Damian Lillard’s ‘All-Snub’ Team and Other NBA All-Star Suggestions

The NBA basketball community had a range of opinions about this year’s recently-concluded and newly-formatted NBA All-Star weekend.

This year’s All-Star Game wasn’t even a single game: it was a mini-tournament featuring four teams (three with NBA All-Stars and one with G-League players), all of which had not a time limit, but a score limit of 40 points. Draymond Green said the format was “unfair” to players like Victor Wembanyama who played hard only to be on the court for relatively few minutes, and likened the G-League team’s inclusion to “watching the Olympic team play against a U-19 team.”

Damian Lillard had opinions of his own, according to Rachel Nichols:

Dame Lillard wants to go back to an East-West All-Star game, says he’d be fine with home court in the Finals being on the line. Alternately, he says if this format stays, maybe an “all Snub” team would be better as the 4th team instead of the Rising Stars.

Lillard also suggests the game be moved to the actual mid-point of the season instead of 2/3 of the way through, noting that right now some players are saving their bodies for the playoffs.

To his first point: yes, giving the All-Star game some meaning for the rest of the season could help. I’m not sure we need to have an East-West designation, and the incentive doesn’t necessarily need to be playoff-related.

One thought: the NBA could loosen its All-NBA and other award requirements to give players a three-game coupon, so that All-Star winners need only play 62 games rather than 65 to qualify. This would be a tangible and (for some players) financial incentive that wouldn’t break the competitive balance of the NBA Playoffs.

The “All-Snub” team idea is a brilliant one: you market more NBA stars, and the competitive incentive is still there. The game the G-League players played against Dame’s team in the first round was the most interesting and competitive because of the “chip-on-our-shoulder” undertones, and a snub team would maintain that.

It’s also true that many folks call the All-Star game “the halfway point” of the season when it’s anything but, and it would make sense to move it closer to the mathematical middle.

Lillard also doesn’t think the lack of competitiveness in years past was due to players not caring:

I don’t think it’s a matter of guys not caring. It’s just so much pressure on ‘this guy didn’t win (a championship),’ and they need to do this and do that. So we want to be our best for that. You don’t want to go out there and get hurt when there’s just really nothing on the line.

This is true… nothing will change the fact that every game played that isn’t a playoff game or other game of significance could be a chance to get hurt and miss games that matter more. But history hasn’t shown the All-Star game to be a bigger injury risk than any other game, and all you’re asking for is for the competition to be fun to watch.

All in all, Dame’s suggestions resonate with me, and I may be in the minority when I say I liked the format changes and thought the basketball was more interesting. Were there a ton of commercials and sidebars? Yes. Did it ruin the flow of the game? Yes, and that part needs to be fixed, while at the same time acknowledging that basketball broadcasts are a vehicle for advertising. That will never change. And since the All-Star game was interesting when it was actually played, I’m considering this year’s experimentation a win in its own right, and (importantly) a data point to guide future format changes.