In 1963, there were only nine teams in the NBA but 24 spots available in the All-Star Game, observes Lev Akabas of Sportico (subscription required). Sixty years later, the league’s number of teams has more than tripled, to 30, but the league still only names 24 All-Stars per season (barring injuries).
An expansion of All-Star rosters is long overdue, in Akabas’ view, since players are putting up record-setting scoring numbers in the current era, meaning many with All-Star caliber résumés find themselves on the outside looking in.
Akabas points out that 21 players who are averaging at least 20 points per game this season weren’t named All-Stars. Not all of them had strong cases, but many did — James Harden, for instance, is averaging 21.4 PPG while also leading the NBA in assists per contest (10.8) for a 38-19 team, but didn’t qualify as an All-Star.
Besides leaving out worthy candidates, naming just 24 All-Stars across 30 teams hurts fan engagement, contends Akabas, since there will always be a number of clubs who don’t have any players in the game. He singles out Atlanta and Washington to illustrate this point — those are two of the NBA’s top 10 media markets, and the Hawks and Wizards rank among the East’s top 10 teams in 2022/23, but neither club will be represented in this year’s All-Star Game.
Akabas also argues that, since some players’ contracts include All-Star bonuses, there’s a significant amount of money on the line, and with just 12 All-Stars selected per conference, a snub can have a major financial impact on a player.
Additionally, Akabas says, a player’s career number of All-Star appearances goes a long way toward determining his legacy, and the fact that players from previous generations had an easier path to the game when there were fewer teams – and fewer players – in the NBA makes it more difficult to compare stars from different eras.
I don’t find Akabas’ point about All-Star bonuses particularly compelling – those contracts were negotiated with the current format in mind – but the rest of his case is reasonable. Certainly, with teams permitted to carry up to 13 active players in a normal regular season game, it makes sense to at least expand All-Star rosters by one in each conference, increasing the total number of players from 24 to 26.
Still, that bump to 26 or more players often happens naturally. In each of the last three seasons, three All-Star replacements have been named for injured players, and we have to go all the way back to 2005 to find the last All-Star Game that didn’t feature at least one injury replacement. Those substitutions often allow the NBA to rectify the year’s most egregious snubs.
We want to know what you think. Do you like the fact that the NBA still names only 24 All-Stars per season? Does the fact that it’s more difficult, statistically, to make an All-Star team now than it ever has been in the past add to the event’s appeal by making the All-Star roster a more exclusive club?
Or do you think it makes sense to increase the All-Star rosters – if only by one spot per conference – to account for the grown of the league’s player pool that has occurred over the decades?
Head to the comment section below to share your two cents!
Add more players, create 4 teams and run a tournament a la the rising stars.
I would say they should pick 14 players from each conference so 28 total.
Adam Silver first needs to bring back some physicality to the NBA and some defense for guys stats don’t be so inflated.
Then he needs to get rid of load management.
Let’s just say most teams have played between 58-61 games by the time the All Star break comes around. You have to play in between 48-51 games or you don’t qualify.
Then that will play into their money so they will be out there more.
I love the NBA and I know it’s not going to be played like the 90’s anymore but I would love for it to be played like 2003-2013 where defense and physicality was still on display and scores wasn’t so inflated.
It’s like averaging 30 now is like 25. Bring it down. I’m tired of seeing these crazy scores and stats. It’s way too many triple doubles these days.
Teams carry 15 players. So expand it to 15 all stars. I’m good with that.
Nailed it
Should be 30 spots available, gives everyone a chance from each team to make an all star appearance
Second it and a League that Teamss can send guys to that aren’t a Rookie or don’t want to cut them to open a spot.
Go to 15, but this current format stinks, go back to conference vs conferences. No more LeBron and players choosing teams, it is stupid.
Nah the draft is definitely better than conf v conf. More variation to see players who might not ever play together in live game action together. Could maybe have some more variation where the two captains are not players so you don’t have LeBron v whoever every year.
Plus if you ever have a year where one conference is just flat out more talented than the other, that will reflect in the ASG.
Yes. The active roster for teams is now 13 so it should replicate that plus two spots for potential injury replacements but the players wouldn’t agree to the two inactive slots imo. But it should be 13 not 12.
Seems like the league is determined to ruin the game completely. If the 65% drop in tv ratings hasn’t clued them in to stop what they’re doing nothing will.
Why not cancel the whole NBA all star weekend entirely? The game is boring as hell. My opinion of course
I’m sure the players would like to have the time off. It helps at least one city every year to make a little more money. Ppl like the 3 point contest and Slam Dunk contest. I don’t think ppl really care about the skills challenge. I think H-O-R-S-E would be interesting. I just don’t know how you replace the game. The rising stars challenge guys care bc they’re trying to prove something. Expand the rosters to 15 and have some sort of 3 on 3 tournament could be interesting. Each team gets a guard forward and C/big forward? Have some sort of random lottery to pick teams? I guess my main point is they won’t cancel the game bc of money.
They used to have a H-O-R-S-E competition. Imo it was not fun or good. No one is going to go all out in that type of competition and unless they’re all making it on the first try it gets boring.
I am fine with expanding it but I don’t find the ideas given reasonable.
I know some people might not think of it this way at first (think about it – really) but all stars are the best players and just because you expand the number of total players by increasing the number of teams or players per team, the number of best players is still the same. Honestly, you could even reduce it to 18 or 20 for a typical rotation on an NBA team.
Looking over the last 20 or 30 years, how many all stars have there been that you might now say “wow they were an allstar?”
Let’s talk about changing the voting before the amount of players that shouldn’t be there in the first place.
All NBA teams were expanded to 3, from 2. But that’s about honoring players.
The All Star game isn’t supposed to be about honoring players. It’s supposed to be about the fans, and giving them an exhibition game between the two best rosters that can be compiled from the league’s best. One game, two sides. Until that changes, 12 a side is already a lot. There aren’t a lot of 12 man rotations in use.
If the number of All Stars is increased, then I hope it’s not just a mindless expansion of the two rosters. Maybe do like they now do in the rising stars. 4 teams, of maybe 8 guys each, in a 4 team playoff format; with games of shorter duration.
Expand the all star game to 4 teams, 15 players per team. Players selected as follows: 30 selected by fans, 30 selected by players and coaches, 30 come from contest winners: slam dunk, 3 pointer, young stars competition etc, remaining at least 1 player from a unrepresented team.
Still hold the draft. Team 1 plays team 3, team 2 plays team 4. Winners play each other within team getting first prize, loser getting second. losing.teams play each other for third.
Players awarded $100k for first prize, second $50k, third $25k, 4th 15k.
Teams can have 15 active players, not 13, so it makes sense that All-Star rosters should be 15 players. Every team has at least a chance to get one player in the game. 3 point guards, 6 wings (SG/SF), and 6 bigs (PF/C) per team. No injury replacements. Bring back East vs. West.
If the fans vote accounted for 100% of 15 spaces we’d see the likes of Reaves, Looney, Westbrook and Poole as AllStars this year. Over the likes of Brunson, Gordon, KP, Trae, Kuzma etc who were close and arguably deserving. it just wouldn’t work because of the OTT fan base of bigger franchises saturating the honours.
Yeah people get snubbed every year, a couple spots I agree with. But not to this extreme.
Division All-Star Teams
How would that work?
Link: link to hawksquawk.net
Expansion when the league expands…
Then have 4 teams with the top 4 vote getters chosing the players…
Each team plays a quarter in the first half, the teams with the highest scores move on to the 2nd half to face each other…
That way there’s something to play for each quarter…
The NBA should be taking ideas on what else to do instead of the All-Star weekend.
How about give the players 1 week off in the middle of the season?
I’d prefer that, over ideas on how to share All-Star weekend with Hollywood, and other unimportant media personalities that I really don’t want to see, or hear.
If its not players playing, count me out
Give the defensive player of the game 1 million bucks, only way to save this sorry thing.