

While the game wasn't compelling (397 combined points, the East winning in a blowout where they scored 211 points, and Karl-Anthony Towns had a 50-point game that went unnoticed), the ratings for the contest did increase compared to 2023 — 2024 averaged 5.5 million viewers, and had 11.6 million unique viewers.

All-Star Saturday Night was also a worthwhile watch, thanks in large part to the NBA (Stephen Curry) vs. WNBA (Sabrina Ionescu) Three-Point Challenge — it had a 5.4 million average, and 10 million unique, up 54 percent from 2023 and being the most watched Saturday Night of All-Star festivities since 2020. However, it's fair to assume that if the quality of play didn't improve, the viewership had reached its ceiling, which by itself wasn't that high — the 2024 ASG had the second-lowest viewership in the game's history). And, compared to other All-Star games, the NBA had some catching up to do. For context:

• 2024 MLB All-Star Game: 7.44 million average (up 6 percent thanks to the Paul Skenes effect, along with Shohei Ohtani and the Yankees duo of Aaron Judge and Juan Soto batting early)

• 2024 NFL Pro Bowl: 5.75 million average (even down 8 percent from 2023, it's still higher)

• 2024 WNBA All-Star Game: 3.44 million average (up from 800k the year prior, thanks to the format of Caitlin Clark and Angel Reese leading Team WNBA vs the Olympic team of A'ja Wilson, Breanna Stewart and the winners of eight consecutive gold medals).

All these other games have a good future because of either the format, the new players involved, or both (I'm looking at you MLB; you have the best All-Star Game). The NBA, on the other hand, has struggled since 2017's horrible ASG, the players currently involved haven't drawn major audiences, and the format wasn't inspiring players to give it their all. So, with all of that in mind, here comes the fourth format change in eight years.

The gist of it is this: three teams of All-Stars along with the winner of the Rising Stars tournament from Friday, all comprised of eight players will compete in a total of three games with a set score (first to reach 40 points). It's exactly like the new format of the Rising Stars Challenge. The 24 players selected will be put in a draft pool where Kenny Smith, Shaquille O'Neal and Charles Barkley will draft.

If that reads like something silly, It's because it is. Kevin Durant said it himself, Damian Lillard doesn't know what to think about it, and I'm sure others will feel, at best, indifferent about it. I'm certain no All-Star will enjoy flying out to play, at minimum, one game that doesn't last half an hour and, at worst, two games with some wait time in between (as I'm sure the league will incorporate some spectacle to it to make the time between games longer). You had someone like Lillard complaining about how long the game took to start, and now you're going to make most of them do the waiting twice? I'm sure that's going to go over well.

Even if you ignore that, do you mean to tell me that the fix to a boring exhibition is three boring exhibitions? There was nothing done to address the concerns of lack of player motivation in any sense. Maybe, big maybe, the game where the Rising Stars play will be entertaining given the fact that they'll have a chip on their shoulder playing against eight of the league's best. For the most part, young players are always looking to prove they belong, and what a statement would they make if they beat an All-Star team?

If they get close to winning, that finish will be entertaining as the All-Stars wouldn't want to be embarrassed by losing to rookies and sophomores. However, with the talent gap likely being huge, it's more likely that the game isn't close. Other than that, nothing leads me to believe players will be more competitive in two separate shorter games as opposed to one larger one.

The way the coaching will work is odd as well. The two head coaches from the leading team in each conference (unless they coached the year prior, which is unlikely given in 2024 it was the Bucks' Doc Rivers and the Nuggets' Michael Malone) will coach two teams, while one assistant from each will coach another. While I get it, and maybe it ends up adding another layer of competitiveness (if an assistant coach matches up against the coach they work for, maybe they have fun and give effort to beat each other), it feels like we missed a golden opportunity to just have the General Managers of each team (Smith, O'Neal, Barkley, and Candace Parker, who will coach the Rising Stars representation) coach. After all, we're looking to maximize entertainment, and in a game up to 40 points with only three reserves, there's little coaching to be done after all. And, if there needs to be, imagine if it's a close game and you get to see one of the four in the huddle drawing up a play. They could all be mic'd up and we could hear on occasion during the game. This is a potential wrinkle wasted.

Also, a smaller thing: if the voting will work the same, with 10 starters being selected, but 15 All-Stars will end up starting (as there are three teams, five starters for each), there will be five players that weren't selected that will start. For history's sake, that's weird.

The problem with the NBA's All-Star Game

The funny thing about this conversation is that the problem isn't even about the format. Sure, we'll talk about the new one because it's newsworthy, and we can discuss changing it to make the game better, but that's simply because it's the only variable that the league controls. Yet, that's not the one that's caused all the hoopla about improving the game. That would be one that the league, nor us, have any control over — player motivation.

If players were motivated to compete, they could make all the formats work. East vs West was an entertaining watch for decades before 2016, the captain's format by itself made for worthwhile games in 2018 and 2019, and the Elam Ending addition helped produce the best All-Star Game of all time in 2020. Since then, even if we exclude 2021 (which happened during the pandemic with no fans in attendance, understandable how that wasn't compelling), something has shifted for the players. They don't get up for these games like they used to.

Players have pointed to the possibility of suffering an injury during the game as motivation to ease up on the intensity. I'm not sorry to say that I think that's the silliest concern ever. If it was inspired by an actual injury that happened in a recent game would be one thing, but this realization that they could get hurt playing basketball has come as a coping mechanism for a larger issue. The only one that people can recall is Dwyane Wade breaking Kobe Bryant's nose.

If we want to nitpick, we can point to Paul George breaking his leg in the 2014 Team USA exhibition as motivation for players to not defend hard in showcase games like the ASG. Yet, if we can only point to two injuries in a span of 20 years, I think it's fair to say that the concern is exaggerated. Furthermore, if the concern is getting hurt in games that don't matter, why do players go hard in scrimmages during the summer? Why does that concern pop up just for the ASG?

There's something to be said for the new generation of star players not wanting to go as hard in these games. After all, the ASG had a formula that proved to make most people happy and didn't comprise of players getting exhausted in an exhibition: little defense for three quarters, an intense final five minutes if the game was close. We've deviated from this formula recently with zero defense for four quarters, and no sense of urgency for players to win if they're losing by a lot. And, I think, there's a direct correlation to be made with the players that aren't participating in these games anymore.

The 2000's (LeBron James, Kevin Durant, Chris Paul, Dwyane Wade, Carmelo Anthony, Kyle Lowry) and early 2010's (Russell Westbrook, DeMar DeRozan, James Harden, Kyrie Irving, Blake Griffin) generation of perennial All-Stars followed the formula to a tee. As their careers have winded down, they haven't played at an All-Star level consistently and/or have suffered injuries, they've stopped being fixtures on ASG since 2020. Since then, the new generation hasn't played with the same inspiration. For reference, you can look at the 2018, 2019 and 2020 ASG box scores, all filled with memorable moments and finishes, see who the starters and closers were for those games and compare it to 2022 and 2024 (I think 2023 was good because it was close).

Jaylen Brown, someone from the new generation, brought up the fact that no one competed in 2023, which is a start. But that's a moot point when we consider another element at play: even if some players acknowledge that there's a problem with the game, none are putting an effort into convincing their peers to fix it. Brown will say that no one is trying, but won't tell them to, even though he could call out Nike for allegedly keeping him from making Team USA.

And perhaps the opinion of one millionaire won't change the perspective of a dozen millionaires, but all it takes is one to try and there could be a shift in play. Maybe 2025 is the year it happens and the criticism of the format changes doesn't matter. For the ASG to matter again, the effort needs to be there, and that change is only player-driven.

Is there a fix?

While the format isn't the larger issue, it's still something that needs to be tinkered with. I thought 2020, under the Captain's format and the Elam Ending, gave it the necessary juice (bragging rights for players being drafted too low, for the captains to prove they drafted the better team, and for the ending to be interesting). The draft could be worked on, as to not have what happened in 2024 with players waiting around before the game. It could happen before the game, but with all players standing on the court and being selected quickly with no commercial breaks, advertisers be damned.

Having said that, we get to the effort issue brought up earlier. How can the league control the effort players give? Different scenarios are brought up, and I think they all aren't good. Let's take a look:

• Cash incentives: like with the NBA Cup, the incentive of all players in the winning team receiving $500k is a big motivator (as Giannis Antetokounmpo stated recently). But, the financial aspect is only important when you have teammates who probably won't see a big payday in the NBA. If all the players involved are the top earners, making at least $20 million (with salaries skyrocketing), that isn't relevant.

• Home court advantage: as MLB used to do, the pitch is that the conference that won the ASG would have home court (in their case, home field) advantage for the Finals. First off, it's silly to have one exhibition decide that instead of a long regular season, which would make the perception of it being meaningless grow. Furthermore, that isn't fair to all teams, as they won't be in control of having that advantage (as they would have 1-2, in unlikely cases 3-4, spots out of 12 on an all-star team). On top of that, I think most would feel like they're in a great team that could win anywhere, and even if they didn't I don't think that's incentive enough to motivate most.

In conclusion, both the problem and solution of the ASG lies in the hands of the players. The league can try as the might with the format (still think the captain's format rules), but the ball is in the player's court to make it work.

I feel like the next change, which should happen at this point, is to make it USA vs World, like the Rising Stars was for a while. There's so much great talent from around the world, that the matchup (barring injuries) would be good on paper. In that format, at least I know most of the international players will be trying, as they have always show superior pride when representing their country. That, in turn, could lead to the Americans feeling a sense of urgency to win, like they do in international play. For concerns about the voting being inbalanced towards one side (if the voting is divided by nationality, there might be more American snubs that could make it on the World side, for example), that already has been the case with conferences, as the West has always had superior talent.

And who knows, maybe the Victor Wembanyama effect is enough to prop up the ASG, regardless of format. He's a draw for France, and for the rest he's a phenom that likes to compete, and doesn't care what the perception is about it. If the other all-stars see someone of his caliber competing, that might motivate them. Everyone might want to score on him or get a stop, which might lead to an entertaining game on top of good ratings.

And maybe the presence of Wemby solves the effort issue and distracts from all the format changes. But that's all a maybe. At this point, I've written "maybe" eight times, and "might" five, which is a concerning indication that I'm not sure if the problem will be solved. This shouldn't be rocket science! It's a game advertised to feature the 24 best players in the world, a celebration of the season's best at the midpoint, and it's broken. That's a damn shame.

But, like I think about everything, I hope I'm proven wrong and I don't have to regurgitate this tentpole conversation the next time the NBA has another idea for a new format.