Why isn't basketball a two-man sport?

Question

I think given the way the game is played, there should only be two players per team on the court. I think having an extra three men doesn't really work. As we're seeing today, the sport has gotten tremendously selfish, and it always seems every team has one or two players who are good while the rest are irrelevant.

Would switching to 2-on-2 vastly improve the flow of the game, and eliminate the fluff? Imagine Dwyane Wade and Shaq against Kobe and Lamar Odom, or Dirk and Jason Terry versus Steve Nash and Amare? You have marquee line-ups and a faster-paced game because when one player stops dribbling, he either has to shoot or find a way to pass to his only other player.

What I'm saying is, that in other sports, every player serves a function somehow. In basketball, that is not so. In sports like soccer and hockey, any player can pick up the ball or puck without needing a pass. Baseball and football have players who fit roles. Understand?

Answer 1

Well...your onto something, sorta. If it were 2 on 2 it would be a much more "high paced" exciting game and stuff, and obviously would sell much better. But just like why Football isnt just 4 on 4 *a QB, and 3 WR's* or 7 on 7, or why Futbol isnt 4 on 4 as well *1 GK, 1 D, 1 M, 1 F*, or why Hockey isnt 4 on 4 or any of these other kind of things. It takes away a dimension from the game. Players in basketball DO FIT ROLES, examples...

The Los Angeles Lakers of their time *the 2000-2004 period*. They had Shaquille O'Neal who fell in as their dominant post player, he changed the way the game was played, and provided them with a rebounding choice and defensive presence against those who wanted to penetrate. Ron Harper/Derek Fisher, they were the 3 point specialists, when a double team would come to stop Shaquille or Kobe, they would be open to knock down a shot, they also provided needed defense as well as great leadership in the locker room which is needed with a team of 12 men who might not all get along. Rick Fox, another spot up shooter who also had a mean defense at times and would usually be in charge of guarding the opposing teams #1 option *if a SG or SF* on offense and would do a damn solid job at it. Also had the occassional jumpshot and stuff. Kobe Bryant, creator so to speak, he was the playmaker of the offense, he would penetrate and kick to Shaquille, or feed Shaquille and let him dominate, he would take his man and attack basket, wear down the defense. Defensively, he would guard the opposing teams #1 option in crunch time, had a mean man on man defense, and still does. Robert Horry, clutch player, clutch times you need clutch players, this is what Horry was, clutch 3 after 3 after 3. Also came down with many clutch boards and defensive plays that many do not remember him for.

Point being, each player has their own role, and without them, the game loses a dimension and it loses the "teamwork" part of the game. 2 on 2 would not eliminate "fluff" since their is no "fluff". The players are needed since no team wins without considerate play from their role players, in any sport, period. You always need that one X-Factor(s) to show up and make somethin happen. So just like other sports, these players do have their own roles that cannot be removed from the game without losing a dimension to this allready beautiful game.

Answer 2

Well it would be interesting. But then there's no role players. Instead of a two player game. It would probably work better with a three player game. But the transition D would be awful. Just Imagine Nash and MARION. They would run all over everyone. And what about Kobe and LeBron? You know you need at least two guys to stop THEM, usually three lol. But my point being the D would be next to non-existent. Which would be sortta cool, but true basketball fans would boycott the league and we don't need all that trash...

Answer 3

i imagine the Celtics will win because they'll study from their activity 6 blunders and wrestle to win. Plus, the Perkins harm will gasoline their hearth. yet besides the actuality that if the Lakers win, it received't count number, because the Finals were tremendous and unique this year. For LeBron to bypass to lengthy island, they could might want to draw yet another large participant to play alongside LeBron. operating example if Chris Bosh is going to lengthy island, then LeBron may bypass there. LeBron + Bosh can be a acceptable crew.

Answer 4

I that would be horrible to watch. Besides the other guys are key to what happens. If the NBA was 2 on 2 you'd be the only fan.

Answer 5

Evidently, you don't understand the game at all.

Being a TEAM player is what makes the individual.

Answer 6

thats a dumb question you need 5 players out there or else most stuff would change basketball wouldnt even be basketball anymore it would be a whole nothe thing at the least i would say 4 people