Analytics Versus Entertainment in Sports

Analytics, analytics, analytics. That seems to be all the sports media focuses on nowadays when discussing sports. NBA teams need more three-point shooters because it’s a more efficient shot, baseball teams don’t care about batting average because OPS determines more success, and the every-down back has disappeared from the NFL.

The analytics movement has undoubtedly spurred innovation in professional sports, as evident in Michael Lewis’s Moneyball. The Oakland Athletics found a new way to win and find value from overlooked players. And so, a movement was born.

The problem of analytics arose in the MLB in the era of the shift. When the data showed that a batter would hit the ball to a particular side of the diamond, defenses began to align to that side. Outfielders would even set up in the outfield. At various times, teams could have four outfielders. This approach shrank the size of the field and hindered teams' abilities to get on base and for fans to expect a great play, either a hit or an infield play.

This approach hurt baseball because it became boring. Yes, boring is one of those subjective, emotionally charged terms that goes against the analytics ethos, but the MLB is an entertainment product. The defensive alignments led to players trying to hit more home runs. Players trying to hit more home runs led to more strikeouts and lower batting averages. The entertainment problem here is simple. If every at-bat is a home run or nothing, the game becomes boring. Chicks may dig the long ball, but the average fan needs more than a few dingers to consistently watch the games.

To be fair, the reality is that the number of strikeouts and home runs, as well as batting averages, have not changed since the shift was removed in 2023. So, if the analytics show there isn’t a difference, what’s the point?

This year, the MLB viewership has its best viewership since 2017. According to MLB.com, the league has seen significant viewership increases on FOX, TBS, and ESPN. They cite stars such as Aaron Judge and Shohei Ohtani as the cause for this increase. I would argue the better reasoning for this change in viewership is the rule changes from 2023 (banning the shift, increasing the base sizes, and adding the pitch clock).

These rules have resulted in faster games, quicker gameplay, and more highlight plays. When it comes to entertainment, perception is reality. Banning the shift may not have created more hits, but it has created more opportunities for fielders to make highlight plays. More importantly, it has created the perception that there is more action. Fans tune in to games based on expectations. If they expect more hits, more highlights, and more entertainment (whether or not it’s true), they will watch more games.

The rule changes have also led to more stolen bases (more opportunities for the catcher to try to throw the runner out at second). The perception of every at-bat ending in a home run or strikeout led fans away from the game. The increased action resulting from the rule changes has led them back.

The MLB’s success should lead the NBA to follow suit. The three-point line was added for this purpose, as was the restricted area. The three-point line would add a new exciting element, encouraging play further from the rim (a long-term change), and the restricted area would allow for more highlight dunks.

The general issue with NBA rule changes is that they were implemented to increase scoring. The MLB, in contrast, wanted to increase action, leading to more engagement. In 2016, the MLB scored 21,745 runs over the entire season compared to 21,344 in 2024. The numbers aren’t that different from the highest years ever (1999 and 2000 both exceeded 24,000); however, that disparity can be attributed to the end of the Steroid Era and the increased skill of current pitchers.

In contrast, the NBA has increased scoring from 102.7 to 113.8 points per game in that same time period (including 24.1 to 37.6 3PAs). However, the MLB is on the rise in viewership while the NBA is down. In 2016, ESPN averaged 1.6 million viewers per NBA game. In 2025, ESPN, TNT, and ABC averaged 1.5 million viewers per NBA game combined.

Many would like to attribute the NBA’s diminished ratings to the lack of star power or the changing media landscape. “People don’t only watch on TV!” The problem with the latter is quite evident and doesn’t require much debunking. The NBA relies on television contracts to pay the players' salaries. The increase in television revenue is directly tied to the increasing salary cap.

The former is a marketing mistake based on the assumption that Michael Jordan’s popularity was replicable. It is as if a record company made the assumption that the Beatles mania of the 1960s would recur with every new generation. The MLB may have cited “star power,” but the increased viewership since the rules changes seems a more likely cause than the stars they cited (who were both established stars before the change).

The point is that leagues should hitch their wagons to on-screen products over star power. Players come and go with each successive generation. There will always be game changers, none more so than Stephen Curry and Patrick Mahomes in terms of how they’ve influenced the style of play in their respective leagues, but the products, and thus the marketing, must outlive them. The Chiefs fanbase will outlive Mahomes' career. The Yankees have managed to remain a dominant product long after Babe Ruth’s playing career. Focusing on star players to market a league is a boom-or-bust approach. Focusing on sustainable elements, such as franchises or style of play, is more sustainable.

The NFL’s rule changes caused significant complaining but little in the way of decreased viewership because the on-the-field product remains entertaining. The rule changes have arguably led to more “star players.” The star quarterbacks everyone has come to love are a result of these rule changes. Players like Mahomes and Lamar Jackson have revolutionized the game by playing a style that would have led to their physical demise 30 years ago. The rule changes have increased scoring, yes, but that isn’t their most significant effect. The more important element of the NFL’s changes has been keeping quarterbacks (and star players in general) healthy and on the field. In a league that arguably doesn’t have enough quarterback talent for 32 teams to have dependable starters, it makes financial sense to keep as many on the field as possible. The expectation from these rule changes is increased engagement and excitement.

Even better examples come from the changes made to the NFL playoff, NHL, and College Football overtime models. The NFL and College Football created opportunities for both teams to have a shot at winning the game. That’s fun for the fan! The NHL shootouts had the purists complaining, but it is impossible to deny the entertainment and increased fan interest. There is nothing worse in sports than ties.

All of this to say that the NBA needs to adapt to the effects of analytics on the style of play. The emphasis on the three-point shooting or layups-only offense has led to increased scoring but decreased interest in the game. If that is all that can happen, why shouldn’t fans just check the highlights out on social media instead of sitting down to see how the game unfolds? The MLB brought back the excitement of the unknown. Could this hit be a line drive or an out because of an incredible play from the shortstop? In the NBA, the question is who will shoot a three. By creating a predictable pattern and eliminating offensive diversity from the game, the analytics have made the league boring. The post-up is virtually gone from the game. The mid-range jumper is chastised (even though league MVP Shai Gilgeous-Alexander relies on it).

So, what are the rule changes that would increase NBA viewership? The extension of the three-point line is a place to start. Rules allowing for more physicality may also benefit the league. The attempt to create a smoother, well-flowing product has been successful, but at the expense of the fans. Great defense makes great offense. In a recent interview, LeBron James suggested adapting to some FIBA rules, including shorter games and removing the goaltending rule. Those would certainly change the game.

It is common practice in a speech class to tell the students to break up their rhythms to prevent the listener from disengaging. The NBA should heed that lesson. Every team plays the same way. If a fan has seen one game, they’ve seen them all. The rule changes suggested here may not provide the answer, but the NFL and MLB have shown them a playbook for success. Make rules that make the games more entertaining and less predictable. Perhaps, some rule changes could make it more difficult to score (gasp!).

However, the analytics departments shouldn’t shut down. Their input into the entertainment aspect is invaluable. Analytics teams find the most efficient ways to play their respective games. The leagues need to continually adapt the rules to keep the games entertaining. The shift was effective, but it was very boring. The three-point shot is the same way. For the good of the league, shake it up.