I think just a mandate to the refs and players to speed up the game and get rid of dead time, could probably shave a decent amount of time off the games. Like from when a foul is called to when a free throw is actually shot, or when a timeout is called to when the team actually inbounds the ball, etc., you're telling me that amount of time can't be sped up if you wanted to cut time?
TP for the stats.
I agree with cutting the slack time around timeouts. get the refs to limit the time during a timeout to just that amount of time would cut quite a bit. 20-second timeouts should be just that -- 20 seconds. give them maybe 5 more to inbound the ball. regular timeouts --- keep them to a minute with 5 seconds to inbound the ball.
also agree with keeping the game moving after a foul call -- both when FTs are shot and when it's just a foul.
Another TP for BDM860.
I agree that it isn't so much the overall amount of time, it's really (I think) about the wasted time and the fequency of stoppages. Friends of mine who can't stand watching the NBA complain most about the frequency of fouls and frequency/length of play interruption.
'Let them play' is not the total answer, IMO. There has to be greater clarity for what will be an won't be called -- this is a difficult task given the nuanced contact that occurs naturally in the game. Leaning more on subjectivity (e.g., calling fouls when play is truly impacted by the contact -- promoting no harm/no foul mentality) is wrought with land mines of potential errors in judgment.
I don't know the answer. As for me, I'd rather see fewer fouls -- and much less doddling during play stoppages -- but I'll watch the C's no matter what. To get more fans interested, the NBA really has to figure out how to reduce frequency of foul calls, be more consistent, and streamline play stoppage.
It's not a matter of reducing the overall time of games, rather, it's about increasing uninterrupted action.