NBA's New All-Star Format: A Global Success Story
INGLEWOOD, CALIFORNIA — The NBA's All-Star Game has always been a midseason spectacle, but this year's edition introduced a groundbreaking format: USA vs. the World. The league's 25 All-Stars were divided into two American teams (USA Stars and USA Stripes) and one international squad, resulting in a thrilling round-robin tournament. The USA Stars emerged victorious, claiming the 2026 All-Star Game title with a score of 47-21 over the USA Stripes, and Minnesota Timberwolves guard Anthony Edwards was named the Kobe Bryant All-Star Game MVP.
The new format sparked curiosity and debate among fans and critics alike. Did it elevate the game's excitement and competitiveness? Or was it just a temporary novelty? The Athletic's NBA writers, who attended the All-Star Weekend in Southern California, shared their insights and grades for the innovative format.
David Aldridge: B+ (A Solid Improvement)
David Aldridge praised the new format, calling it a 'marked improvement' over previous iterations. He highlighted the presence of Victor Wembanyama, whose team's performance brought an extra layer of intensity. Aldridge noted that the 2020 All-Star Game in Chicago, held just weeks after Kobe Bryant's passing, was a standout event, and he believed the new format could bring similar magic.
Sam Amick: A+ (Fun and Competitive)
Sam Amick was impressed by the format's ability to create a fun and competitive atmosphere. He argued that the Elam Ending, which made a significant impact in 2020, didn't last, but the new format's success in engaging players was undeniable. Amick questioned the influence of Victor Wembanyama, acknowledging his disruptive presence despite the team's loss in the final game.
Mirin Fader: A- (Pure Excitement)
Mirin Fader found the new format 'awesome,' emphasizing the players' passion and dedication. She praised the intensity and competitiveness displayed, crediting Victor Wembanyama for inspiring a sense of urgency among the players.
Zach Harper: A- (Competitive Spirit)
Zach Harper noted the increased competitiveness, particularly in the first 12 minutes, which saw a high number of blocked shots. He compared the new format to the Elam Ending debut, which was initially successful but later became an issue. Harper expressed optimism, hoping for sustained improvement.
John Hollinger: A+ (Players' Engagement)
John Hollinger awarded the highest grade, A+, citing the players' genuine care and effort. He was moved by Victor Wembanyama's genuine disappointment over his team's loss, emphasizing the players' dedication. Hollinger believed the new format had finally made players take the All-Star Game seriously.
Jason Jones: A (Entertainment and Competition)
Jason Jones praised the format for its competitive nature, game-winning moments, and clutch performances. He found it more engaging than the previous year's version, emphasizing that entertainment is the primary goal, regardless of the format.
Law Murray: B+ (Room for Improvement)
Law Murray acknowledged the format's success but suggested room for refinement. He proposed a modification where the 'entertainment' breaks should be scheduled after the third game, allowing players rest and post-game interviews for non-participating teams. Murray appreciated the four-quarter structure without the Elam Ending.
Shakeia Taylor: A- (Sustainable Format)
Shakeia Taylor recognized the format's ability to engage players and fans, highlighting the presence of sweat, defense, and active fan participation. She questioned the format's long-term sustainability and its potential to become stale, similar to previous iterations.
Joe Vardon: B (Mixed Feelings)
Joe Vardon had mixed reactions, initially excited by the first three games but disappointed by the final game's sloppiness and lopsidedness. He criticized the turnovers and lazy defense, expressing a desire for a more balanced championship game next season.
Jared Weiss: B+ (Crucial Step Forward)
Jared Weiss viewed the new format as a significant step towards restoring the All-Star Game's magic. He attributed the success to the short games and tournament structure, which eliminated complacency and allowed players to take defensive breaks without prolonged impact. Weiss highlighted the issue of excessive game length in previous iterations.
Dan Woike: A (Energy and Engagement)
Dan Woike witnessed a transformative moment when Anthony Edwards, initially reluctant to play harder, became a passionate competitor. He observed Edwards' defensive efforts and crucial shots, noting the positive impact of the new format on even non-believers like himself.
