KUALA LUMPUR (Mageshwaran's AsiaScope) - One of the raging topics in the aftermath of China’s earlier-than-expected ouster at the 27th FIBA Asia Championship in Manila (Philippines) in August this year was the situation and status of the CBA League in the contribution to the quality of players – their improvement or the lack of it – to the Chinese National team.

Numerous questions were raised with some serious and strong arguments favoring both sides of the debate, but the fact remains that the jury is still out on this hot-burning issue, which corners all attention at the start of another season in the CBA.

The simplistic ways of analyzing the CBA is to check how much quality time the local players got for their respective teams in the CBA game after game; and how often the promising talent actually played in the games. In a league that was increasingly becoming import-laden these questions do sound relevant. The answers will be known at the end of the season.

Teams in CBA have shown a growing tendency to get big names to sign up merely for the commercial capitalization of the star value of these players but certainly with no interest in improving the competitive efficiency of the team.

A name like Tracy McGrady suited up for Qingdao Eagles last season and did accumulate some impressive stats, but the team itself finished last in a fray of 17 teams in the Regular Season!

Numerous similar examples were cited where teams brought players with no real effect on the results for the teams!

Now, commercial interests certainly constitute a huge consideration for a league as large and long as the CBA, but should those be the only concerns for the teams?

Nobody here is complaining about money being made out of playing or promoting basketball. But there certainly was a tendency to assume that basketball should be played only for making money. A dangerous situation indeed, which was rightly, albeit unfortunately, reflected in the disastrous result in Manila.

Any and every National league – including the hallowed NBA – is run and played – or should be played – for the sole purpose of basketball promotion and development. There can’t be any second opinion on this. Making money out of it is only a bonus by-product. This aspect was beginning to take a backseat in the CBA, many Chinese media said while analysing the Manila fiasco.

The opportunity for China to rehaul their roster and present a refreshing line-up in the post-Yao era was certainly lost in Manila with many of the mainstays in the team on the wrong side of the 30s and lacking in speed when taking on the much younger opponents.

The more glaring situation was that the younger players who may have stood as replacements for these veterans – all at the twilight of their illustrious careers – had not sufficient time in their very own domestic leagues to prove their mettle. That a talented center like Li Muhao averaged a mere 18.2 minutes per game for Dongguan Leopards was a case in point. Again, there are many youngsters like Li Muhao, who can do well with the experience gained in the CBA.

As a veteran Chinese journalist quipped at the end of the Manila event: "China basketball has to realize that the C in CBA stands only for China and nothing else. We’ll be back on top once that happens."

Makes sense? Let’s see what’s in store in the season ahead.

So long…

S Mageshwaran

FIBA Asia

FIBA's columnists write on a wide range of topics relating to basketball that are of interest to them. The opinions they express are their own and in no way reflect those of FIBA.

FIBA takes no responsibility and gives no guarantees, warranties or representations, implied or otherwise, for the content or accuracy of the content and opinion expressed in the above article.