With over 300 points scored between the two teams, this year’s NBA All-Star Game was yet another offensive explosion. While the series of highlight-reel plays gave casual fans what they wanted to see, the lack of defense in nearly every All-Star Game can be extremely frustrating for die-hard fans.

Though the All-Star Game has historically been nothing more than a glorified exhibition game, in light of recent injuries that occurred during exhibition games — Paul George’s horrific leg injury in a Team USA scrimmage comes to mind — players, especially now, do not give their full effort and play very little defense, as most injuries tend to take place on the defensive end. As a result, score lines like Sunday’s 163-158 result are the norm, and Russell Westbrook’s impressive total of 41 points in 26 minutes seems relatively normal.

The All-Star Game is inherently just an exhibition game for the entertainment of the fans. Perhaps if the game had meaningful implications like the MLB All-Star game, in which the winning conference (the American League or the National League) in the game earns home field advantage in the World Series, players would be more willing to give their full effort and make the game exciting for reasons other than flashy dunks and wide-open outside shots.

If the NBA All-Star Game were to implement this reward for the NBA Finals, I believe it would do wonders for the popularity, and more importantly, the credibility of the game.

Traditionally, the All-Star Game is known for three quarters of flashiness and highlight-reel plays followed by a close game in the fourth quarter. However, even the “close game” in the fourth quarter is played with very little defense, and many fans find it frustrating.

The most obvious benefit of this change would be the incentive for players to try to win and to care about winning as a team, as the game would have meaningful playoff implications.

Furthermore, making the All-Star Game count for a significant prize would allow the All-Star players’ talents to be showcased in a more effective and fair way. For example, Marc Gasol, the starting center for the Western Conference this year, is the reigning NBA Defensive Player of the Year, but the nature of the current All-Star Game prevents him from fully showing off one of his greatest talents.

Though some pundits and fans would disagree, tougher defense would not ruin the All-Star Game. The players are all extremely talented offensively, and while the combined score would be a little lower than 300, offense would still dominate the game.

In fact, with defensive stalwarts playing their hardest, offensive superstars like Stephen Curry and LeBron James would be able to show their most impressive moves against actual defense. To me, that sounds much better than Westbrook simply strolling into the lane for uncontested dunks.

But perhaps the most important reason why the All-Star Game should be played for home-court advantage in the Finals is to affect the voters who determine the players who play in the All-Star Game. Under the current format, the voting is all about popularity. As a result, Jeremy Lin (10.2 points per game, 4.6 assists per game) received twice as many votes as the far superior Mike Conley (16.9 points per game, 5.3 assists per game) this season, which is a clear sign that something needs to change.

If voters knew that the players they voted into the game as starters would be playing for home court in the Finals (a highly valued prize), they might vote for not just the most popular players, but the best ones. Not only would the All-Star Game gain respect in circles of die-hard basketball fans, but many casual fans would get to see the best players of our generation showcasing their true talents as they duke it out for postseason implications.

Moreover, if the rare occasion arises when a team like the Atlanta Hawks have four of their five starters named to the team, people will want to see them play as a unit against the league’s best. However, when the game is so focused on highlights instead of defense, a unit like the Hawks can only do so much, as team chemistry and synergy take a backseat during the All-Star Game.

Yes, changing the nature of the game would be risky and possibly even a threat to players’ health, as they would face an increased risk of injury. However, if the All-Star Game is truly about the fans — and not just the ones who know the players, but the ones who know and appreciate good basketball — then this change needs to happen and it needs to happen soon. If it does not, the All-Star Game and the weekend that precedes it risks losing even more credibility than they already have.

Paolo Santamaria is a freshman in the College. SAXA SYNERGY appears every Friday.