Warriors forward Draymond Green is not a fan of the NBA’s new load management rules
Forgive me for making a tremendous understatement, but Golden State Warriors forward Draymond Green is not afraid to speak his mind, and nor should he be. Both on and off the court, Draymond’s demonstrative nature has made him one of the most captivating (and controversial) NBA players of the 21st century, and it’s what will eventually make him a Charles Barkley-like presence as an analyst once his playing career is over. With a microphone in front of him and a podcast that averages nearly 2 million monthly downloads, Draymond yields an incredible amount of power whenever he speaks on any NBA-related topics. And this one he’s addressing today is a slow pitch right down the center of the plate that’s just begging for Draymond to make like Barry Bonds and crank one out of the park.
MVP front-runner Joel Embiid will miss an underdetermined, yet significant amount of time due to a meniscus tear that occurred during a matchup with Draymond’s Warriors. But as Draymond points out, Joel Embiid had been nursing a knee injury for quite a while before that game against Golden State, and had the NBA not implemented new load management rules that puts a 65-game minimum on eligibility for end of season awards, it’s possible, if not likely, that the 76ers may have opted to sit Embiid in that game versus the Dubs to begin with.
In theory, I understand why the NBA introduced these load management rules. The integrity of the product is at risk when you have players sitting out games that they were clearly healthy enough to be playing in. It impacts the fans who paid money to be in the arena to see a team or specific player play in person. I’ve been to games in the past that have had numerous players sitting out for “load management,” so I understand the frustration. It also impacts the advertisers who shelled out money to have commercials air on broadcasts that feature two teams playing without their star players, but I care significantly less about those whose primary concern in matters like this one is making money.
As it relates to year-end awards, there was no good reason to put a 65-game minimum on award eligibility. Most voters already have a hard number of games in mind that they expect players to suit up for in order to make their ballot, and if they don’t, it’s at least part of the criteria they use to make their selection. If you’re evaluating, say, 80 games of Shai Gilgeous-Alexander versus 60 games of Joel Embiid, doesn’t Shai’s availability in comparison to Embiid’s strengthen his MVP case? Hadn’t we already figured this out?
Additionally, if anything, implementing that 65-game minimum could end up keeping players out even more games once they missed their 18th game. If any player, let’s say Luka Doncic, had already missed 18 games with five games remaining in the season and the Mavericks had nothing to play for in terms of playoff positioning, what’s to incentivize Luka in playing those games if he’s already been ruled ineligible for end of season awards and has more to gain from ensuring good health for the postseason?
(This is where cranky old guy says, “It’s his job to play the game!” while completely ignoring the fact that we know a heck of a lot more about player health now than we did in the 70’s when guys were traveling coach, wearing low top sneakers, and smoking cigarettes in the halftime locker room).
The 76ers now have to get used to life without Joel Embiid, and in related news, I have to get used to the idea that when I see the Philadelphia 76ers play the Cleveland Cavaliers in-person on February 12th, Embiid won’t be on the floor. Would he have been healthy enough to play against Cleveland if he had sat out against the Warriors? There’s no way to tell. But I do know I won’t be the only person in Rocket Mortgage FieldHouse who was looking forward to seeing one of the most prolific centers in NBA history at the peak of his powers.
