The NBA Jam Effect
Thanks to BM for sending me this very interesting link:
An academic study of NBA officiating found little to no evidence that referees favor teams from large media markets in the playoffs, a favorite conspiracy theory of skeptical fans. But the same study found that NBA referees tend to favor home teams, teams trailing in a game and teams trailing in a playoff series. [...] The researchers found that each type of favoritism — home, trailing in a game and trailing in a series — resulted in a 5 to 10 percent advantage in “discretionary” turnovers, or ones over which referees have the most influence. The researchers do not attempt to explain what the percentages could mean in actual wins and losses.
This is both more psychologically plausible than standard “conspiracy theory” views, and you can also see how these kind of problems could conflict because they tend to be good for revenue. In particular, home team advantage is good for sports leagues. There’s clear evidence linking attendance to wins—fans like to go see their team win. So things that bias the system toward the home team tending to win are likely to increase ticket sales. Similarly, long playoff series mean money. Thus, insofar as human psychology is inclining referees toward these biases, the league has little incentive to push back.
At any rate, this is basically how the godlike AI behind NBA Jam ran things—if you fell way behind, then suddenly John Starks would become a completely unstoppable three point shooter and next thing you know, the Knicks are right back in the running.
28 Responses to “The NBA Jam Effect”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
June 5th, 2009 at 10:46 am
John Starks was a completely unstoppable three point shooter in real life. Actually a completely unstoppable basketball force as powerful as a supernova.
June 5th, 2009 at 10:50 am
Those guys in the picture don’t look like NBA players to me. They look like kids.
June 5th, 2009 at 11:01 am
Thanks for that memory.
“We’re the Knicks.”
“Crap.”
June 5th, 2009 at 11:08 am
“He’s heating up!”
“He’s ON FIRE!”
June 5th, 2009 at 11:15 am
I don’t think NBA official possess wit or talent enough to actively participate in a conspiracy. They just suck. Also, David Stern is a dick.
June 5th, 2009 at 11:16 am
Isn’t the real problem that the NBA changed its contact foul rules in response to Riley’s Knicks back in the ’90s and the new rules just give referees too much discretion in deciding what is a foul or not? It’s gotten to be even worse than how baseball’s strike zones used to be before they instructed umpires to stick to the rule book and added technology like QuestTec. The solution would be to allow more incidental contact so that only hard contact that is clearly a foul is called as such. That might mean lower scoring games, but I’d rather watch a low scoring but fast paced game than one that is constantly interrupted for (poorly shot) free throws.
June 5th, 2009 at 11:16 am
I’m okay with this as long as the refs don’t start inputting secret codes that make it possible for Cliff Robinson to dunk from the 3-point line. Or turn Danny Manning and Ron Harper into Mike D and Adrock from the Beastie Boys.
June 5th, 2009 at 11:17 am
At any rate, this is basically how the godlike AI behind NBA Jam ran things—if you fell way behind, then suddenly John Starks would become a completely unstoppable three point shooter and next thing you know, the Knicks are right back in the running.
Dear Matt,
Go to Hell. Take Starks with you.
Love,
My 8 year old self
June 5th, 2009 at 11:18 am
Seriously, that series was the single most painful sporting event of my life.
Fucking Rockets.
June 5th, 2009 at 11:30 am
What’s amazing is that despite the incredible technological progress that has occured since the days of NBA Jam, none of the new games seem nearly as fun to play as the old-school NBA Jam series (at least not to me).
June 5th, 2009 at 11:40 am
Starks may have sucked in Game 7 against the Rockets, but everybody forgets that he nearly won Game 6 of that series all by himself.
June 5th, 2009 at 11:43 am
I’d rather watch a low scoring but fast paced game than one that is constantly interrupted for (poorly shot) free throws
90% or more of regular-season NBA games are unwatchable garbage. Bored players, frequent interruptions, manufactured excitement, pompous refs. It’s just crap. Just about anything (competitive paint drying!) would be an improvement.
June 5th, 2009 at 12:15 pm
Ahhh, the memories. Epic battles with my roommate into the wee hours. Me playing Portland, with Terry Porter and Clyde Drexler, him playing Miami with Rony Seikaly and Harold “Baby Jordan” Miner. He wasn’t even a Heat fan-he just knew it galled me no end that cyber-Seikaly was inexplicably, insanely good from the 3 point line.
Agree with Rob@#10-terrific gameplay in that game, considering how simple it was.
June 5th, 2009 at 12:26 pm
Jeffrey, there’s a code you can enter that gave your players giant heads. That’s what’s going on in that picture. Still never quite sure why anyone would use it.
This NBA Jam effect, though, was rendered impotent if you used the Power Up On Fire code: permanent turbo, and 90% shooting from anywhere inside half court. Kevin Johnson could do anything but shoot 3s, so I’d use that code and suddenly he’d average 100 points a game.
June 5th, 2009 at 12:27 pm
“Isn’t the real problem that the NBA changed its contact foul rules in response to Riley’s Knicks back in the ’90s and the new rules just give referees too much discretion in deciding what is a foul or not?”
The problem with NBA officiating is that it’s so arbitrary that conspiracy theories seem more reasonable. There is frequently so discernable reason why a foul is called this time and not that time, leaving people to wonder what’s going on.
Mike
June 5th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
Let’s not forget that one of the NBA refs was, in fact, fixing games, and, as Bill Simmons points out, the fact that his behavior was not distinguishable from the refs who were merely arbitrary or playing favorites tells you something about the quality of the officiating in the NBA.
June 5th, 2009 at 1:20 pm
It sounds like that study is actually pretty inconclusive. Though it’s telling that it was noted in a Portland newspaper. As a Traiblazers fan, I will believe in the conspiracy theories until the day I die.
June 5th, 2009 at 1:25 pm
Honestly, the NBA ought to be incredibly concerned that out of all the major sports leagues in the US, it has the largest perception that the games aren’t officiated on the level.
For whatever reason, the NBA utterly refuses to market their game as a NATIONAL game, instead focusing on a handful of players in major TV markets. Once Lebron goes to New York, you’ll devolve back into the 1980’s, when literally six teams were the only ones to go to the Finals in 10 years(Boston, Houston, Los Angeles, Detroit, Philadelphia and Portland). Conspicuously excluding smaller market teams from their marketing resulted in TV ratings cratering when they started to appear in the Finals with more regularity in the 1990’s.
On the other hand, the NFL markets their game NATIONALLY, where the game itself is more important than the size of the media market. The second highest rated Super Bowl in history featured the Indianapolis Colts for goodness sakes.
June 5th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
15. Of course, Pacer fans remember the bizarre flagrant foul against Vern Fleming at the end of game 7 of the 1994 Eastern Conference Finals that helped the Knicks pull away in the final 10 seconds. Or the twenty thousand steps Ewing took when he scored the winning bucket in game 2 of the 1995 Eastern Conference Semis. Or the mysterious continuation call Larry Johnson got when he travelled to make the three pointer +1 during the 1999 Eastern Conference Finals.
Granted, in 1994 and 1999, the Knicks had the better team, but they really benefitted from truly fortuitous bizarre calls at crucial moments in those Pacer series.
June 5th, 2009 at 1:42 pm
Once Lebron goes to New York
For gawd’s sake, LeBron is not going to New York. He’s not a drunk. The Knicks dropped stopped being relevant a decade and a half ago. Why would you believe that they were suddenly a good organization. He might not stay in Cleveland, but he’s not going to the Knicks.
June 5th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
On the other hand, the NFL markets their game NATIONALLY, where the game itself is more important than the size of the media market. The second highest rated Super Bowl in history featured the Indianapolis Colts for goodness sakes.
Right, that had nothing to do with leveraging the celebrity of that Manning fellow.
June 5th, 2009 at 1:53 pm
From downtown!
June 5th, 2009 at 2:36 pm
I was a quasi substitute umpire for a men’s fast-pitch softball league I played in. I would get a call every once in a while when an ump didn’t show and there was no back-up. I was like a last resort guy.
I handled second base so I had all the calls that did not involve home plate. I would guess I umped roughly 10 or 12 games over the years, and I can honestly say I never missed a call. It was easy and fun.
I refereed a 3 on 3 basketball tournament once. Again, doing a favor. I reffed 6 or 7 games during the course of a long day. I can honestly say I totally blew no less than 40 calls, and possibly, if I wasn’t being generous to myself, hundreds of calls. In fact, I rarely if ever was sure I got a call right.
It is the nature of basketball, I think. Refereeing that sport is an art form.
June 5th, 2009 at 2:49 pm
Yes, Manning had a national following. However, he gained that following while playing in one of the smallest media markets in all of professional sports. His national stardom wasn’t really contingent on playing in New York or Boston.
Again, Super Bowl 41 featuring a team from a tiny media market with a very famous quarterback and a team from the third largest media market with an incredibly mediocre quarterback had the second highest overall rating in SB history. Considering there hasn’t been NFL games played in LA for over a decade makes this even more impressive.
On the flip side, the NBA has had a very unfortunate habit of aggressively marketing only the star players who play in large markets. LeBron being a notable exception. Do you think that if the San Antonio Spurs were the Los Angeles Spurs or the New York Spurs that their four titles in seven years wouldn’t have been gushed about in all-time dynasty like fawning by the basketball press? No, we heard that they were “boring” and the low ratings of their Finals’ appearances were cited to downgrade their accomplishments.
June 5th, 2009 at 4:24 pm
“At any rate, this is basically how the godlike AI behind NBA Jam ran things—if you fell way behind, then suddenly John Starks would become a completely unstoppable three point shooter and next thing you know, the Knicks are right back in the running.
“Dear Matt,
Go to Hell. Take Starks with you.
Love,
My 8 year old self”
Bulls fan here, too. John Starks always looked like he was going to start crying, especially after a bad call.
Regarding the video games’ godlike AI, it sounds like it had one of those automatic stabilizer subroutines.
June 5th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
Man, I miss my Genesis.
June 5th, 2009 at 7:14 pm
There is frequently so discernable reason why a foul is called this time and not that time, leaving people to wonder what’s going on.
I have to say that this is the preeminent reason why I don’t enjoy watching the NBA all that much. I have no idea how the foul calls work. One moment you have large humans crashing into each other and everything’s apparently fine, and then the next moment the whistle blows because something that looks just like the stuff-that’s-fine has happened, only this time it was, like, bad. Completely screwy. And it doesn’t seem to hold to the NFL pattern, where everyone on the line is constantly holding, so the refs call it once in a while when it seems particularly consequential. In the NBA it seems utterly random when a foul is called and when it’s not.
June 9th, 2009 at 6:21 pm
Home team advantage: I once read about (although I can’t find the link at the moment) an experiment with top professional and international soccer referees. All were shown clips of potential fouls in the penalty area. They would alternate the crowd noise on the clips: a crowd crying out for a penalty, a crowd dismissive/booing a “dive,” and mute with no sound at all. The referees were asked to decide whether the clip shown was a foul or not. By a small but statistically significant, referees were more likely to call a foul when the home crowd noise asking for a penalty was playing than when it was not.
Obviously the fouls are different in basketball, and I’m not familiar enough to with “discretionary” turnovers to know what kinds of fouls those are (whereas a decision to call/not call a penalty kick is usually an intense moment).