Sunday, October 15, 2006
I think that the NBA did the right thing in taking a more measured approach to the synthetic basketball that is being used in the NBA.  David Stern recently said: 

"Right now our plans are to stay the course, but we will monitor it and if we find there is something to it and it is a serious issue, we will take the appropriate steps because the most important thing to us is the game,"

Earlier this week I got a phone call from Michael Curry who works alongside the executive office of the NBA.  He told me on the call that David Stern was going to order additional testing of the basketball and that the NBA really wanted feedback from the players.  This was great news to hear and I am really glad that the league office is taking feedback from the players so seriously.  I knew from the beginning that the league would listen to the players on this issue.  From all of the reports that I've heard, the main issue with the new basketball is that when it gets wet it gets extremely slippery and can slip out of players' hands causing turnovers, etc.    I'm excited to see how this unfolds.  I think that the additional testing will only confirm what the NBA players feedback has been about how slippery the ball is when it has moisture on it.

Early on, the NBA made the following statement describing the new ball as  "a better ball with a better grip and feel and more consistency from ball-to-ball."  I think that no one would doubt that all of the new balls are almost perfectly identical to a "t".  So there is most certainly "more consistency from ball-to-ball."  But to call the new synthetic ball "better" or that it has a "better grip" I think is premature.  I feel that once all of the feedback gets back to the league from the players, the verdict could be somewhat different.  When  the ball is dry there is no question but that the ball feels much more "tacky" or even sticky to some extent which could make shooting percentages go up.

Perhaps I am wrong though.  On my team there is one huge proponent of the new ball and it is Mike James.  Mike James says that "he loves the new ball."   And he hopes that the media does not go to him, b/c he will tell them he loves it.  Marko Jaric also is comfortable with the new ball, probably because he is used to international competition, where the synthetic ball is the norm.  However, other than Mike and Marko, I've not heard of anyone else loving the ball and I have talked to many many people and players.  And again, they key, prevalent complaint is how slippery the ball gets when it gets a little bit wet.  I think the other MAJOR concern is that all of the players just would like to have a voice in such a major decision.  This has been a common theme on my team inside the locker room.  I think the NBA is doing a great job of getting our feedback now and opening the dialogue by having people like Michael Curry reach out to us personally.

10/15/2006 12:28:12 AM (Central Daylight Time, UTC-05:00)  #    Comments [7]
10/15/2006 11:35:30 PM (Central Daylight Time, UTC-05:00)
Mark,

Can the ball be changed during a game? If so couldn't the refs regularly sub in a non-wet ball on time-outs and period changes etc...?

Just a thought to help with the wetness thing.

Sorry about the loss to detroit...hope you were glad to see your old coach and other former teammates. I look forward to a win by you all on Monday. Indiana is sure going through a lot.... Glad you guys don't have so much drama.

John
10/16/2006 3:54:02 AM (Central Daylight Time, UTC-05:00)
First of all, the name of this blog is the bomb! As far as the ball is concerned, I can't understand why it was so necessary to change it? Was it because it's cheaper to make, and therefor would be cheaper to sell? Anyway, please tell your coach to give Foye some more minutes. And tell Ricky he's missed out here in Boston...You da man mad dog!
10/16/2006 12:40:18 PM (Central Daylight Time, UTC-05:00)
Mark - We miss you in LA! David Stern said the NBA tested the ball in the D league, and in summer leages, and that they got feedback from various players that they'd given the ball to. If that is all true, shouldn't there have been feedback (positive or negative) enough for them to make a good decision? It seems like they pretty much sprung it on you guys, and that the ball just aren't very good once the game is underway, and there is sweat on them.
10/16/2006 6:48:13 PM (Central Daylight Time, UTC-05:00)
I have a question that should bring this issue back down to earth, once and for all.

Mark, have you ever played with the Spalding TF-1000 ZK Pro? We common folk play with this awesome ball all the time at the local gyms.

As far as I know, everyone loves this ball. It is made of microfiber composite, which should be quite similar to the new NBA ball. Just check the Spalding website and you'll see.

The only problem with the ZK Pro it takes awhile to break in, but after it's broken in, overall it is better and has a longer life than the traditional NBA grain leather. We've also used that at the gym and it tends to get "old" real quick, i.e., real heavy and slippery -- not a good investment for the Average Joe at the gym.

So my question is, how can the new NBA ball be any worse than the TF-1000 ZK Pro?
10/17/2006 4:52:32 PM (Central Daylight Time, UTC-05:00)
If the ball works, use it. If it turns out to be a dud, hopefully the NBA will have enough guts to admit a mistake and change it. I've got to believe they've tested it enough in the D-league and elswhere to know if it's a complete disaster. Time will tell.
10/19/2006 5:38:25 PM (Central Daylight Time, UTC-05:00)
Hey Mark,

How about a sense of things from the first four games. This last game against Detroit was a downer...why the disparity between the close first 3 games and this game that eluded you most all night? How is the morale after that game? Best wishes with your next game tomorrow night.
11/9/2006 12:03:03 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00)
Hi Mark,
The following article appeared in Science, Vol 314, No. 5799, Page 573, on Oct 27, 2006:

"Some players in the U.S. National Basketball Association (NBA) hate the new synthetic ball the league adopted this year, and a physicist has agreed to find out whether it really is different from the old leather-covered ball.

NBA players complain that the new ball is slippery and bounces unpredictably. League officials counter that the new ball is more consistent and more durable than the old ball. At the request of the Dallas Mavericks team, Kaushik De, a particle physicist at the University of Texas, Arlington, and colleagues are testing both balls.

De says that his very preliminary results suggest that a worn leather ball bounces higher than the synthetic ball, although the synthetic ball and a new leather ball bounce about equally. A worn leather ball also bounces truer than a new leather ball, which has deeper grooves and is embossed with logos, he says. Perhaps most important, the new synthetic ball does not absorb water, which means it gets slippery when wet. A leather ball absorbs moisture and actually gets stickier, De says. He notes that the ball's manufacturer, Spalding, designed it not to absorb water so as to maintain a constant weight: "In optimizing one variable, they seem to have affected the others.""
Name
E-mail
Home page

Comment (HTML not allowed)  

Enter the code shown (prevents robots):