The game is simply better today than in the 90's and this article explains why.

[Dr.J4ever]

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-ball-dont-lie/gary-payton-don-t-modern-nba-payton-basically-175801742--nba.html

[El Gato Negro]

is it because of the shorts?

[chocolatethunder]

:banghead:
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-ball-dont-lie/gary-payton-don-t-modern-nba-payton-basically-175801742--nba.html
What a bunch of garbage that was.

[jstern]

I only read the Gary Payton quote


"Basically everything. It's no defense, it's just run and gun. To me, there's only three point guards in the NBA that impress me; I got Chris Paul, Rondo, and another kid that I like a lot and I forgot his name right now. Oh, and Tony Parker. That's only three NBA players in there.

There's too much touch fouls. Every time you touch and they stay on the free throw line. That's no way to watch basketball. When we were playing, it was rough and tough. Even superstars like me fouled out a lot. That's because they let people play, and if you do something then you call it. But nowadays it's not like that and this is the era.

This is what kids want to see. You see these Playstations, they scoring 50 and 60 with one player, that's what they want to see on TV and I don't go with that. My era, give me one-on-one with somebody and stop him and right now you can't do that with a player because if you touch him he's going to the foul line and you're fouling out. Let him be rough. If he got an opportunity to go at you in the offensive end, let me go at him on the defensive end and rough him up. So that's the way I like basketball and I don't think it's like that."

[RedBlackAttack]

Kelly Dwyer has never produced a decent piece of sports journalism. He's awful.

Weak era for sports writers.

[Rose'sACL]

this is one of the reasons i think a players like charles barkley would not have stats he has back in the day. most of his game was backing the defender from pretty much close to 3 pt line. you just can't do that now.
He most probably would have the same impact on the game offensively if he got a good coach as he would still be a great weapon to bait players into doubling him leaving open jumpers for role players. His PPG stats would take a hit though.
His rebounding numbers will stay the same or might even increase.
His bad defense will be exposed though just like harden is exposed. although i believe he would do a better job than harden, he would still have to improve a lot to not be a negative on defense.
both offensive and defensive schemes by even mid tier teams are getting more and more complex every year. just watch this year's playoff. last season, san antonio used to run 2 and some time even more than 2 screens to free tony parker.
If defense was as weak as payton said, there wouldn't be any need for it. Hand checking with current rules will result in all good defensive teams holding even good teams to score of 60s or at most 70s. that is it.
Pace of the game has actually slowed a little as compared to most of the 90s.
Just because old players can't think of ways to play defense without hand checking doesn't mean that today's pros can't. they are doing it and doing it well.

[King Jane]

I only read the Gary Payton quote
Wow that guy is delusional, these old heads are stuck in lala land :facepalm

There are kids today that are better players than anyone I ever seen highlights of from pre lebron/Durant era. Soon even lebron and Durant will be phased out by the up coming super athletes of tomorrow. Anyone who don't know wut I'm talmbout check out seventh woods. Kid makes Jordan look like a stiff. The game just gets better and better as humans and athletes evolve, but old codgers who are now irrelevant don't want to own up to being inferior. Such is life nothing to see here.

[TheCorporation]

Payton was complaining about free throws? Maybe someone should let The Glove know that MJ peaked at 12 fta per game lol Followed up the next two years with 11 and 10 and 9.

Let's compare peak streaks for 4 consecutive seasons between MJ and LBJ

Jordan:
11.9 - 10.5 - 9.8 - 8.5 = 40.7 / 4 = 10.175

LeBron:
10.3 - 9.0 - 10.3 - 9.4 = 39 / 4 = 9.75

This year Durant is leading the league with most fta per game with 10.0

Let's look at the "good ol days" and see if anyone was drawing more fouls per game?

2000:

Shaq 10.4
Stackhouse 9.3

2001:

Shaq 13.1
Iverson: 10.1
Stackhouse: 10.1

2002:

Shaq 10.7
Iverson: 9.8

2003:

Shaq 10.3
McGrady: 9.7
Pierce: 9.5

I think you get my point...Durant's 10 fta per game is his recent single season high (if you are counting his last 4 season). And we all feel he is getting a very generous helping of fta this season, too. Take his last 2 seasons, where he was 9.3 and 7.6, respectively. He doesn't even shake a stick at others on the list. (Shaq was intentionally fouled a bunch, I already know this :P).

[King Jane]

this is one of the reasons i think a players like charles barkley would not have stats he has back in the day. most of his game was backing the defender from pretty much close to 3 pt line. you just can't do that now.
He most probably would have the same impact on the game offensively if he got a good coach as he would still be a great weapon to bait players into doubling him leaving open jumpers for role players. His PPG stats would take a hit though.
His rebounding numbers will stay the same or might even increase.
His bad defense will be exposed though just like harden is exposed. although i believe he would do a better job than harden, he would still have to improve a lot to not be a negative on defense.
both offensive and defensive schemes by even mid tier teams are getting more and more complex every year. just watch this year's playoff. last season, san antonio used to run 2 and some time even more than 2 screens to free tony parker.
If defense was as weak as payton said, there wouldn't be any need for it. Hand checking with current rules will result in all good defensive teams holding even good teams to score of 60s or at most 70s. that is it.
Pace of the game has actually slowed a little as compared to most of the 90s.
Just because old players can't think of ways to play defense without hand checking doesn't mean that today's pros can't. they are doing it and doing it well.
Barlkley would have to play shooting guard in today's era but he would struggle even then. Today u gotta be 7 foot to play as a big. Barkley would get owned by the size of modern players inside since he was only bout 6 4 but he is not skilled enough or quick enough to handle players his size like Westbrook or Irving. They'd cross him up bad and blow by him with their modern athleticism. Some players from the past could play today maybe but Barkley ain't one of em.

[moe94]

Anyone who don't know wut I'm talmbout check out seventh woods. Kid makes Jordan look like a stiff.
http://replygif.net/i/111.gif

[Micku]

Eh. Most of his complaints was more 98-04 than the chuck of the 90s itself. I disagree with some of his statements.

[quote]I grew up in Payton

[Rose'sACL]

Barlkley would have to play shooting guard in today's era but he would struggle even then. Today u gotta be 7 foot to play as a big. Barkley would get owned by the size of modern players inside since he was only bout 6 4 but he is not skilled enough or quick enough to handle players his size like Westbrook or Irving. They'd cross him up bad and blow by him with their modern athleticism. Some players from the past could play today maybe but Barkley ain't one of em.
but dwight plays C and he is at most 6'10. he does have great strength to make up for the height difference though.
you are a troll but i agree about barkley. he would have to change his game a lot for today's league just like a few players of today would have to do the same if they played in 90s.

[Milbuck]

Barlkley would have to play shooting guard in today's era but he would struggle even then. Today u gotta be 7 foot to play as a big. Barkley would get owned by the size of modern players inside since he was only bout 6 4 but he is not skilled enough or quick enough to handle players his size like Westbrook or Irving. They'd cross him up bad and blow by him with their modern athleticism. Some players from the past could play today maybe but Barkley ain't one of em.

Stop

[poido123]

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-ball-dont-lie/gary-payton-don-t-modern-nba-payton-basically-175801742--nba.html


Just a heads up.

Already a thread made on this.

[King Jane]

http://replygif.net/i/111.gif
http://youtu.be/If7Hrcf04Dw

http://www.thecoli.com/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/ufdup.png

Ain't no one in the 90s touchin that

[moe94]

http://youtu.be/If7Hrcf04Dw

http://www.thecoli.com/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/ufdup.png

I know who he is. :biggums:

[Out_In_Utah]

Wow that guy is delusional, these old heads are stuck in lala land :facepalm

There are kids today that are better players than anyone I ever seen highlights of from pre lebron/Durant era. Soon even lebron and Durant will be phased out by the up coming super athletes of tomorrow. Anyone who don't know wut I'm talmbout check out seventh woods. Kid makes Jordan look like a stiff. The game just gets better and better as humans and athletes evolve, but old codgers who are now irrelevant don't want to own up to being inferior. Such is life nothing to see here.

This is the reason I like rep. There is something just viscerally satisfying about negging people for moronic statements like this.

[King Jane]

This is the reason I like rep. There is something just viscerally satisfying about negging people for moronic statements like this.
Ooooo an e-thug

http://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_matcekFz4v1r270ozo1_250.gif

U ain't intimidatin no one

http://www.thecoli.com/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/pacspit.gif

[oh the horror]

Wow that guy is delusional, these old heads are stuck in lala land :facepalm

There are kids today that are better players than anyone I ever seen highlights of from pre lebron/Durant era. Soon even lebron and Durant will be phased out by the up coming super athletes of tomorrow. Anyone who don't know wut I'm talmbout check out seventh woods. Kid makes Jordan look like a stiff. The game just gets better and better as humans and athletes evolve, but old codgers who are now irrelevant don't want to own up to being inferior. Such is life nothing to see here.


Bro, most of the kids in the league can barely hit a midrange jumper coming into the league. There are several players right now that merely drive and hope for fouls or launch 3s.


ALOT of dumb basketball being played righ now. Athleticism and talent is there but basic lack of fundamental skills shows in this league.

[oh the horror]

http://youtu.be/If7Hrcf04Dw

http://www.thecoli.com/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/ufdup.png

Ain't no one in the 90s touchin that

See, this is why young kids (and I'm sure you're young) fail against savvy elders.


Your eye for the game is still infantile and simplistic. YOu see some kid pulling crossovers and high flying fancy moves and assume he's just better than anything else before him.


You literally don't see the game from any technical point of view.

[russwest0]

That Gary Payton quote was spot on...

90s was a much better time for the sport.

[Trollsmasher]

90s were the worst era since 50s

80s were good, but no D has been played at all

Today's game is balanced and full of skilled and all time great players.

A perfect product

[oh the horror]

And also am I crazy or is it incredibly stupid how some younger members here act like evolution hit the league in the past 20 years?


As if players now would just flat out DOMINATE superstars from the 80s, 90s. Etc.

[poido123]

And also am I crazy or is it incredibly stupid how some younger members here act like evolution hit the league in the past 20 years?


As if players now would just flat out DOMINATE superstars from the 80s, 90s. Etc.


I know :oldlol:

Guys of the 80's, 90's have some of the best fundamentals the league has seen. When you are dealing with handchecking and physical play, you need to have good fundamentals to be competitive.

Lebron's crabstep is hilarious :lol

The post up play and fundamentals of the big men in today's league is laughable :pimp:

[Rose'sACL]

And also am I crazy or is it incredibly stupid how some younger members here act like evolution hit the league in the past 20 years?


As if players now would just flat out DOMINATE superstars from the 80s, 90s. Etc.
i have also seen posters here here write that today's players would be crap in 90s league.
it works both ways but i don't see the so called good posters on this site have problems with that so it is understandable when a troll makes this kind of threads.
anyways, nothing GP said is right and that is what i was saying.

[moe94]

Lebron's crabstep is hilarious :lol


Randomly bringing him up as if he's not incredibly skilled or wouldn't dominate any era. :facepalm

[hitmanyr2k]

Payton was complaining about free throws? Maybe someone should let The Glove know that MJ peaked at 12 fta per game lol Followed up the next two years with 11 and 10 and 9.

Let's compare peak streaks for 4 consecutive seasons between MJ and LBJ

Jordan:
11.9 - 10.5 - 9.8 - 8.5 = 40.7 / 4 = 10.175

LeBron:
10.3 - 9.0 - 10.3 - 9.4 = 39 / 4 = 9.75

You didn't include shot attempts to go along with the free throw averages? You didn't mention in order to average 11.9 free throws a game Jordan had to be in constant attack mode and average 28 shots a game that season? And he barely shot any three pointers on top of that since his game was always midrange or attack the rim back then.

Meanwhile you have Lebron James not anywhere near as aggressive offensively as Jordan averaging 4-5+ less shots a game, also throwing up 4-5 threes a game and still averaging just as many free throws? It puts those numbers more in context, doesn't it?



This year Durant is leading the league with most fta per game with 10.0

Let's look at the "good ol days" and see if anyone was drawing more fouls per game?

2000:

Shaq 10.4
Stackhouse 9.3

2001:

Shaq 13.1
Iverson: 10.1
Stackhouse: 10.1

2002:

Shaq 10.7
Iverson: 9.8

2003:

Shaq 10.3
McGrady: 9.7
Pierce: 9.5

I think you get my point...Durant's 10 fta per game is his recent single season high (if you are counting his last 4 season). And we all feel he is getting a very generous helping of fta this season, too. Take his last 2 seasons, where he was 9.3 and 7.6, respectively. He doesn't even shake a stick at others on the list. (Shaq was intentionally fouled a bunch, I already know this :P).

Once again Durant is nowhere near as aggressive offensively as Jordan (or McGrady or Iverson) and also throws up a ton of long range shots but still gets to the line plenty. You also didn't mention that Iverson, Stackhouse and McGrady were taking anywhere from 24-28 shots a game some of those years you listed to get their free throw averages to equal the same amount as Durant who takes only 17-19 shots a game. The refs are far more whistle-happy these days.

And how about that James Harden? Averaging 16-17 shots a game, 1/3 of his shots are threes (taking 6 a game) but that guy still averages 9-10 free throws a game the last couple of seasons. Yep, Payton is absolutely right, this era is softer than a roll of wet Charmin. Imagine how many free throws young Jordan would rack up in this shit era taking 28 shots a game, staying away from threes and constantly attacking the rim if he got "Harden" superstar treatment.

[Rose'sACL]

You didn't include shot attempts to go along with the free throw averages? You didn't mention in order to average 11.9 free throws a game Jordan had to be in constant attack mode and average 28 shots a game that season? And he barely shot any three pointers on top of that since his game was always midrange or attack the rim back then.

Meanwhile you have Lebron James not anywhere near as aggressive offensively as Jordan averaging 4-5+ less shots a game, also throwing up 4-5 threes a game and still averaging just as many free throws? It puts those numbers more in context, doesn't it?



Once again Durant is nowhere near as aggressive offensively as Jordan (or McGrady or Iverson) and also throws up a ton of long range shots but still gets to the line plenty. You also didn't mention that Iverson, Stackhouse and McGrady were taking anywhere from 24-28 shots a game some of those years you listed to get their free throw averages to equal the same amount as Durant who takes only 17-19 shots a game. The refs are far more whistle-happy these days.

And how about that James Harden? Averaging 16-17 shots a game, 1/3 of his shots are threes (taking 6 a game) but that guy still averages 9-10 free throws a game the last couple of seasons. Yep, Payton is absolutely right, this era is softer than a roll of wet Charmin. Imagine how many free throws young Jordan would rack up in this shit era taking 28 shots a game, staying away from threes and constantly attacking the rim if he got "Harden" superstar treatment.
he gave you stats to back up his statements. did you even think that he just might be fouled more when he is going to the basket or when lebron is going to the basket as they are a massive mismatch for the other team?
also, i am pretty sure jordan would have loved 3 pt shot if he grew up today if he was good at it. his only good 3 pt shooting season came when 3 pt line was shorter. i am sure he would have practiced 3 pt shots more if he grew up now instead of 70s and 80s.
pretty much all fouls on lebron are when he is going to the rim instead of on his jump-shots.
durant gets fouled on jump-shots too. jordan started the era of superstar treatment by refs so don't even start that argument.

[poido123]

Randomly bringing him up as if he's not incredibly skilled or wouldn't dominate any era. :facepalm


I don't know why you would get upset by this?

Well duh, most basketball players have skill, otherwise they wouldn't be in the league :(

I wouldn't call Lebron a highly skilled player. Dominate with the use of his body, strength and speed? Sure. Can throw a nice pass, post game is limited, jumpshot is pretty solid. What else does he have fundamentally? His footwork is average at best, his handles are average, I don't think this is even an issue?


Skilled fundamentally like a Kobe, Hakeem or Jordan? No, not in that respect.

[davehos]

The 90s ... the game was different ... you could maul someone and may, or may not, get a call.

Would I take the best team of the 90s against the best team of the 2000s? Hell yes .. without a doubt.

For your consideration!

PG: Nash -- Stockton
SG: Bryant -- Jordan
PF: Duncan -- Malone
SF: James -- Pippen
C: O'Neil -- Olajawon

It would be one hell of a good game too.

[Marlo_Stanfield]

I don't know why you would get upset by this?

Well duh, most basketball players have skill, otherwise they wouldn't be in the league :(

I wouldn't call Lebron a highly skilled player. Dominate with the use of his body, strength and speed? Sure. Can throw a nice pass, post game is limited, jumpshot is pretty solid. What else does he have fundamentally? His footwork is average at best, his handles are average, I don't think this is even an issue?


Skilled fundamentally like a Kobe, Hakeem or Jordan? No, not in that respect.
:roll: :roll: :roll: :biggums:

[moe94]

Skilled fundamentally like a Kobe, Hakeem or Jordan? No, not in that respect.

What the hell are you even talking about? Why does it matter if he's as effective as he needs to be?

Guess who banged in Jordan's era who was dominant? More dominant than Dream. Shaq. Shaq is also a low skilled brute who dominated with his body. Even if what you're saying is true, it matters very little if the result is the same or in these cases, better. :confusedshrug:

[hitmanyr2k]

he gave you stats to back up his statements. did you even think that he just might be fouled more when he is going to the basket or when lebron is going to the basket as they are a massive mismatch for the other team?
also, i am pretty sure jordan would have loved 3 pt shot if he grew up today if he was good at it. his only good 3 pt shooting season came when 3 pt line was shorter. i am sure he would have practiced 3 pt shots more if he grew up now instead of 70s and 80s.
pretty much all fouls on lebron are when he is going to the rim instead of on his jump-shots.
durant gets fouled on jump-shots too. jordan started the era of superstar treatment by refs so don't even start that argument.

He gave nothing but free throw averages which says nothing about the player's style of play or how aggressive they are. I put more context to those free throw averages. There is no way in hell you can spin a player averaging 16-17 shots a game, jacking up 6 threes a game averaging near the same amount of free throws as an athletic freak, taking 28 shots a game, constantly attacking the rim and taking practically NO three point shots. It's ridiculous. Jordan never got NEAR the superstar treatment these MFs are getting today.

[poido123]

What the hell are you even talking about? Why does it matter if he's as effective as he needs to be?

Guess who banged in Jordan's era who was dominant? More dominant than Dream. Shaq. Shaq is also a low skilled brute who dominated with his body. Even if what you're saying is true, it matters very little if the result is the same or in these cases, better. :confusedshrug:


Again, you're getting rather sensitive over a non-issue. It's not blasthemy to suggest that Lebron is limited fundamentally. Does he need elite fundamentals? No, he's big, strong and fast.

Shaq is a low skilled brute. Think you need to watch this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewBnHq04CRg

The guy had an array of post moves, footwork and could go coast to coast as a centre. :eek: He was very skilled fundamentally, don't let the thunderous power and dunks fool you :no:


If I was arguing that Lebron is both limited fundamentally and ineffective? Then of course I'd have rocks in my head. But I NEVER said Lebron was ineffective.

[hitmanyr2k]

Again, you're getting rather sensitive over a non-issue. It's not blasthemy to suggest that Lebron is limited fundamentally. Does he need elite fundamentals? No, he's big, strong and fast.

Shaq is a low skilled brute. Think you need to watch this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewBnHq04CRg

The guy had an array of post moves, footwork and could go coast to coast as a centre. :eek: He was very skilled fundamentally, don't let the thunderous power and dunks fool you :no:



Agreed. Shaq didn't always have to use his ass to get to the rim. Do you see any other big today making moves like this? The footwork. The speed. And then just going over Robinson and kicking him off like a sack of garbage :oldlol: It was easy to see the thunderous dunks and all that but I always saw the moves. It wasn't fair for a man the size of Shaq to be this coordinated and quick.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lI85iVU3xkE

He had the up and unders, the drop step, the fadeaway jumphook from the baseline. Shaq had skills, no doubt.

[moe94]

Again, you're getting rather sensitive over a non-issue. It's not blasthemy to suggest that Lebron is limited fundamentally. Does he need elite fundamentals? No, he's big, strong and fast.

Shaq is a low skilled brute. Think you need to watch this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewBnHq04CRg

The guy had an array of post moves, footwork and could go coast to coast as a centre. :eek: He was very skilled fundamentally, don't let the thunderous power and dunks fool you :no:


If I was arguing that Lebron is both limited fundamentally and ineffective? Then of course I'd have rocks in my head. But I NEVER said Lebron was inefffective.

If you're really arguing that Shaq was more skilled relative to his position than LeBron, then this argument needs no further discussion.

Do you really think LeBron is leaps and bounds the best athlete in the league and no forward can touch him? Is that what you're arguing?

[poido123]

If you're really arguing that Shaq was more skilled relative to his position than LeBron, then this argument needs no further discussion.

Do you really think LeBron is leaps and bounds the best athlete in the league and no forward can touch him? Is that what you're arguing?


That's fine if you truly believe that. But I'd argue Shaq was more skilled fundamentally as a centre, than Lebron is as a SF. Shaq's footwork leaves Lebron for dead.

Lebron has a unique combination of size, strength and speed unrivalled in the league. So no, I'm not arguing the MOST athletic, but the most unique body shape and speed relative to size in the league. Once he gets a head of steam, nobody can stop Lebron.

[JohnMax]

The 90s ... the game was different ... you could maul someone and may, or may not, get a call.

NBA discourages fighting because the Ron Artest/Ben Wallace incident almost killed the league. Alot of fans saw NBA players as thugs after that.

Thats why Steve Nash and Dirk Nowitaki were given MVP trophies.

[BoutPractice]

In the case of Dirk, it was really because he deserved it. He was going to win the MVP at some point with his play, and 2007 seemed like the year due to the Mavs' exceptional record. (He had a strong case the two years before as well. So did Nash by the way but I think there were better options available).

As for Barkley... of course he'd dominate today. He retired in 2000, not a century ago. His lack of height didn't bother him in a golden age of 7 foot paint protectors, so why would it bother him today?

[sportjames23]

In the case of Dirk, it was really because he deserved it. He was going to win the MVP at some point with his play, and 2007 seemed like the year due to the Mavs' exceptional record. (He had a strong case the two years before as well. So did Nash by the way but I think there were better options available).

As for Barkley... of course he'd dominate today. He retired in 2000, not a century ago. His lack of height didn't bother him in a golden age of 7 foot paint protectors, so why would it bother him today?


Thank you. Barkley had to work in the paint that had monsters like Dream, Robinson, Ewing, Shaq, Mutombo and Mourning in it. There's no one today who lives in the paint who could even slow Sir Charles down. No one.

[STATUTORY]

game's constantly improving, it's called progress. old people always in fear of it

[SHAQisGOAT]

Wow that guy is delusional, these old heads are stuck in lala land :facepalm

There are kids today that are better players than anyone I ever seen highlights of from pre lebron/Durant era. Soon even lebron and Durant will be phased out by the up coming super athletes of tomorrow. Anyone who don't know wut I'm talmbout check out seventh woods. Kid makes Jordan look like a stiff. The game just gets better and better as humans and athletes evolve, but old codgers who are now irrelevant don't want to own up to being inferior. Such is life nothing to see here.

:biggums: :facepalm

Wtf is this 8 year old talking about?? Take your ass back to your mommy and stop posting please.


Barlkley would have to play shooting guard in today's era but he would struggle even then. Today u gotta be 7 foot to play as a big. Barkley would get owned by the size of modern players inside since he was only bout 6 4 but he is not skilled enough or quick enough to handle players his size like Westbrook or Irving. They'd cross him up bad and blow by him with their modern athleticism. Some players from the past could play today maybe but Barkley ain't one of em.

So he played PF against the likes of Karl Malone, Kevin McHale, Terry Cummings, Ralph Sampson, Buck Williams, Kevin Willis, Tom Chambers, Dennis Rodman, Shawn Kemp, Chris Webber, Derrick Coleman.... And he would've had to play SG nowadays? :oldlol: :oldlol: If anything he could play C. Height average is lower too, nowadays.

:facepalm :facepalm
So much fail, ban this guy please.

[Basketbolero]

Kelly Dwyer has never produced a decent piece of sports journalism. He's awful.

Weak era for sports writers.
This is so true. I don't agree with Payton but Dwyer is clueless.

[Bones_Jones]

is it because of the shorts?

Sounds about right.

[sportjames23]

:biggums: :facepalm

Wtf is this 8 year old talking about?? Take your ass back to your mommy and stop posting please.



So he played PF against the likes of Karl Malone, Kevin McHale, Terry Cummings, Ralph Sampson, Buck Williams, Kevin Willis, Tom Chambers, Dennis Rodman, Shawn Kemp, Chris Webber, Derrick Coleman.... And he would've had to play SG nowadays? :oldlol: :oldlol: If anything he could play C. Height average is lower too, nowadays.

:facepalm :facepalm
So much fail, ban this guy please.


He's one of the worst of the new posters. I'm starting to suspect they're all dupes, doe. They all say the same shit.

[Dr.J4ever]

I don't know but I basically agree with the article. I think today's game is at the very least a better game to watch than the 90's to early 00's product. The game back then was lower scoring with very rough defense, and the offense was more on isos and and less ball movement. It was the time of AI, and even though I'm a big Sixer fan, I thought the game regressed overall partly because of him.

[215Philly]

Barlkley would have to play shooting guard in today's era but he would struggle even then. Today u gotta be 7 foot to play as a big. Barkley would get owned by the size of modern players inside since he was only bout 6 4 but he is not skilled enough or quick enough to handle players his size like Westbrook or Irving. They'd cross him up bad and blow by him with their modern athleticism. Some players from the past could play today maybe but Barkley ain't one of em.
:roll: :roll: :roll: This post had me in tears :roll:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

If I was Kelly Dwyer, I would write another article. Tell the people he was drinking the night he wrote this one.

[tragicbronson]

Barlkley would have to play shooting guard in today's era but he would struggle even then. Today u gotta be 7 foot to play as a big. Barkley would get owned by the size of modern players inside since he was only bout 6 4 but he is not skilled enough or quick enough to handle players his size like Westbrook or Irving. They'd cross him up bad and blow by him with their modern athleticism. Some players from the past could play today maybe but Barkley ain't one of em.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoJtwYSLeMw

[ImKobe]

Barlkley would have to play shooting guard in today's era but he would struggle even then. Today u gotta be 7 foot to play as a big. Barkley would get owned by the size of modern players inside since he was only bout 6 4 but he is not skilled enough or quick enough to handle players his size like Westbrook or Irving. They'd cross him up bad and blow by him with their modern athleticism. Some players from the past could play today maybe but Barkley ain't one of em.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hTCyPAEzMI

[Straight_Ballin]

game's constantly improving, it's called progress. old people always in fear of it

Actually the 90's wasn't any weaker than today's league. There's a lot of insecure young stans replying to this thread that are emotionally invested in the game and want to feel like their opinion on the matter isn't biased. It is. Meanwhile, those posting that are older and saw both eras have no bias, and therefore their opinion holds far more weight.

Didn't get to watch MJ in his prime? So what. Be thankful you got to see the likes of Kobe and Bron and quit yer bitching.

[Cali Syndicate]

Wow that guy is delusional, these old heads are stuck in lala land :facepalm

There are kids today that are better players than anyone I ever seen highlights of from pre lebron/Durant era. Soon even lebron and Durant will be phased out by the up coming super athletes of tomorrow. Anyone who don't know wut I'm talmbout check out seventh woods. Kid makes Jordan look like a stiff. The game just gets better and better as humans and athletes evolve, but old codgers who are now irrelevant don't want to own up to being inferior. Such is life nothing to see here.

Never go full retard

[AbeVigodaLive]

May be rehashing a bit from what others wrote, but I agree with Dwyer.

I remember watching Olajuwon, Barkley and Drexler play in Houston.
It sounds great on paper, even if each was a bit older. It was insufferable. Here was their offense...

Olajuwon in the post. Barkley on the wing. Drexler up top. Dribble. Dribble. Back down. Dribble. Dribble. Back down. Dribble. Dribble.

That was one of them. The two without the ball... and the other two guys on the court just stood there. Literally. They just stood there.

I've never had a more enjoyable basketball experience/season than watching the Phoenix Suns during the 2005 season. That Suns team MOVED. They PASSED. They brought entertainment back to basketball. And they did it in a way that won games. More importantly, they brought me back to the NBA.

Today's NBA can be called soft. Fine. But I prefer basketball skill over tackling. You know why those old Knicks squads played like that? They couldn't match up playing conventional basketball. Let the best players be the best players. And let the coaches coach. As Dwyer points out, the league has come a long way on the coaching and scheming end of things.

And those are only good things. There's a lot wrong with the NBA still... free-flowing movement and creativity and excitement and unpredictability (compared to the 90s) are not among them.

[Marchesk]

Wow that guy is delusional, these old heads are stuck in lala land :facepalm

There are kids today that are better players than anyone I ever seen highlights of from pre lebron/Durant era. Soon even lebron and Durant will be phased out by the up coming super athletes of tomorrow. Anyone who don't know wut I'm talmbout check out seventh woods. Kid makes Jordan look like a stiff. The game just gets better and better as humans and athletes evolve, but old codgers who are now irrelevant don't want to own up to being inferior. Such is life nothing to see here.

http://sports-kings.com/passthepill/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/perk.jpg

[oh the horror]

What the hell are you even talking about? Why does it matter if he's as effective as he needs to be?

Guess who banged in Jordan's era who was dominant? More dominant than Dream. Shaq. Shaq is also a low skilled brute who dominated with his body. Even if what you're saying is true, it matters very little if the result is the same or in these cases, better. :confusedshrug:



Shaq was a "low skilled brute" to you?


Ooooookay.

[Marchesk]

Shaq was a "low skilled brute" to you?

Shaq would come off the bench in today's league of highly evolved players. Kareem would be in the D-League. Wilt would have had to play in Greece.

Dat progress.

[STATUTORY]

Actually the 90's wasn't any weaker than today's league. There's a lot of insecure young stans replying to this thread that are emotionally invested in the game and want to feel like their opinion on the matter isn't biased. It is. Meanwhile, those posting that are older and saw both eras have no bias, and therefore their opinion holds far more weight.

Didn't get to watch MJ in his prime? So what. Be thankful you got to see the likes of Kobe and Bron and quit yer bitching.
obviously the 90s is closer to the modern game than the 60s but i still believe today's players are marginally better than the average player in the 90s

[robert de niro]

See, this is why young kids (and I'm sure you're young) fail against savvy elders.


Your eye for the game is still infantile and simplistic. YOu see some kid pulling crossovers and high flying fancy moves and assume he's just better than anything else before him.


You literally don't see the game from any technical point of view.
:applause:

[oarabbus]

http://grantland.com/features/packing-paint-nba-defensive-strategy-forcing-coaches-rethink-their-offense/

This article actually explains why today is better than the 90s. And it is.

[TheMan]

http://youtu.be/If7Hrcf04Dw

http://www.thecoli.com/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/ufdup.png

Ain't no one in the 90s touchin that
Stop, you are embarrasing yourself

[BoutPractice]

Imo the game has evolved (but evolution in a game is not always progress, in certain aspects it definitely is but in other it's just a change, and some of these changes may be cyclical, like changes in pace).

Player's capabilities have not, but they have more tools to work on their capabilities.

Also, when a game progresses in one area it often happens that something else is sacrificed along the way. For instance, great collective structure can reduce the need for individual smarts as well as improvisational ability.

[ArbitraryWater]

Is it the shoes?

[moe94]

Shaq was a "low skilled brute" to you?


Ooooookay.

It's called turning a retarded argument on its damn head. Hilarious how you said nothing about LeBron having low skills. :applause:

[oarabbus]

Shaq was a "low skilled brute" to you?


Ooooookay.


He was...

compared to Olajuwon.

[rmt]

Bro, most of the kids in the league can barely hit a midrange jumper coming into the league. There are several players right now that merely drive and hope for fouls or launch 3s.

ALOT of dumb basketball being played righ now. Athleticism and talent is there but basic lack of fundamental skills shows in this league.

I agree. There is a serious lack of fundamental basketball skill. It seems that the more athletic a player is, the less his fundamentals. I guess it's human nature that if you can get by on jumping over/running faster, then there's no need to put in the hard work/repetition to master skills.

As the root of it, is the mental/character deficiency and selfishness. Some one like Bynum, with that size, blessed to be taught the fundamentals by KAJ, should be dominating the league. Maybe it's just this generation of instant gratification - spoiled too much, too early.

[Quickening]

I agree. There is a serious lack of fundamental basketball skill. It seems that the more athletic a player is, the less his fundamentals. I guess it's human nature that if you can get by on jumping over/running faster, then there's no need to put in the hard work/repetition to master skills.

As the root of it, is the mental/character deficiency and selfishness. Some one like Bynum, with that size, blessed to be taught the fundamentals by KAJ, should be dominating the league. Maybe it's just this generation of instant gratification - spoiled too much, too early.

Selfishness? Its just a game. Maybe the players have better perspective now, and no there is more to life than basketball, and instead of spending thousands of hours of there 20s in a gym shooting hoops, they're spending it doing more meaningful things.

[rmt]

Selfishness? Its just a game. Maybe the players have better perspective now, and no there is more to life than basketball, and instead of spending thousands of hours of there 20s in a gym shooting hoops, they're spending it doing more meaningful things.

When players get to the NBA, it's no longer just a game. They are professionals - being paid millions to do a job. Yes, I would hope that they are spending thousands of hours trying to get better and not just coasting on their athleticism. One day that athleticism will be diminished and hopefully, they have some other skill to fall back on.

[moe94]

Selfishness? Its just a game. Maybe the players have better perspective now, and no there is more to life than basketball, and instead of spending thousands of hours of there 20s in a gym shooting hoops, they're spending it doing more meaningful things.

It's his damn job of which he's obligated to perform to his best capability. Are you serious right now? This isn't a damn hobby. It's a business and he's under a contract.

[sportjames23]

When players get to the NBA, it's no longer just a game. They are professionals - being paid millions to do a job. Yes, I would hope that they are spending thousands of hours trying to get better and not just coasting on their athleticism. One day that athleticism will be diminished and hopefully, they have some other skill to fall back on.


:cheers:

[Round Mound]

[B]Barkley couldn

[SCdac]

Touch fouls and ticky tack fouls really ruin the flow and intensity of so many games. Definitely my biggest qualm with today's game, agree with Payton on that one. It gets worse because players adapt to it (quick whistles), and play for the foul.

[Quickening]

It's his damn job of which he's obligated to perform to his best capability. Are you serious right now? This isn't a damn hobby. It's a business and he's under a contract.

Spending an extra 3 hours on my shooting, or watching my son in his school play, or my daughter riding her first bike.

Its a job, a lot of basketball players purely see it as that, a job... not there number 1 priority, and there is nothing wrong with that attitude. Sure they might not reach their basketball potential, but maybe they cherish having a good relationship with their kids more.:confusedshrug:

[Euroleague]

The writer of that article is another brain dead moron. Payton was 100% right. Except about Chris Paul.........he's a total douche bag of a teammate and no team with him is ever going to do jack shit.

[bizil]

The game in the 80's and 90's is better overall than the game is today in my book. It's because of the more dominant big men and tougher defensive rules. That's not to say the best of the best couldn't dominate today. But overall, I prefer the game in the 80s and 90s to today. I also like the fact the u had more PG's who balanced scoring and assists more evenly. U had pure quarterbacks like Magic, Isiah, KJ, Price, and Tim Hardway who could also dominate scoring the rock. Those who say KJ or Hardaway were shoot first or combo type guards aren't correct. Those guys weren't shoot first players. Now most of the truly dominant PG's are more scoring first or combo guards with the exception of guys like CP3, D Will, or Rondo. Steph Curry those is quickly becoming a Mark Price style PG due to his improved passing ability and looks to join the guys like Magic, Isiah, Price CP3, etc. in terms of great passing and scoring into one.

[ssginc]

Payton was complaining about free throws? Maybe someone should let The Glove know that MJ peaked at 12 fta per game lol Followed up the next two years with 11 and 10 and 9.

Let's compare peak streaks for 4 consecutive seasons between MJ and LBJ

Jordan:
11.9 - 10.5 - 9.8 - 8.5 = 40.7 / 4 = 10.175

LeBron:
10.3 - 9.0 - 10.3 - 9.4 = 39 / 4 = 9.75

This year Durant is leading the league with most fta per game with 10.0

Let's look at the "good ol days" and see if anyone was drawing more fouls per game?


You also have to take into account how many FG the player/s take.

Here's Jordan during that 4 year period you brought up:

11.9 FTA on 27.8 FGA
10.5 / 24.4
9.8 / 22.2
8.5 / 24.0

To put that in perspective, Durant is averaging 10 FTA on just 19.4 FTA this year. Harden takes 9.1 FTA on just 16.5 FGA, Lebron 7.3 FTA while taking only 16.1 FGA, etc.

Today's players go to the FT line at a much higher rate.

[Rocketswin2013]

this is one of the reasons i think a players like charles barkley would not have stats he has back in the day. most of his game was backing the defender from pretty much close to 3 pt line. you just can't do that now.
He most probably would have the same impact on the game offensively if he got a good coach as he would still be a great weapon to bait players into doubling him leaving open jumpers for role players. His PPG stats would take a hit though.
His rebounding numbers will stay the same or might even increase.
His bad defense will be exposed though just like harden is exposed. although i believe he would do a better job than harden, he would still have to improve a lot to not be a negative on defense.
both offensive and defensive schemes by even mid tier teams are getting more and more complex every year. just watch this year's playoff. last season, san antonio used to run 2 and some time even more than 2 screens to free tony parker.
If defense was as weak as payton said, there wouldn't be any need for it. Hand checking with current rules will result in all good defensive teams holding even good teams to score of 60s or at most 70s. that is it.
Pace of the game has actually slowed a little as compared to most of the 90s.
Just because old players can't think of ways to play defense without hand checking doesn't mean that today's pros can't. they are doing it and doing it well.
Charles Barkley was a pick and pop savant and an other wordly offensive rebounder. He mastered the midrange jumpshot and was a physical mismatch on the low-block because of his enormous amount of strength and lower center of gravity. On top of that, he was faster than every PF in the NBA not named Blake Griffin.

And the NBA is no taller than it was in the 90's you stupid ****.

[diamenz]

today's game is nothing but a bunch of show and no substance. three point chucking and wide open lanes if you get around your fifth pick of the play.

it's just like today's rap - all show and no substance.

[atljonesbro]

I only read the Gary Payton quote
Gary Payton is delusional.

[SHAQisGOAT]

Just going through this thread... :biggums: The amount of ignorance in some posts is ridiculous :facepalm Article in the OP pretty shitty too :facepalm

[DonDadda59]

I don't know but I basically agree with the article. I think today's game is at the very least a better game to watch than the 90's to early 00's product. The game back then was lower scoring with very rough defense, and the offense was more on isos and and less ball movement. It was the time of AI, and even though I'm a big Sixer fan, I thought the game regressed overall partly because of him.

Guess it depends on your personal taste, but give me a competitive grind out game where guys earn their points and are allowed to show emotion vs constantly chucking 3s (25.7% of shots taken in the league are 3s last I checked) and weak touch fouls and whistles blown for a guy frowning. Ratings say the general public agrees.

[Shade8780]

I only read the Gary Payton quote
RONDOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOO!!

[Da_Realist]

today's game is nothing but a bunch of show and no substance. three point chucking and wide open lanes if you get around your fifth pick of the play.

it's just like today's rap - all show and no substance.


Guess it depends on your personal taste, but give me a competitive grind out game where guys earn their points and are allowed to show emotion vs constantly chucking 3s (25.7% of shots taken in the league are 3s last I checked) and weak touch fouls and whistles blown for a guy frowning. Ratings say the general public agrees.

Yep. I don't even need to read the previous pages. ^^ sums it up.

[Rocketswin2013]

Barlkley would have to play shooting guard in today's era but he would struggle even then. Today u gotta be 7 foot to play as a big. Barkley would get owned by the size of modern players inside since he was only bout 6 4 but he is not skilled enough or quick enough to handle players his size like Westbrook or Irving. They'd cross him up bad and blow by him with their modern athleticism. Some players from the past could play today maybe but Barkley ain't one of em.
Idiot HOF nominee.

[Calabis]

game's constantly improving, it's called progress. old people always in fear of it

If that's the case, please explain the lack of stars in college basketball?

[tontoz]

this is one of the reasons i think a players like charles barkley would not have stats he has back in the day. most of his game was backing the defender from the 3 point line.


One of the dumbest things i have seen on this site. Barkley could not be guarded by anyone 1 on 1 and the same would be true today. He could get position down low routinely and would do the same now. The main difference is that he would be shooting a lot more foul shots in today's game.

[Calabis]

Kobe Bryant on today's game:

[Calabis]

One of the dumbest things i have seen on this site. Barkley could not be guarded by anyone 1 on 1 and the same would be true today. He could get position down low routinely and would do the same now. The main difference is that he would be shooting a lot more foul shots in today's game.

:applause:

Totally agree, he's a moron for that statement

[DonDadda59]

[QUOTE=Calabis]Kobe Bryant on today's game:

[plowking]

The game is so much more structured today. Defense is on another level in terms of setting up, containing and forcing into bad shots.
For that very reason, offense relies a lot more on moving the ball and getting the whole team involved instead of feeding it into a player, or letting a player work his way on the perimeter.
Its just a hell of a lot harder these days to dominate the game as an individual. Teams collapse on you, trap, and are far more organized than they've ever been.

What people don't seem to understand is that basketball is a relatively young game, and hence the progress in actual level of play is still increasing. Obviously not like the increase in level experienced from 1960 to 1980, but even now, from 1990 to 2010, there has been improvements to the game. Seeing as it is relatively new, management techniques are one of the things that really push the game. Players are simply taught to be more effective these days, and that is undeniable.

[Calabis]

I find myself sitting here nodding in agreement with Bean? :biggums:

Brave new world.

Matt Barnes tweets (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1728771-clippers-swingman-matt-barnes-calls-the-nba-so-soft-now-on-twitter):

Watching this Pistons v Celtics from 85.. Where u had to #REALLY foul some1 to hear the whistle. #NoFlopping #NoCharges (cont)

You could hand check. Wat happened to that style of play? #REALHOOP!! The NBA is so soft now, but I guess u can say that bout all sports smh

[DonDadda59]

The game is so much more structured today. Defense is on another level in terms of setting up, containing and forcing into bad shots.
For that very reason, offense relies a lot more on moving the ball and getting the whole team involved instead of feeding it into a player, or letting a player work his way on the perimeter.
Its just a hell of a lot harder these days to dominate the game as an individual. Teams collapse on you, trap, and are far more organized than they've ever been.


Nothing but nonsense above. Post '06 guys have been dominating games individually from the perimeter in ways that never happened outside of Jordan and handful of other individuals Historically.

Just look at that '06 season alone. How many perimeter guys set career scoring highs that season/postseason? But you mean to tell me defenses advanced after the previous summer's rules changes to hinder them? :oldlol:

And then you have a guy like LeBron with a questionable mid range game shooting near 60% as a perimeter player and a twig like Durant living at the free throw line despite taking 6 3s per game (over a quarter of his total shots)?

Seriously?

[tontoz]

Payton was complaining about free throws? Maybe someone should let The Glove know that MJ peaked at 12 fta per game lol Followed up the next two years with 11 and 10 and 9.

Let's compare peak streaks for 4 consecutive seasons between MJ and LBJ

Jordan:
11.9 - 10.5 - 9.8 - 8.5 = 40.7 / 4 = 10.175

LeBron:
10.3 - 9.0 - 10.3 - 9.4 = 39 / 4 = 9.75

This year Durant is leading the league with most fta per game with 10.0

Let's look at the "good ol days" and see if anyone was drawing more fouls per game?

2000:

Shaq 10.4
Stackhouse 9.3

2001:

Shaq 13.1
Iverson: 10.1
Stackhouse: 10.1

2002:

Shaq 10.7
Iverson: 9.8

2003:

Shaq 10.3
McGrady: 9.7
Pierce: 9.5

I think you get my point...Durant's 10 fta per game is his recent single season high (if you are counting his last 4 season). And we all feel he is getting a very generous helping of fta this season, too. Take his last 2 seasons, where he was 9.3 and 7.6, respectively. He doesn't even shake a stick at others on the list. (Shaq was intentionally fouled a bunch, I already know this :P).


Another idiotic post. Durant is a jump shooter who scores only 6.4 ppg inside, same as their pg Westbrook.

http://www.82games.com/1314/13OKC8.HTM

Yet he still takes 10 fts per game.

Jordan attempted 12 fts per game in his 3rd season on 28 shots per game. He only took 66 3 pointers the whole season. He attacked the basket constantly.

And of course all of Shaq's shot attempts were within 10 feet. He didn't take any perimeter jumpers.

Comparing Durant to guys like Jordan and Shaq sets a new standard for stupidity.

[DonDadda59]

Another idiotic post. Durant is a jump shooter who scores only 6.4 ppg inside, same as their pg Westbrook.

http://www.82games.com/1314/13OKC8.HTM

Yet he still takes 10 fts per game.

Jordan attempted 12 fts per game in his 3rd season on 28 shots per game. He only took 66 3 pointers the whole season. He attacked the basket constantly.

And of course all of Shaq's shot attempts were within 10 feet. He didn't take any perimeter jumpers.

Comparing Durant to guys like Jordan and Shaq sets a new standard for stupidity.

Exactly. The league explicitly changed the rules in the middle of the last decade to make life easier for perimeter players in an attempt to manufacture more 'Next Jordans'. Yet you have people sitting there trying to convince themselves defenses have 'advanced' to stop them? :oldlol:

2013-14 NBA Scoring Leaders

1) Kevin Durant 31.8
2) Carmelo Anthony 28.1
3) LeBron James 27.0
4) Kevin Love 26.5
5) James Harden 24.6

*Kevin Love takes 6.4 3 attempts per game (over 1/3 of his shots)*

1993-94 NBA Scoring Leaders

1) David Robinson 29.8
2) Shaquille O'Neal 29.3
3) Hakeem Olajuwon 27.3
4) Dominique Wilkins 26.0
5) Karl Malone 25.2

Jordan 89-93: 8.2 FTA (23.4 FGA/ 1.9 3s)
Durant '10-'14: 9.2 FTA (19.5 FGA/ 4.9 3s)

But yeah, defenses are so advanced and are designed to stop perimeter guys from getting theirs :durantunimpressed:

[FKAri]

Defense is more advanced; players are more athletic; players are better shooters. That's about it really.

[SHAQisGOAT]

Defense is more advanced; players are more athletic; players are better shooters. That's about it really.


Not really; better and more advanced suplements, regiments, equipment and medicine.. yes; you mean better 3PT shooters, on average/overall, also coming up with the line and game more "focused" on it. That's that, really.

[atljonesbro]

The game is definitely more progressed. 80s, 90s was more about just throwing it to your star 1 on 1 and hoping he outplays the defender. Today it's more of a team effort to put the ball in the basket. And defense has progressed as well. Players have to actually stay in front of their man rather than leaning on the crutch of being "physical".

[SHAQisGOAT]

The game is definitely more progressed. 80s, 90s was more about just throwing it to your star 1 on 1 and hoping he outplays the defender. Today it's more of a team effort to put the ball in the basket. And defense has progressed as well. Players have to actually stay in front of their man rather than leaning on the crutch of being "physical".

:roll: :roll:

Majority of what you've said is actually the other way around. Only thing right is that the game was more physical.

[Asukal]

The game is definitely more progressed. 80s, 90s was more about just throwing it to your star 1 on 1 and hoping he outplays the defender. Today it's more of a team effort to put the ball in the basket. And defense has progressed as well. Players have to actually stay in front of their man rather than leaning on the crutch of being "physical".

ZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzz......... :sleeping

Can people like you stop posting your ignorant opinions please.... :facepalm

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

The game is definitely more progressed. 80s, 90s was more about just throwing it to your star 1 on 1 and hoping he outplays the defender. Today it's more of a team effort to put the ball in the basket. And defense has progressed as well. Players have to actually stay in front of their man rather than leaning on the crutch of being "physical".

Yeah, back when guys played with sticks and stones :eek:

[DonDadda59]

The game is definitely more progressed. 80s, 90s was more about just throwing it to your star 1 on 1 and hoping he outplays the defender. Today it's more of a team effort to put the ball in the basket. And defense has progressed as well. Players have to actually stay in front of their man rather than leaning on the crutch of being "physical".

Again, why do people like to spew bullshit like no one can check to see if it's true or not?

1993-94 Team Assist #s (League Pace AVG 95.1): 24.4 APG
2013-14 Team Assist #s (League Pace AVG 94.1): 21.9 APG

Where do you people get this shit from? :confusedshrug:

And this so called defensive progression is not showing up in stats nor the ole eye test.

Seriously doe... where are you people getting this horseshit from?

[ILLsmak]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-cG7uUBYxo

if you're gonna ask GP what's up you gotta let him hold a pool cue.

-Smak

[50_40_90_]

Here's Barkley playing like a modern day stretch 4 to win the game no less
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5nW4R_Iz40

[305Baller]

I agree with Dwyer. 90s bball was like boxing. 2 guys going at it iso and it was not very fun to watch most of the time.

[DonDadda59]

I agree with Dwyer. 90s bball was like boxing. 2 guys going at it iso and it was not very fun to watch most of the time.

Again... where are you getting this from? Show me stats/numbers to back up your claim. Team APG were highest in the 80s-90s, even when the pace was comparable to today (as I showed above). And if the game was 'not very fun to watch'... why have ratings gone down since the 90s?

I keep hearing people spewing a lot of bullshit that clearly is not based in reality. I'm convinced you guys are just parroting what you heard/read someone say (like the hack 'journalist' in the OP). Is anyone going to try to justify their ridiculous claims with anything factual? :confusedshrug:

[King Jane]

the game is better today, more evolved athletes, more coaching schemes and statistics, most past players would be too slow and confused to play today its just a superior more complex game that requires more athleticism now

[Rocketswin2013]

the game is better today, more evolved athletes, more coaching schemes and statistics, most past players would be too slow and confused to play today its just a superior more complex game that requires more athleticism now
You stupid ****. My God.


What do you think they were blind monkeys? Every star player in the 90's from Chris Mullin to Michael Jordan would be at least as great.

[DonDadda59]

the game is better today, more evolved athletes, more coaching schemes and statistics, most past players would be too slow and confused to play today its just a superior more complex game that requires more athleticism now

Leading Scorer 1993-94:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-PIOw3PshPoU/UMlla8-EYqI/AAAAAAAA9a8/wobt0j83XSA/s1600/David+Robinson.jpg

# 2 Scorer & # 2 Rebounder 1993-94:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_4N7Ur2aSFsA/S2M-jrJ2ATI/AAAAAAAADP0/oVb2yUquf5A/s400/shaq_orlando.jpg

http://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mc7qu6Jvi01rgx7ico1_400.gif

Leading Scorer 2013-14:

http://a.espncdn.com/i/travel/salary/player_durant.png

"According to the Times, Durant was the only prospect at camp who failed to bench press 185 pounds..."

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2007/news/story?id=2894925

#4 Scorer & # 3 Rebounder 2013-14:

http://lh6.ggpht.com/-n8YitXNG368/Tt1h_KkULII/AAAAAAAABpo/y605pnfCrcg/kevin-love.png




:durantunimpressed:

[Round Mound]

Leading Scorer 1993-94:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-PIOw3PshPoU/UMlla8-EYqI/AAAAAAAA9a8/wobt0j83XSA/s1600/David+Robinson.jpg

# 2 Scorer & # 2 Rebounder 1993-94:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_4N7Ur2aSFsA/S2M-jrJ2ATI/AAAAAAAADP0/oVb2yUquf5A/s400/shaq_orlando.jpg

http://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mc7qu6Jvi01rgx7ico1_400.gif

Leading Scorer 2013-14:

http://a.espncdn.com/i/travel/salary/player_durant.png

"According to the Times, Durant was the only prospect at camp who failed to bench press 185 pounds..."

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2007/news/story?id=2894925

#4 Scorer & # 3 Rebounder 2013-14:

http://lh6.ggpht.com/-n8YitXNG368/Tt1h_KkULII/AAAAAAAABpo/y605pnfCrcg/kevin-love.png



:durantunimpressed:

:applause: :confusedshrug:

[diamenz]

man, threads like these really separate the men from the boys don't they?

[plowking]

Again... where are you getting this from? Show me stats/numbers to back up your claim. Team APG were highest in the 80s-90s, even when the pace was comparable to today (as I showed above). And if the game was 'not very fun to watch'... why have ratings gone down since the 90s?

I keep hearing people spewing a lot of bullshit that clearly is not based in reality. I'm convinced you guys are just parroting what you heard/read someone say (like the hack 'journalist' in the OP). Is anyone going to try to justify their ridiculous claims with anything factual? :confusedshrug:

All your posts are hyperbole.

Pace isn't comparable back then as it is to now. The game was a lot quicker.

Ratings really haven't gone down if you want to consider the amount of global fans there are now, the amount that watch on streams, and the amount that watch officially through the NBA app and league pass.
There are more fans than ever these days.

No one is repeating what they've heard. Most of us aren't stuck in the 80's and 90's and keep insisting its better, when it clearly isn't.

What you don't seem to understand is technological progress in a new product. The NBA is still a young product, and will keep getting better.

You point you make about rule changes is just further evidence... :oldlol:
You know what you do to offset something that becomes dominating or overpowering? You change something. Defense was clearly getting too dominant in basketball during the 2000-2004 period, with more advanced techniques and management and it was diminishing the product. Hence you change something.
Yes, in 2006 and 2007, it was a bit easier to score as the changes were excessive, but now the game is as balanced as ever.

Defenses now, on average are better than ever. They let in less points, slow the game down more, and hence it is harder to score. The less points there are in a game, the less an individual can score, etc.

So you're telling me, based on the fact that there are less points in today's game, more advanced defenses, that it isn't harder to take over a game, and actually put points on the board? :oldlol:

[DonDadda59]

All your posts are hyperbole.

F*ck outta here. If I say something I make damn sure I can back it up. Now let's see you do the same:

YOU: "The game is so much more structured today. Defense is on another level in terms of setting up, containing and forcing into bad shots.
For that very reason, offense relies a lot more on moving the ball and getting the whole team involved instead of feeding it into a player, or letting a player work his way on the perimeter.
Its just a hell of a lot harder these days to dominate the game as an individual. Teams collapse on you, trap, and are far more organized than they've ever been."

You go ahead and back up your statements (especially the red) with something tangible and then we'll talk about who's spouting 'hyperbole'.


Pace isn't comparable back then as it is to now. The game was a lot quicker.

93-94 League Wide Average Pace: 95.1
13-14 League Wide Average Pace: 94.1

*'96-97/'03-'04 (90.1 Pace) & '97-'98 (90.3) hold the record for slowest non lockout season pace in league History*


Ratings really haven't gone down if you want to consider the amount of global fans there are now, the amount that watch on streams, and the amount that watch officially through the NBA app and league pass.
There are more fans than ever these days.

Many Regular Season games and all NBA finals are broadcast on channels that every TV set comes come with, no need for streams or league pass. The highest ratings were in the 80s and particularly the 90s and plummeted during the last decade only to even out to early 2000 level ratings.

From last year's finals:



CHART: TV Ratings For The NBA Finals Are The Worst In 5 Years

Through five games of the NBA Finals, the games are averaging just 15.1 million viewers per game.

That is down 10.7% from last year and down 48.0% from their peak in 1998, the final championship of the Michael Jordan-led Chicago Bulls.

If the pattern holds, this will be the third straight year that the ratings have dropped since the Lakers-Celtics series in 2010. That series averaged 18.1 million viewers.

The good news for the NBA is that the last two games both topped 16 million viewers (16.2 for game 4, 16.3 for game 5). And that number will almost certainly go up in game six and a potential game seven. Still, it is unlikely that the series will surpass last year's average of 16.9 million viewers...

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-tv-ratings-for-the-nba-finals-are-the-worst-in-5-years-2013-6#ixzz2wf0VtSZg


Meanwhile, the NFL has been experiencing record breaking ratings virtually every year the last decade+ despite everything you listed above for the NBA. Dress it up however you want, ratings have dropped since the 90s.


No one is repeating what they've heard. Most of us aren't stuck in the 80's and 90's and keep insisting its better, when it clearly isn't.

You people keep making nonsense blanket statements like 'there's more ball movement and less 1 on 1' despite the fact that teams averaged more assists in the 90s (not even getting into the 80s) than teams today, even when pace was comparable. I've shown that with proof, empirical evidence. If you can do the same, I might consider what you're saying as more than just bullshit you heard someone else say.


What you don't seem to understand is technological progress in a new product. The NBA is still a young product, and will keep getting better.

Except a lot of people don't see this so called progress, including guys who play/played in this era (see: Bryant, Kobe).


You point you make about rule changes is just further evidence... :oldlol:

Further evidence of what exactly? The NBA changed the rules to allow more freedom for perimeter players, not restrict them. They even explicitly, on the record, said this.

Again... tell me what happened in the first season these rules were implemented ('05-'06). Was it 'harder for individuals to dominate' or less 1-on-1 going on as you misguidedly claimed? What happened in the finals? :lol


You know what you do to offset something that becomes dominating or overpowering? You change something. Defense was clearly getting too dominant in basketball during the 2000-2004 period, with more advanced techniques and management and it was diminishing the product. Hence you change something.


Yes, and since you're not getting why they changed the rules or what the goal was, I'll let it come straight from the horse's mouth:

Stu Jackson: No. The scoring increase was not our goal. Our objective was to allow for more offensive freedom by not allowing defenders to hand-, forearm- or body-check ball handlers. By doing so, we encouraged more dribble penetration. As players penetrated more, it produced higher quality shots for the ball handler as well as shots for teammates on passes back out to perimeter. When NBA players get higher quality shots — having more time to shoot — they tend to make more of them.

Stu Jackson: It doesn’t. With the rule and interpretation changes, it has become more difficult for defenders to defend penetration, cover the entire floor on defensive rotations and recover to shooters. This has provided more time for shooters to ready themselves for quality shots. With more dribble penetration, ball handlers are getting more opportunities at the rim. Additionally, teams now realize the 3-point shot is a great competitive equalizer, so they are taking more; they have improved their skill level on threes and are making them at a higher rate.


But keep telling yourself they changed the rules to 'advance' defense :lol


Yes, in 2006 and 2007, it was a bit easier to score as the changes were excessive, but now the game is as balanced as ever.

Balanced how? You do realize that Durant is getting considerably more FTA on less shots than Jordan was in the early 90s right? The League right now is playing at it's highest pace since '93-'94, eFG% is at an all time high (not counting the league moving the 3 pt line in the mid 90s). Individual players, specifically on the perimeter, and teams as a whole are having no trouble scoring whatsoever.

How many random role players have scored at least 40 this year alone? :confusedshrug:


Defenses now, on average are better than ever. They let in less points, slow the game down more, and hence it is harder to score. The less points there are in a game, the less an individual can score, etc.

See above.


So you're telling me, based on the fact that there are less points in today's game, more advanced defenses, that it isn't harder to take over a game, and actually put points on the board? :oldlol:

Again, see above.

[diamenz]

[QUOTE=DonDadda59]F*ck outta here. If I say something I make damn sure I can back it up. Now let's see you do the same:

YOU: "The game is so much more structured today. Defense is on another level in terms of setting up, containing and forcing into bad shots.
For that very reason, offense relies a lot more on moving the ball and getting the whole team involved instead of feeding it into a player, or letting a player work his way on the perimeter.
Its just a hell of a lot harder these days to dominate the game as an individual. Teams collapse on you, trap, and are far more organized than they've ever been."

You go ahead and back up your statements (especially the red) with something tangible and then we'll talk about who's spouting 'hyperbole'.



93-94 League Wide Average Pace: 95.1
13-14 League Wide Average Pace: 94.1

*'96-97/'03-'04 (90.1 Pace) & '97-'98 (90.3) hold the record for slowest non lockout season pace in league History*



Many Regular Season games and all NBA finals are broadcast on channels that every TV set comes come with, no need for streams or league pass. The highest ratings were in the 80s and particularly the 90s and plummeted during the last decade only to even out to early 2000 level ratings.

From last year's finals:



CHART: TV Ratings For The NBA Finals Are The Worst In 5 Years

Through five games of the NBA Finals, the games are averaging just 15.1 million viewers per game.

That is down 10.7% from last year and down 48.0% from their peak in 1998, the final championship of the Michael Jordan-led Chicago Bulls.

If the pattern holds, this will be the third straight year that the ratings have dropped since the Lakers-Celtics series in 2010. That series averaged 18.1 million viewers.

The good news for the NBA is that the last two games both topped 16 million viewers (16.2 for game 4, 16.3 for game 5). And that number will almost certainly go up in game six and a potential game seven. Still, it is unlikely that the series will surpass last year's average of 16.9 million viewers...

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-tv-ratings-for-the-nba-finals-are-the-worst-in-5-years-2013-6#ixzz2wf0VtSZg


Meanwhile, the NFL has been experiencing record breaking ratings virtually every year the last decade+ despite everything you listed above for the NBA. Dress it up however you want, ratings have dropped since the 90s.



You people keep making nonsense blanket statements like 'there's more ball movement and less 1 on 1' despite the fact that teams averaged more assists in the 90s (not even getting into the 80s) than teams today, even when pace was comparable. I've shown that with proof, empirical evidence. If you can do the same, I might consider what you're saying as more than just bullshit you heard someone else say.



Except a lot of people don't see this so called progress, including guys who play/played in this era (see: Bryant, Kobe).



Further evidence of what exactly? The NBA changed the rules to allow more freedom for perimeter players, not restrict them. They even explicitly, on the record, said this.

Again... tell me what happened in the first season these rules were implemented ('05-'06). Was it 'harder for individuals to dominate' or less 1-on-1 going on as you misguidedly claimed? What happened in the finals? :lol



Yes, and since you're not getting why they changed the rules or what the goal was, I'll let it come straight from the horse's mouth:

Stu Jackson: No. The scoring increase was not our goal. Our objective was to allow for more offensive freedom by not allowing defenders to hand-, forearm- or body-check ball handlers. By doing so, we encouraged more dribble penetration. As players penetrated more, it produced higher quality shots for the ball handler as well as shots for teammates on passes back out to perimeter. When NBA players get higher quality shots

[chips93]

Barlkley would have to play shooting guard in today's era but he would struggle even then. Today u gotta be 7 foot to play as a big. Barkley would get owned by the size of modern players inside since he was only bout 6 4 but he is not skilled enough or quick enough to handle players his size like Westbrook or Irving. They'd cross him up bad and blow by him with their modern athleticism. Some players from the past could play today maybe but Barkley ain't one of em.

barkley would thrive in the more open pick and roll. he had great handles, and vision for a forward, two great traits for a modern PF.

look at guys like david lee or paul millsap, they make a living just being able to dribble/pass/shoot after rolling on the pick and roll

barkley would be great today as a power forward.

[Calabis]

[QUOTE=DonDadda59]F*ck outta here. If I say something I make damn sure I can back it up. Now let's see you do the same:

YOU: "The game is so much more structured today. Defense is on another level in terms of setting up, containing and forcing into bad shots.
For that very reason, offense relies a lot more on moving the ball and getting the whole team involved instead of feeding it into a player, or letting a player work his way on the perimeter.
Its just a hell of a lot harder these days to dominate the game as an individual. Teams collapse on you, trap, and are far more organized than they've ever been."

You go ahead and back up your statements (especially the red) with something tangible and then we'll talk about who's spouting 'hyperbole'.



93-94 League Wide Average Pace: 95.1
13-14 League Wide Average Pace: 94.1

*'96-97/'03-'04 (90.1 Pace) & '97-'98 (90.3) hold the record for slowest non lockout season pace in league History*



Many Regular Season games and all NBA finals are broadcast on channels that every TV set comes come with, no need for streams or league pass. The highest ratings were in the 80s and particularly the 90s and plummeted during the last decade only to even out to early 2000 level ratings.

From last year's finals:



CHART: TV Ratings For The NBA Finals Are The Worst In 5 Years

Through five games of the NBA Finals, the games are averaging just 15.1 million viewers per game.

That is down 10.7% from last year and down 48.0% from their peak in 1998, the final championship of the Michael Jordan-led Chicago Bulls.

If the pattern holds, this will be the third straight year that the ratings have dropped since the Lakers-Celtics series in 2010. That series averaged 18.1 million viewers.

The good news for the NBA is that the last two games both topped 16 million viewers (16.2 for game 4, 16.3 for game 5). And that number will almost certainly go up in game six and a potential game seven. Still, it is unlikely that the series will surpass last year's average of 16.9 million viewers...

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-tv-ratings-for-the-nba-finals-are-the-worst-in-5-years-2013-6#ixzz2wf0VtSZg


Meanwhile, the NFL has been experiencing record breaking ratings virtually every year the last decade+ despite everything you listed above for the NBA. Dress it up however you want, ratings have dropped since the 90s.



You people keep making nonsense blanket statements like 'there's more ball movement and less 1 on 1' despite the fact that teams averaged more assists in the 90s (not even getting into the 80s) than teams today, even when pace was comparable. I've shown that with proof, empirical evidence. If you can do the same, I might consider what you're saying as more than just bullshit you heard someone else say.



Except a lot of people don't see this so called progress, including guys who play/played in this era (see: Bryant, Kobe).



Further evidence of what exactly? The NBA changed the rules to allow more freedom for perimeter players, not restrict them. They even explicitly, on the record, said this.

Again... tell me what happened in the first season these rules were implemented ('05-'06). Was it 'harder for individuals to dominate' or less 1-on-1 going on as you misguidedly claimed? What happened in the finals? :lol



Yes, and since you're not getting why they changed the rules or what the goal was, I'll let it come straight from the horse's mouth:

Stu Jackson: No. The scoring increase was not our goal. Our objective was to allow for more offensive freedom by not allowing defenders to hand-, forearm- or body-check ball handlers. By doing so, we encouraged more dribble penetration. As players penetrated more, it produced higher quality shots for the ball handler as well as shots for teammates on passes back out to perimeter. When NBA players get higher quality shots

[TheMan]

:eek: Damn I thought I was reading Nas "ether" lyrics......plowking better take his loss and go work on his debate game.
That plowking clown won't be heard from again in this thread, me thinks. He got ethered.:oldlol:

[diamenz]

may as well bump it and give him his chance.

[Soundwave]

Leading Scorer 1993-94:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-PIOw3PshPoU/UMlla8-EYqI/AAAAAAAA9a8/wobt0j83XSA/s1600/David+Robinson.jpg

# 2 Scorer & # 2 Rebounder 1993-94:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_4N7Ur2aSFsA/S2M-jrJ2ATI/AAAAAAAADP0/oVb2yUquf5A/s400/shaq_orlando.jpg

http://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mc7qu6Jvi01rgx7ico1_400.gif

Leading Scorer 2013-14:

http://a.espncdn.com/i/travel/salary/player_durant.png

"According to the Times, Durant was the only prospect at camp who failed to bench press 185 pounds..."

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2007/news/story?id=2894925

#4 Scorer & # 3 Rebounder 2013-14:

http://lh6.ggpht.com/-n8YitXNG368/Tt1h_KkULII/AAAAAAAABpo/y605pnfCrcg/kevin-love.png




:durantunimpressed:

http://gifrific.gifrific.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Magneto-perfection.gif

Even Derrick Coleman ... shown in that Shaq gif having the backboard fall on him :lol would dominate this weak ass crop of modern bigs.

[20Four]

man, threads like these really separate the men from the boys don't they?
Exactly son!! :cheers:

[houston]

yea it is better

[juju151111]

[QUOTE=DonDadda59]F*ck outta here. If I say something I make damn sure I can back it up. Now let's see you do the same:

YOU: "The game is so much more structured today. Defense is on another level in terms of setting up, containing and forcing into bad shots.
For that very reason, offense relies a lot more on moving the ball and getting the whole team involved instead of feeding it into a player, or letting a player work his way on the perimeter.
Its just a hell of a lot harder these days to dominate the game as an individual. Teams collapse on you, trap, and are far more organized than they've ever been."

You go ahead and back up your statements (especially the red) with something tangible and then we'll talk about who's spouting 'hyperbole'.



93-94 League Wide Average Pace: 95.1
13-14 League Wide Average Pace: 94.1

*'96-97/'03-'04 (90.1 Pace) & '97-'98 (90.3) hold the record for slowest non lockout season pace in league History*



Many Regular Season games and all NBA finals are broadcast on channels that every TV set comes come with, no need for streams or league pass. The highest ratings were in the 80s and particularly the 90s and plummeted during the last decade only to even out to early 2000 level ratings.

From last year's finals:



CHART: TV Ratings For The NBA Finals Are The Worst In 5 Years

Through five games of the NBA Finals, the games are averaging just 15.1 million viewers per game.

That is down 10.7% from last year and down 48.0% from their peak in 1998, the final championship of the Michael Jordan-led Chicago Bulls.

If the pattern holds, this will be the third straight year that the ratings have dropped since the Lakers-Celtics series in 2010. That series averaged 18.1 million viewers.

The good news for the NBA is that the last two games both topped 16 million viewers (16.2 for game 4, 16.3 for game 5). And that number will almost certainly go up in game six and a potential game seven. Still, it is unlikely that the series will surpass last year's average of 16.9 million viewers...

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-tv-ratings-for-the-nba-finals-are-the-worst-in-5-years-2013-6#ixzz2wf0VtSZg


Meanwhile, the NFL has been experiencing record breaking ratings virtually every year the last decade+ despite everything you listed above for the NBA. Dress it up however you want, ratings have dropped since the 90s.



You people keep making nonsense blanket statements like 'there's more ball movement and less 1 on 1' despite the fact that teams averaged more assists in the 90s (not even getting into the 80s) than teams today, even when pace was comparable. I've shown that with proof, empirical evidence. If you can do the same, I might consider what you're saying as more than just bullshit you heard someone else say.



Except a lot of people don't see this so called progress, including guys who play/played in this era (see: Bryant, Kobe).



Further evidence of what exactly? The NBA changed the rules to allow more freedom for perimeter players, not restrict them. They even explicitly, on the record, said this.

Again... tell me what happened in the first season these rules were implemented ('05-'06). Was it 'harder for individuals to dominate' or less 1-on-1 going on as you misguidedly claimed? What happened in the finals? :lol



Yes, and since you're not getting why they changed the rules or what the goal was, I'll let it come straight from the horse's mouth:

Stu Jackson: No. The scoring increase was not our goal. Our objective was to allow for more offensive freedom by not allowing defenders to hand-, forearm- or body-check ball handlers. By doing so, we encouraged more dribble penetration. As players penetrated more, it produced higher quality shots for the ball handler as well as shots for teammates on passes back out to perimeter. When NBA players get higher quality shots

[SHAQisGOAT]

Leading Scorer 1993-94:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-PIOw3PshPoU/UMlla8-EYqI/AAAAAAAA9a8/wobt0j83XSA/s1600/David+Robinson.jpg

# 2 Scorer & # 2 Rebounder 1993-94:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_4N7Ur2aSFsA/S2M-jrJ2ATI/AAAAAAAADP0/oVb2yUquf5A/s400/shaq_orlando.jpg

http://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mc7qu6Jvi01rgx7ico1_400.gif

Leading Scorer 2013-14:

http://a.espncdn.com/i/travel/salary/player_durant.png

"According to the Times, Durant was the only prospect at camp who failed to bench press 185 pounds..."

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2007/news/story?id=2894925

#4 Scorer & # 3 Rebounder 2013-14:

http://lh6.ggpht.com/-n8YitXNG368/Tt1h_KkULII/AAAAAAAABpo/y605pnfCrcg/kevin-love.png




:durantunimpressed:


:lol


[QUOTE=DonDadda59]F*ck outta here. If I say something I make damn sure I can back it up. Now let's see you do the same:

YOU: "The game is so much more structured today. Defense is on another level in terms of setting up, containing and forcing into bad shots.
For that very reason, offense relies a lot more on moving the ball and getting the whole team involved instead of feeding it into a player, or letting a player work his way on the perimeter.
Its just a hell of a lot harder these days to dominate the game as an individual. Teams collapse on you, trap, and are far more organized than they've ever been."

You go ahead and back up your statements (especially the red) with something tangible and then we'll talk about who's spouting 'hyperbole'.



93-94 League Wide Average Pace: 95.1
13-14 League Wide Average Pace: 94.1

*'96-97/'03-'04 (90.1 Pace) & '97-'98 (90.3) hold the record for slowest non lockout season pace in league History*



Many Regular Season games and all NBA finals are broadcast on channels that every TV set comes come with, no need for streams or league pass. The highest ratings were in the 80s and particularly the 90s and plummeted during the last decade only to even out to early 2000 level ratings.

From last year's finals:



CHART: TV Ratings For The NBA Finals Are The Worst In 5 Years

Through five games of the NBA Finals, the games are averaging just 15.1 million viewers per game.

That is down 10.7% from last year and down 48.0% from their peak in 1998, the final championship of the Michael Jordan-led Chicago Bulls.

If the pattern holds, this will be the third straight year that the ratings have dropped since the Lakers-Celtics series in 2010. That series averaged 18.1 million viewers.

The good news for the NBA is that the last two games both topped 16 million viewers (16.2 for game 4, 16.3 for game 5). And that number will almost certainly go up in game six and a potential game seven. Still, it is unlikely that the series will surpass last year's average of 16.9 million viewers...

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-tv-ratings-for-the-nba-finals-are-the-worst-in-5-years-2013-6#ixzz2wf0VtSZg


Meanwhile, the NFL has been experiencing record breaking ratings virtually every year the last decade+ despite everything you listed above for the NBA. Dress it up however you want, ratings have dropped since the 90s.



You people keep making nonsense blanket statements like 'there's more ball movement and less 1 on 1' despite the fact that teams averaged more assists in the 90s (not even getting into the 80s) than teams today, even when pace was comparable. I've shown that with proof, empirical evidence. If you can do the same, I might consider what you're saying as more than just bullshit you heard someone else say.



Except a lot of people don't see this so called progress, including guys who play/played in this era (see: Bryant, Kobe).



Further evidence of what exactly? The NBA changed the rules to allow more freedom for perimeter players, not restrict them. They even explicitly, on the record, said this.

Again... tell me what happened in the first season these rules were implemented ('05-'06). Was it 'harder for individuals to dominate' or less 1-on-1 going on as you misguidedly claimed? What happened in the finals? :lol



Yes, and since you're not getting why they changed the rules or what the goal was, I'll let it come straight from the horse's mouth:

Stu Jackson: No. The scoring increase was not our goal. Our objective was to allow for more offensive freedom by not allowing defenders to hand-, forearm- or body-check ball handlers. By doing so, we encouraged more dribble penetration. As players penetrated more, it produced higher quality shots for the ball handler as well as shots for teammates on passes back out to perimeter. When NBA players get higher quality shots

[TheMan]

Where's that mouthy cvnt plowking:confusedshrug:

Well at least he knew well enough to run and fight another day:oldlol:

Don wit dat full on pwnage:bowdown:

[Round Mound]

http://gifrific.gifrific.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Magneto-perfection.gif

Even Derrick Coleman ... shown in that Shaq gif having the backboard fall on him :lol would dominate this weak ass crop of modern bigs.

Derrick Coleman Would Feast in This Era. He Had More Potential than Webber and Garnett to Be A Top 5 All Time PF. He Was Even More Lazy Than Freak Sir Charles Was.

Sir Charles Would Destroy This Soft League With Ease Today. No One Could Guard Him In The Post or Off The Dribble 1 on 1.

[CasterL]

[QUOTE=DonDadda59]F*ck outta here. If I say something I make damn sure I can back it up. Now let's see you do the same:

YOU: "The game is so much more structured today. Defense is on another level in terms of setting up, containing and forcing into bad shots.
For that very reason, offense relies a lot more on moving the ball and getting the whole team involved instead of feeding it into a player, or letting a player work his way on the perimeter.
Its just a hell of a lot harder these days to dominate the game as an individual. Teams collapse on you, trap, and are far more organized than they've ever been."

You go ahead and back up your statements (especially the red) with something tangible and then we'll talk about who's spouting 'hyperbole'.



93-94 League Wide Average Pace: 95.1
13-14 League Wide Average Pace: 94.1

*'96-97/'03-'04 (90.1 Pace) & '97-'98 (90.3) hold the record for slowest non lockout season pace in league History*



Many Regular Season games and all NBA finals are broadcast on channels that every TV set comes come with, no need for streams or league pass. The highest ratings were in the 80s and particularly the 90s and plummeted during the last decade only to even out to early 2000 level ratings.

From last year's finals:



CHART: TV Ratings For The NBA Finals Are The Worst In 5 Years

Through five games of the NBA Finals, the games are averaging just 15.1 million viewers per game.

That is down 10.7% from last year and down 48.0% from their peak in 1998, the final championship of the Michael Jordan-led Chicago Bulls.

If the pattern holds, this will be the third straight year that the ratings have dropped since the Lakers-Celtics series in 2010. That series averaged 18.1 million viewers.

The good news for the NBA is that the last two games both topped 16 million viewers (16.2 for game 4, 16.3 for game 5). And that number will almost certainly go up in game six and a potential game seven. Still, it is unlikely that the series will surpass last year's average of 16.9 million viewers...

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-tv-ratings-for-the-nba-finals-are-the-worst-in-5-years-2013-6#ixzz2wf0VtSZg


Meanwhile, the NFL has been experiencing record breaking ratings virtually every year the last decade+ despite everything you listed above for the NBA. Dress it up however you want, ratings have dropped since the 90s.



You people keep making nonsense blanket statements like 'there's more ball movement and less 1 on 1' despite the fact that teams averaged more assists in the 90s (not even getting into the 80s) than teams today, even when pace was comparable. I've shown that with proof, empirical evidence. If you can do the same, I might consider what you're saying as more than just bullshit you heard someone else say.



Except a lot of people don't see this so called progress, including guys who play/played in this era (see: Bryant, Kobe).



Further evidence of what exactly? The NBA changed the rules to allow more freedom for perimeter players, not restrict them. They even explicitly, on the record, said this.

Again... tell me what happened in the first season these rules were implemented ('05-'06). Was it 'harder for individuals to dominate' or less 1-on-1 going on as you misguidedly claimed? What happened in the finals? :lol



Yes, and since you're not getting why they changed the rules or what the goal was, I'll let it come straight from the horse's mouth:

Stu Jackson: No. The scoring increase was not our goal. Our objective was to allow for more offensive freedom by not allowing defenders to hand-, forearm- or body-check ball handlers. By doing so, we encouraged more dribble penetration. As players penetrated more, it produced higher quality shots for the ball handler as well as shots for teammates on passes back out to perimeter. When NBA players get higher quality shots

[russwest0]

"Basically everything. It's no defense, it's just run and gun. To me, there's only three point guards in the NBA that impress me; I got Chris Paul, Rondo, and another kid that I like a lot and I forgot his name right now. Oh, and Tony Parker. That's only three NBA players in there.

There's too much touch fouls. Every time you touch and they stay on the free throw line. That's no way to watch basketball. When we were playing, it was rough and tough. Even superstars like me fouled out a lot. That's because they let people play, and if you do something then you call it. But nowadays it's not like that and this is the era.

This is what kids want to see. You see these Playstations, they scoring 50 and 60 with one player, that's what they want to see on TV and I don't go with that. My era, give me one-on-one with somebody and stop him and right now you can't do that with a player because if you touch him he's going to the foul line and you're fouling out. Let him be rough. If he got an opportunity to go at you in the offensive end, let me go at him on the defensive end and rough him up. So that's the way I like basketball and I don't think it's like that."

Holy shit, Payton is 100% correct.

Guys are playing the game like football now. Watch LeBron. No artistry whatsoever, just lowering his head down and barreling into the lane and defender to go to the FT line. Guys are playing the game like it's football. Naismith is rolling in his grave right now. Real shit.

[Yi Jianlin]

無.

[juju151111]

Holy shit, Payton is 100% correct.

Guys are playing the game like football now. Watch LeBron. No artistry whatsoever, just lowering his head down and barreling into the lane and defender to go to the FT line. Guys are playing the game like it's football. Naismith is rolling in his grave right now. Real shit.
:applause: ......

[plowking]

I didn't realize people in here were waiting for a response from me, or having a massive circle jerk with Dondadda. lol...

If you actually read my post, and his, you'll see I agree with him on a large chunk, and that the whole post that was referenced towards me, only covered the bit I agreed with him on... lol.

I'll dumb it down for some of you since none of you seemed to get it lol...

Defenses got too advanced and overwhelming during 98-04.
This diminished the product, causing a game that was far more dominant on one side than the other (defense being the dominant).
Rule changes made to restore game to its previous free flowing ways on offense like that prior to that of 98-04 period.


Defenses have to be more organized and structurally sound than before. There is more freedom for players now. They have been given the luxury of zone now though which makes it easier to stop single superstar players, as zone forces ball movement and for a team to swing the ball. It actually encourages team play.
Its a lot harder now to dominate the game as an individual than before. Look at scoring among the stars in the league today. It essentially continues to go down on average since the start of basketball, outside of the full on defensive period of 98-04.

[DonDadda59]

And the last horse finally crosses the finish line :applause:



Defenses have to be more organized and structurally sound than before. There is more freedom for players now. They have been given the luxury of zone now though which makes it easier to stop single superstar players, as zone forces ball movement and for a team to swing the ball. It actually encourages team play.

Tell the good people what the preponderance of zone defense is in the league. Which teams play it the most and at what percentage of their defensive possessions.

Thanks.


Its a lot harder now to dominate the game as an individual than before. Look at scoring among the stars in the league today. It essentially continues to go down on average since the start of basketball, outside of the full on defensive period of 98-04.

Again... what the hell are you talking about? :lol

Please tell us, a couple of days removed from Durant scoring 51, how exactly it's harder for individuals to dominate today... especially perimeter defenders. Point to a time in the 90s when perimeter players were scoring as much as perimeter players in the era post no touching/3 sec violation rules.

Take as many days to formulate a response as you need (even though you still haven't responded to my last post :lol )

[plowking]

And the last horse finally crosses the finish line :applause:



Tell the good people what the preponderance of zone defense is in the league. Which teams play it the most and at what percentage of their defensive possessions.

Thanks.



Again... what the hell are you talking about? :lol

Please tell us, a couple of days removed from Durant scoring 51, how exactly it's harder for individuals to dominate today... especially perimeter defenders. Point to a time in the 90s when perimeter players were scoring as much as perimeter players in the era post no touching/3 sec violation rules.

Take as many days to formulate a response as you need (even though you still haven't responded to my last post :lol )


I don't need to respond to your last post, it essentially agreed with me.

Perimeter scoring is easier today?


Kiki Vandeweghe was scoring 30ppg in the 80's.
Mark Aquirre was putting up 30ppg in the 80's.
Alex English was putting up 30ppg in the 80's.

All of them did it on above 50% shooting. Am I to believe these guys are all better scorers than Durant, and if they played today their ppg and shooting percentages would all go up?
Its easier to score today, right? That means Kiki would be a 35ppg scorer today and the best player in the league. Right?
How about Aquirre? Same deal?

All of them are clearly more multi-faceted and dangerous than Durant at scoring. Better players too, right?
Wait... They're not? How in the world are they putting up comparable, if not, better scoring numbers then?

Hmm...

[DonDadda59]

I don't need to respond to your last post, it essentially agreed with me.

Perimeter scoring is easier today?


Kiki Vandeweghe was scoring 30ppg in the 80's.
Mark Aquirre was putting up 30ppg in the 80's.
Alex English was putting up 30ppg in the 80's.

All of them did it on above 50% shooting. Am I to believe these guys are all better scorers than Durant, and if they played today their ppg and shooting percentages would all go up?
Its easier to score today, right? That means Kiki would be a 35ppg scorer today and the best player in the league. Right?
How about Aquirre? Same deal?

All of them are clearly more multi-faceted and dangerous than Durant at scoring. Better players too, right?
Wait... They're not? How in the world are they putting up comparable, if not, better scoring numbers then?

Hmm...

Are you high? :oldlol:

Why are you talking about the 80s first of all, look at the damn thread title and what I've been discussing since I came into this thread. And for the record, even though it's completely unrelated to the discussion at hand, guys like Kiki and English (especially Alex) would flourish in this era. Not the sort of super strong, ultra athletes that Durant clearly is (:oldlol: ) but they were guys who could get theirs from mid range, drives, post ups without relying on 3s aka what the shorter Wade (22 PPG on 51% this decade) or Parker (18 PPG 51% FG this decade) do. The Nuggets played at very high paces in the 80s, so adjusted for the average today, their numbers would probably be in the neighborhood of those two.

But back on topic... I would love it if for once you actually backed up what you said with some factual evidence. Now I asked you direct questions and would appreciate you actually answering them for once.

I've taken the time to address your nonsensical bullshit with reality. The least you could do is try to repay the favor.

[plowking]

Are you high? :oldlol:

Why are you talking about the 80s first of all, look at the damn thread title and what I've been discussing since I came into this thread. And for the record, even though it's completely unrelated to the discussion at hand, guys like Kiki and English (especially Alex) would flourish in this era. Not the sort of super strong, ultra athletes that Durant clearly is (:oldlol: ) but they were guys who could get theirs from mid range, drives, post ups without relying on 3s aka what the shorter Wade (22 PPG on 51% this decade) or Parker (18 PPG 51% FG this decade).

But back on topic... I would love it if for once you actually backed up what you said with some factual evidence. Now I asked you direct questions and would appreciate you actually answering them for once.

I've taken the time to address your nonsensical bullshit with reality. The least you could do is try to repay the favor.

The 80's had even less rule restrictions than the 90's in terms of physical play and handchecking. Its just a follow on.
You're essentially claiming that a more physical era with less rules dedicated to restrict the handchecking in game, results in a better defensive era with more difficulty to score from the perimeter. If we go even further back, we'd keep noticing what you claim to be true, isn't in fact true.

I have backed up what I said with factual evidence. Outside of the 98-04 era, you'd notice that perimeter scoring keeps going down in terms of superstars.
There is a reason for it. More organized defenses with better systems to stop individual players.

[plowking]

What is even funnier is, you have the nerve to mock the 60's and Bill Russell (claiming he'd be a Noah guy in this era), yet you hold on to the 90's being the best, and if anyone dare make that assertion about that era, you flip.

What a coincidence. Someone who grew up in the 90's, thinks that there era is the best... No way.

You see no wrong in you doing it to previous eras, yet won't have it done to the one you love.

Biggest hypocrite on here... lol.

[DonDadda59]

The 80's had even less rule restrictions than the 90's in terms of physical play and handchecking. Its just a follow on.
You're essentially claiming that a more physical era with less rules dedicated to restrict the handchecking in game, results in a better defensive era with more difficulty to score from the perimeter. If we go even further back, we'd keep noticing what you claim to be true, isn't in fact true.

I have backed up what I said with factual evidence. Outside of the 98-04 era, you'd notice that perimeter scoring keeps going down in terms of superstars.
There is a reason for it. More organized defenses with better systems to stop individual players.

Dis Nigguh.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-mKhIjnHeCJU/UVEsxv32BYI/AAAAAAAAA2I/BsWbovk3gjY/s1600/Grumpy%20Cat.png

Show me where you did that :oldlol:

Show me where you showed, with factual evidence, that defenses are forcing less 1-on-1/more ball movement and that teams are limiting individual dominance. You show me ONE season from 90-99 where perimeter players were scoring more as a whole than they are since the rule changes of '05-'06. Just ONE.

Then show me the factual evidence that proves teams are relying on 'zone' to accomplish these goals. What is the preponderance of zone use in the league? Which teams in particular use the zone most and what success rate do they have on defense. What are individual stars averaging against these 'zone' dominant teams?

Come on now. Clearly you know what you're talking about right? You're not just talking out of your ass repeating some bullshit you heard/read somewhere else, right?

Give us something... anything.

[plowking]

Show me where you showed, with factual evidence, that defenses are forcing less 1-on-1/more ball movement and that teams are limiting individual dominance. You show me ONE season from 90-99 where perimeter players were scoring more as a whole than they are since the rule changes of '05-'06. Just ONE.

Look at the amount of 30ppg scorers in today's league, or anyone close for that matter. One year we had Durant win with 27.7ppg. Its a rarity to see an individual player get up there like previous eras. If teams were smart, they'd keep giving it to Lebron and Durant, the NBA high scorers, since they're shooting 50+% and above the team average. Yet, both for the most part only average around 26-28ppg. That's evidence enough that teams are getting it out of the hands of the team's best player.
Ignoring right after the rule change, these last 5 or so years, players have had a hard time reaching anywhere near 30ppg outside of Durant. Not exactly the case in the 90's and prior.
Is it just coincidence there were more 30ppg scorers during Mike's playing tenure?


Then show me the factual evidence that proves teams are relying on 'zone' to accomplish these goals. What is the preponderance of zone use in the league? Which teams in particular use the zone most and what success rate do they have on defense. What are individual stars averaging against these 'zone' dominant teams?

Go look at the recent championship Celtics and Mavs. Both used it.
In fact, both these championship teams used it against Kobe and Bron respectively, with each having a rather average to terrible series because of it.

[DonDadda59]

Look at the amount of 30ppg scorers in today's league, or anyone close for that matter. One year we had Durant win with 27.7ppg. Its a rarity to see an individual player get up there like previous eras. If teams were smart, they'd keep giving it to Lebron and Durant, the NBA high scorers, since they're shooting 50+% and above the team average. Yet, both for the most part only average around 26-28ppg. That's evidence enough that teams are getting it out of the hands of the team's best player.
Ignoring right after the rule change, these last 5 or so years, players have had a hard time reaching anywhere near 30ppg outside of Durant. Not exactly the case in the 90's and prior.
Is it just coincidence there were more 30ppg scorers during Mike's playing tenure?

Whole lot of rambling to say absolutely nothing. I asked you to point me to specific seasons where in the 90s, perimeter players as a whole were putting up more points than this era. Instead of admitting you couldn't because it obviously never happened, you talk in circles. Jordan was an anomaly in his era and it was never more clear than when he retired in '93. Yet in '06 you had the 5'11" 165 Iverson putting up 33 PPG and since then the scoring leadership has been dominated by perimeter players.



Go look at the recent championship Celtics and Mavs. Both used it.
In fact, both these championship teams used it against Kobe and Bron respectively, with each having a rather average to terrible series because of it.

And since you ducked my question yet again, I'll do your damn homework for you.

From the '11-'12 Season, the top 3 teams who used zone the most:


The Golden State Warriors play zone 10.3% of the time, followed by the Charlotte Bobcats (9.3%) and Toronto Raptors (7.5%), according to Synergy Sports, which tracks every NBA play and provides in-depth statistical analysis.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/basketball/nba/story/2012-01-17/zone-defense-has-found-its-place-in-the-nba/52657598/1

Defensive rankings of those teams

Golden State Warriors: 27th/30 in DRTG, 28th/30 in PA
Charlotte Bobcats: 30th/30 in DRTG, 27th/30 in PA
Toronto Raptors: 14th/30 in DRTG, 9th/30 in PA

So the team that played 'zone' 3rd most (a whopping 7.5% of the time) was middle of the pack defensively.

From 2009 (8 years after 'zone' was introduced)



'Subtly, Zone Defense Helps Open N.B.A. Game', NY Times 2/27/09

The game’s elite players did not embrace zone defenses when they were introduced to the N.B.A. in 2001. They saw them as an infringement on the purity of their professional game.

Shaquille O’Neal detested the concept. Kobe Bryant feared his drives to the basket would be hindered by clogged lanes. So did Vince Carter.

“Hated it,” Carter, of the Nets, said recently. “A lot of guys did. It just changed the style of the game, especially if you played years before that, like myself. I wasn’t too excited about it, but as the years have gone by, the old ways have passed us by. So, you adapt to what’s going on.”

But the effect of zone defenses, since they became legal in the 2001-2 season, has been noticeable only to the trained eye. The concept of guarding areas instead of players is used fleetingly. It is largely viewed as a gimmick to be avoided in a league in which nearly everyone agrees that each player should be held accountable for guarding his own man.

To the originators of the change, however, the game is more aesthetically pleasing than before it took effect, when coaches were taking advantage of complex illegal-defense rules that encouraged a stagnant game.

“The game had become heavily reliant on one-on-one and two-on-two basketball,” said Stu Jackson, the league’s executive vice president for basketball operations. “The game was not being played the way most experts felt it should be played and that a more free-flowing, up-tempo type of game should be showcased.”

Dismayed by the slowed game and sluggish scoring, the N.B.A.’s competition committee convened in Phoenix, looking to pick up the pace. Owners endorsed changes that trimmed the time allotted to move the ball to the frontcourt to 8 seconds from 10 and eliminated the illegal-defense rules.

“No one knew what illegal defense was,” said Jerry Colangelo, a former owner of the Suns who was the chairman of the committee. “It was kind of left to the eye of the beholder.”

Zone defense, widely used in high school and college basketball, was also introduced with a significant caveat. The committee instituted a three-second rule for defenders in order to prevent teams from parking taller players in the post. The goal was to free the lanes and encourage cuts and drives through the paint.

With those changes, among other factors, offenses have opened up, and scoring has climbed. Teams are averaging 99.7 points a game this season, up from 94.8 in 2000-1, the season before the new rules were introduced. Still, the zone defense has not been embraced in the N.B.A. It is mildly effective in spurts, but often dismissed.

“When you see it in the league, they do it because they can’t guard somebody,” Quentin Richardson of the Knicks said. “If they’re having a hard time stopping this person or that person or a team in general, and they can’t do anything, teams play zone.”

The laundry list of the zone’s shortcomings in the N.B.A. is relatively deep. Long-range shooters are truer in the N.B.A. than at any other level, and open shots are more easily found in the holes of zone defenses. N.B.A. players are better passers, so it is easier for them to whip the ball around the court to find the open man. Teams can grab offensive rebounds more effectively against a zone because opposing players have no set assignments on block-outs.

Then there’s the stigma.

Asked how much zone defense the Cavaliers used, Cleveland Coach Mike Brown said none.

“It almost says, Hey, we can’t guard these guys,” Brown said. “To a certain degree, psychologically, it makes you feel like you’re conceding, and it could be a downer if it doesn’t work.”

Beyond that, some say that N.B.A. coaches are hesitant to install a zone defense simply because they do not have a longstanding history with it or an encompassing knowledge of its intricacies.

“You still have a lot of coaches, general managers and assistant coaches that are old-school former players,” Lakers guard Derek Fisher said. “And the league is based on solid man-to-man principles. That’s how they were taught the game. That’s how they grew up playing the game. And it’s difficult trying to teach something that you don’t necessarily have a great feel for yourself.”

Earlier this season, the Denver Nuggets looked to add wrinkles to their defense, and briefly experimented with zone defenses.

“We practiced one for one week, and it was awful,” Nuggets Coach George Karl said.

The Nets, the Golden State Warriors and the Dallas Mavericks are among the teams incorporating zone defenses to throw offenses off their rhythm or to guard an inbounds pass.

“You spend time teaching your zone and cleaning up your zone,” Nets Coach Lawrence Frank said. “But unless you’re totally committed to zone, you’re not going to spend nearly as much time on zone as you do your man defense. There’s not enough time in the N.B.A. workweek.”

When a team switches to a zone, its opponent can become somewhat flustered. Most N.B.A. teams continue using the offense they would have used against a man-to-man defense.

The reason? If teams do not have enough time to practice a zone defense, they surely do not have time to introduce offenses to attack it.

“When teams do zone, offensively, we’re not ready for it,” Atlanta Hawks Coach Mike Woodson said. “That’s the crazy part behind it. Because you don’t see zone that much, when you do see it, you’re caught off guard.”

Karl said: “My zone offense is to put three guys on the court who can make 3s and have them make a couple.”

But for Jackson, the N.B.A. executive vice president, how much teams use the zone is irrelevant. The goal was to open the floor and encourage a more balanced game.

“Our game today is more five-man orientated,” Jackson said. “The game looks better. There’s not as much standing around.”
[/QUOTE]

Why do people like you act like 'zone' is some unbeatable, super advanced scheme? It's a defense used in the amateurs to hide poor defenders. Guys learn how to beat real zones in middle school/AAU/College. If by the time they get to the league they (and their coaches) don't know how to deal with it, they should have their pay docked.

Zone is nothing but a gimmick in the league and is used sparingly, if at all, by teams. The teams who rely on it by playing man less than 90-95% of the time are usually piss poor defensive teams trying to make up for their lack of defensive personnel. All of the great defensive teams of this, and every era have relied on man principles and schemes.

But again... if you have anything to contradict this, please share with us.

[Dr.J4ever]

[QUOTE=DonDadda59]Whole lot of rambling to say absolutely nothing. I asked you to point me to specific seasons where in the 90s, perimeter players as a whole were putting up more points than this era. Instead of admitting you couldn't because it obviously never happened, you talk in circles. Jordan was an anomaly in his era and it was never more clear than when he retired in '93. Yet in '06 you had the 5'11" 165 Iverson putting up 33 PPG and since then the scoring leadership has been dominated by perimeter players.




And since you ducked my question yet again, I'll do your damn homework for you.

From the '11-'12 Season, the top 3 teams who used zone the most:


The Golden State Warriors play zone 10.3% of the time, followed by the Charlotte Bobcats (9.3%) and Toronto Raptors (7.5%), according to Synergy Sports, which tracks every NBA play and provides in-depth statistical analysis.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/basketball/nba/story/2012-01-17/zone-defense-has-found-its-place-in-the-nba/52657598/1

Defensive rankings of those teams

Golden State Warriors: 27th/30 in DRTG, 28th/30 in PA
Charlotte Bobcats: 30th/30 in DRTG, 27th/30 in PA
Toronto Raptors: 14th/30 in DRTG, 9th/30 in PA

So the team that played 'zone' 3rd most (a whopping 7.5% of the time) was middle of the pack defensively.

From 2009 (8 years after 'zone' was introduced)

[INDENT][I]
'Subtly, Zone Defense Helps Open N.B.A. Game', NY Times 2/27/09

The game

[ThePhantomCreep]

the game is better today, more evolved athletes, more coaching schemes and statistics, most past players would be too slow and confused to play today its just a superior more complex game that requires more athleticism now

Yeah, guys like Robinson, Dream, Chuck, and Malone would be absolutely lost playing against the Kevin Loves and Marc Gasol's of the world.

GTFlyingFOH.

[Rose'sACL]

Yeah, guys like Robinson, Dream, Chuck, and Malone would be absolutely lost playing against the Kevin Loves and Marc Gasol's of the world.

GTFlyingFOH.
Love would average the same or better numbers in any of the past eras. His defense is bad and would be bad in any era. Marc gasol would be top 3-5 defensive C in any era.
Same with Dwight. Orlando Howard would be an elite defedor and among dpoy contenders in any era. His offense would not be elite because unlike love, he can't shoot.

[DonDadda59]

The zone played correctly can limit a lot of post-up plays taken for granted during the 90s. The NBA today is a better looking product to the eye, and shooters are arguably much better today than during the 90s when teams played ugly ball, and talent was diluted due to expansion.

1) The 'zone' can't be played correctly with the 3 second rule.

2) Players who actually know how to play in the post (ie, Jefferson, old man Duncan, even broken down Kobe) were/are not in any way 'limited' by 'zone' that most teams don't play for more than 3-4% of their defensive possessions, if at all.

3) As I said earlier in this thread, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Some people prefer the more physical and competitive game found in the 90s. Others prefer the soft European style where every big man wants to be a guard ala today. Fact remains that this 'product that is better looking to the eye'... has less eyes looking at it than it did in the 90s :lol

4) Talent was 'diluted' in the 90s but today you have star players stacking teams, a team with a 29-41 record talking playoffs on TV right now, the Sixers trying to break the Cavaliers loss record (set in 2011).

5) Are shooters really better or are they just playing under better conditions? I mean when you look at game tape from the 80s-90s, especially before handchecking from the foul line extended was outlawed- you notice PGs used to have to back down their defender after hitting half court. Example:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eibq7MpTAvE

Today guys like Durant and Curry can dribble freely up the court, square up and shoot whenever they feel like it and the only thing a defender can do is wave hello to his face. That's probably why 3 point attempts have skyrocketed since the 80s. Guys can get that shot off whenever they feel like it with little to no resistance.

[Dr.J4ever]

Yeah, guys like Robinson, Dream, Chuck, and Malone would be absolutely lost playing against the Kevin Loves and Marc Gasol's of the world.

GTFlyingFOH.
The 90s definitely had the better interior players than in today's league. I would argue, though, that teams from the 80s were superior to teams from the 90s, overall. The 90s had one(1) great team, the Bulls. The 80s, had at least 3 great teams(Sixers, Lakers, Celtics), and if you want to include them(I don't), the Pistons of the late 80s.

The 3 teams competed side by side raising the level of play beyond anything seen during the 90s. The 80s were like the 60s and 70s of boxing's heavyweight division with greats battling each other. MJ and the Bulls missed this. We will never how good or great the Bulls really were since they weren't tested by all time great teams.

[ThePhantomCreep]

Love would average the same or better numbers in any of the past eras. His defense is bad and would be bad in any era. Marc gasol would be top 3-5 defensive C in any era.
Same with Dwight. Orlando Howard would be an elite defedor and among dpoy contenders in any era. His offense would not be elite because unlike love, he can't shoot.
Gasol wouldn't win DPOY in the 90's, that's for damn sure. With Robinson, Dream, Mutombo, Mourning in the league?

Howard would be terribly undersized in most of his matchups in the 90's. If you're going to be undersized, you'd better have Dream-like moves to compensate, not Mutombo's.

I'm picturing peak Barkley and Malone in today's league. They would annihilate it and be considered even greater all-time than they already are.

[Rose'sACL]

Gasol wouldn't win DPOY in the 90's, that's for damn sure. With Robinson, Dream, Mutombo, Mourning in the league?

Howard would be terribly undersized in most of his matchups in the 90's. If you're going to be undersized, you'd better have Dream-like moves to compensate, not Mutombo's.

I'm picturing peak Barkley and Malone in today's league. They would annihilate it and be considered even greater all-time than they already are.
malone would, not barkley. barkley would average same or even less numbers now. Both of them would still be behind lebron and durant and anyone who thinks otherwise is as biased as anyone who thinks that wilt would average 10ppg in today's league.

[atljonesbro]

Gasol wouldn't win DPOY in the 90's, that's for damn sure. With Robinson, Dream, Mutombo, Mourning in the league?

Howard would be terribly undersized in most of his matchups in the 90's. If you're going to be undersized, you'd better have Dream-like moves to compensate, not Mutombo's.

I'm picturing peak Barkley and Malone in today's league. They would annihilate it and be considered even greater all-time than they already are.
Yeah, they'd just magically get better :facepalm You geezers need to let go of your child hood because according to this forum every player gets way better if inserted into this league

[Dr.J4ever]

1) The 'zone' can't be played correctly with the 3 second rule.

2) Players who actually know how to play in the post (ie, Jefferson, old man Duncan, even broken down Kobe) were/are not in any way 'limited' by 'zone' that most teams don't play for more than 3-4% of their defensive possessions, if at all.

3) As I said earlier in this thread, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Some people prefer the more physical and competitive game found in the 90s. Others prefer the soft European style where every big man wants to be a guard ala today. Fact remains that this 'product that is better looking to the eye'... has less eyes looking at it than it did in the 90s :lol

4) Talent was 'diluted' in the 90s but today you have star players stacking teams, a team with a 29-41 record talking playoffs on TV right now, the Sixers trying to break the Cavaliers loss record (set in 2011).

5) Are shooters really better or are they just playing under better conditions? I mean when you look at game tape from the 80s-90s, especially before handchecking from the foul line extended was outlawed- you notice PGs used to have to back down their defender after hitting half court. Example:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eibq7MpTAvE

Today guys like Durant and Curry can dribble freely up the court, square up and shoot whenever they feel like it and the only thing a defender can do is wave hello to his face. That's probably why 3 point attempts have skyrocketed since the 80s. Guys can get that shot off whenever they feel like it with little to no resistance.
1. No, but it has changed the nature of the game. You can no longer just clear one side of the floor for a star(or semi-star) to go one on one.

2. Yes, it takes brains and people who "know" how to play the zone to beat it. This is why today's basketball looks more intelligent than 90s basketball.

3. Here I agree. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. We can agree to disagree.

4. Not a good situation. Let me tell you though, it was painful watching borderline NBA players on rosters during the 90s before the influx of internationals. There are so many more of these internationals in today's game that has raised the ig level and fundamentals of the game.

5. No, shooting is way better than even during the 80s. I saw the 80s game up close. My Sixer team with Andrew Toney, who was capable of shooting 3s, was limited by the coach. Teams back then just didn't practice it, and didn't believe it was a viable strategy to win.

It's not because players today are just better. Shooting 3s can be practiced by naturally good shooters. I'm sure that's the only reason %s have increased. i

[ThePhantomCreep]

Yeah, they'd just magically get better :facepalm You geezers need to let go of your child hood because according to this forum every player gets way better if inserted into this league
Malone at 40 was still averaging 20/8 in a league not much different from the one you see today. At his peak, he'd eat this league alive.

[atljonesbro]

Malone at 40 was still averaging 20/8 in a league not much different from the one you see today. At his peak, he'd eat this league alive.
And how do you know he wouldn't do that at 40 in 1994?

[Just2McFly]

i thought id never see the day where people are saying expansion era nba ball is better than today's across the board:facepalm

[Straight_Ballin]

Opinion of someone who's watched more era's has more weight than some kid who's only watched this era. :lol

[HoopsFanNumero1]

i thought id never see the day where people are saying expansion era nba ball is better than today's across the board:facepalm

That's Jordan mythologists for you.

[DonDadda59]

1. No, but it has changed the nature of the game. You can no longer just clear one side of the floor for a star(or semi-star) to go one on one.

You haven't seen much of Kobe Bryant's career post mid 2000s rule changes :lol

Turn your channel to TNT and watch Carmelo play for like 5 minutes. Then come back here and tell me there's no more one on one.

And again, the league average for 'zone' played per game is in the neighborhood of 3%. And that's for teams that play it at all. The highest ranked defense last year, the Pacers, didn't play a single possession of zone last season or postseason.


2. Yes, it takes brains and people who "know" how to play the zone to beat it. This is why today's basketball looks more intelligent than 90s basketball.

How is Kevin Love (#4 scorer in the league) chucking 6 3s per game (over 1/3 of his shots) 'more intelligent' basketball? You and I are clearly not seeing the same product.


3. Here I agree. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. We can agree to disagree.

:cheers:


4. Not a good situation. Let me tell you though, it was painful watching borderline NBA players on rosters during the 90s before the influx of internationals. There are so many more of these internationals in today's game that has raised the ig level and fundamentals of the game.

:biggums:

Guys don't have the slightest clue how to post up any more. If by 'fundamentals' you mean 7 footers taking an inordinate amount of 3s, then you have a point.


5. No, shooting is way better than even during the 80s. I saw the 80s game up close. My Sixer team with Andrew Toney, who was capable of shooting 3s, was limited by the coach. Teams back then just didn't practice it, and didn't believe it was a viable strategy to win.

So you're saying that the 3 attempt/gm/team by decade roughly looks like this:

2013-14: 21.4 3s/gm
1993-94: 9.9 3s/gm
1983-84: 2.4 3s/gm

Solely because guys didn't practice? Gotta be honest, that doesn't pass the smell test. In fact, just checked. My point earlier about handchecking from te foul line extended being the reason for the increase...

94-95 rules change:

[tpols]

The lakers just broke their franchise record for points in one quarter against the knicks defense tonight.:lol

[DonDadda59]

The lakers just broke their franchise record for points in one quarter against the knicks defense tonight.:lol

D-Leaguers on 10 day contracts going HAM on advanced zone defense :oldlol:

[Dr.J4ever]

[QUOTE=DonDadda59]You haven't seen much of Kobe Bryant's career post mid 2000s rule changes :lol

Turn your channel to TNT and watch Carmelo play for like 5 minutes. Then come back here and tell me there's no more one on one.

And again, the league average for 'zone' played per game is in the neighborhood of 3%. And that's for teams that play it at all. The highest ranked defense last year, the Pacers, didn't play a single possession of zone last season or postseason.



How is Kevin Love (#4 scorer in the league) chucking 6 3s per game (over 1/3 of his shots) 'more intelligent' basketball? You and I are clearly not seeing the same product.



:cheers:



:biggums:

Guys don't have the slightest clue how to post up any more. If by 'fundamentals' you mean 7 footers taking an inordinate amount of 3s, then you have a point.



So you're saying that the 3 attempt/gm/team by decade roughly looks like this:

2013-14: 21.4 3s/gm
1993-94: 9.9 3s/gm
1983-84: 2.4 3s/gm

Solely because guys didn't practice? Gotta be honest, that doesn't pass the smell test. In fact, just checked. My point earlier about handchecking from te foul line extended being the reason for the increase...

94-95 rules change:

[mehyaM24]

LOL nineties perimeter players were the weakest since the 70s. todays wings are more skilled

[plowking]

You haven't seen much of Kobe Bryant's career post mid 2000s rule changes :lol

Turn your channel to TNT and watch Carmelo play for like 5 minutes. Then come back here and tell me there's no more one on one.

And again, the league average for 'zone' played per game is in the neighborhood of 3%. And that's for teams that play it at all. The highest ranked defense last year, the Pacers, didn't play a single possession of zone last season or postseason.

What a load of shit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3asO6oQpBrc

Go to :27 of the video and pause.
Go to :42 of the video and pause.

I know what that defensive set looks like. :oldlol:
Let me guess, its a loose man to man with everyone playing denial one pass off the ball? I guess that's why on one of the plays Hibbert steps out and goes right back in to his position (and not man). :oldlol:

Its why your stats can be shoved up you know where and taken with little regard. :oldlol:
All you have to do is watch the game, and see a more functional, organized, and advanced form of the game compared to that of 20 years ago.




How is Kevin Love (#4 scorer in the league) chucking 6 3s per game (over 1/3 of his shots) 'more intelligent' basketball? You and I are clearly not seeing the same product.

He is shooting 38% from there. In what way is it a bad shot? Not sure if you know this, but he's a 3 point champion.



Guys don't have the slightest clue how to post up any more. If by 'fundamentals' you mean 7 footers taking an inordinate amount of 3s, then you have a point.

How many opportunities do players really get to post up with defenses as they are. Dominant post players are doubled and chased off the block as soon as they get the ball.
Bron is one of the best post players in the league in terms of points per shot. You don't think he'd want to be in their all game? Defenses don't allow for it.

Sure. There are not as many great post players today. Reason is... its one of the first things the defense takes away from you, and one of the easiest with floating players and zones.


And way to avoid the question about Kiki and Aquirre. Would they be even better scorers in today's league? Going by what you're saying, no handchecking in this era compared to the one they played in. They'd be dropping 40pg on 60% due to no handchecking... Right?

[plowking]

D-Leaguers on 10 day contracts going HAM on advanced zone defense :oldlol:

Like has been said. Ball movement, and less superstar dominated basketball is a must today. Lakers are essentially, exactly that. A team predicated on great spacing and great shooting.

[DonDadda59]

What a load of shit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3asO6oQpBrc

Go to :27 of the video and pause.
Go to :42 of the video and pause.

I know what that defensive set looks like. :oldlol:
Let me guess, its a loose man to man with everyone playing denial one pass off the ball? I guess that's why on one of the plays Hibbert steps out and goes right back in to his position (and not man). :oldlol:

Its why your stats can be shoved up you know where and taken with little regard. :oldlol:
All you have to do is watch the game, and see a more functional, organized, and advanced form of the game compared to that of 20 years ago.

Why do you do this to yourself? :lol

Straight from the horse's mouth:


Pacers' Frank Vogel will use zone next year to prepare for playoffs
By Zach Harper | NBA writer
May 23, 2013 7:07 pm ET

MIAMI -- Why didn't the Indiana Pacers play a zone defense on the final play of Game 1 against the Miami Heat when LeBron James made a game-winning layup?

That was one of the questions posed immediately after the Pacers' loss in which they had a chance to take control of the Eastern Conference Finals with a Game 1 victory. Instead, Paul George over-committed against James, which led to a defensive breakdown that helped the Heat keep their home-court advantage for at least another game. It was an incredible play by James that led to a lot of second-guessing immediately following the game and spilled over into Thursday.

There's a pretty big reason the Pacers didn't have a zone in place: They don't play zone.

They don't really play it at all.

Pacers' coach Frank Vogel would like to change that starting next preseason and utilize it "at least two times each game" in order to gain the necessary confidence to implement it. The Pacers already possess the top defensive team in the NBA, so adding a zone could make it even more stifling for opponents. The reason they don't do it now is because the team hasn't really practiced it much and the trust for using it isn't there for the playoffs.

Indiana typically stops teams from scoring at the basket and around the 3-point line. The Pacers dare you to take bad midrange shots and force turnovers. That didn't work so much in Game 1 with a lot of defensive breakdowns. Their film session after Game 1 was almost exclusively about helping the helper on defense, which they struggled to do en route to giving up 60 points in the paint. Being able to throw the zone into the mix when they do have those rare breakdowns could help curtail that kind of action against their defense.

Zone defense is such a tricky thing for NBA defenses to do. If you were to treat the NBA like a college basketball game and play a heavy amount of zone throughout the contest, you'd likely see the skill of offensive players consistently get the ball to the middle of the zone before finding cutters from the weak side or shooters in the dead spots of the zone. It's not something you can consistently play against NBA talent. But you can often go to it as a surprise weapon in your defensive quiver at key spots in games just to turn the opposition a little on their head.

The zone takes a lot of practice to create the necessary rhythm and trust between teammates to react to where the ball goes. If you haven't practiced it a lot, then you can't really just throw it into the end of an Eastern Conference Finals game in an attempt to throw off the other team; you'd probably just end up throwing off your own team.

But the Pacers know they want to eventually have a zone defense option with center Roy Hibbert manning the middle of it. Next year when they start marching through the Eastern Conference playoffs, it will be just another way for them to stop you from scoring.

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on-basketball/22290547/pacers-frank-vogel-will-use-zone-next-year-to-prepare-for-playoffs


Shit isn't even fun any more. You make it ridiculously easy.

NBA teams, especially the great defenses, don't bother with zone outside of a handful of possessions here and there. And the truly great ones (Boston big 3 era, Pistons, etc) usually NEVER play zone. The league wide average for 'zone' play is around 3% of the game, those who use it in the 5-10% range tend to be those lacking defensive personnel and who are terrible defensively (as shown above from '11-'12).

Zone defense is an amateur gimmick used by middle school-college coaches to hide poor defenders. Like I said, if there's an NBA player or coach who doesn't know how to beat a faux 'zone' the relative handful of posessions they see it per season, their pay should be docked.


How many opportunities do players really get to post up with defenses as they are.

Ask Big Al Jefferson.


Bron is one of the best post players in the league in terms of points per shot. You don't think he'd want to be in their all game? Defenses don't allow for it.

Sure. There are not as many great post players today. Reason is... its one of the first things the defense takes away from you, and one of the easiest with floating players and zones.

Nothing but bullshit above, per the course. Tell me more about these 'floating zones' and what teams play them, please.

[dreamwarrior]

90s nba was more fun to watch but there seemed to be less strategy. guys like mj would demand the ball like they were the best player on a high school team. these days the offense is more spread out.

[Soundwave]

Honestly I think modern basketball hasn't changed that much since the mid-90s.

The Bad Boy Pistons and Knicks and Bulls basically created the modern notion of NBA defence, and offence has largely stayed the same too. To counter this the NBA opened up the rules to allow wing players to score more easily once their TV ratings dipped in the post-Jordan era.

D'Antoni tried to bring back a different style of basketball, which is basically 70s/80s run n' gun bball, but most coaches still adhere to the same basic style of play.

The main difference in today's game is the Jordan effect ... no kid wants to play as a big. They all want to play the 2/3 positions so they can play the flashier style of game.

And development of big men has completely fallen apart. There are no great bigs left, because no one wants to play in the post. It's not cool/sexy/flashy, heck even Shaq would routinely get the spotlight taken away by Penny/Kobe/Wade.

[tontoz]

LOL nineties perimeter players were the weakest since the 70s. todays wings are more skilled


Who exactly are you talking about here? Kobe is old and injured. Wade is frequently injured and one of the worst 3 point shooters ever. Harden is good but a flopper taking advantage of the new rules.

After those guys, who are the quality 2s?

[plowking]

Why do you do this to yourself? :lol

Straight from the horse's mouth:



Who cares what Vogel says? There is video evidence of it.

Doc Rivers said the same thing about the Celtics, yet they used it excessively in the 08 finals to stop Kobe Bryant.

You just said that the Pacers didn't play a single possession of zone, yet you got proven otherwise. There is video evidence of it.

Coaches say it more for the fact of covering for a player and making it seem like there are no weak links in the defense.

EDIT: Here is an article for yourself... your very own that you cited. lol...
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/basketball/nba/story/2012-01-17/zone-defense-has-found-its-place-in-the-nba/52657598/1

Talks exactly about why NBA coaches don't want to admit to zone. lol.
Also talks how it is the most effective way of slowing an efficient offense. Talks how it forces outside shots and makes it harder to get inside hence forcing 3 point shots.

And here we go... a former player telling it how it is... Steve Smith with this gem.


Zones remain divisive. NBA TV analyst Steve Smith, a former All-Star, said he would outlaw it, arguing that players who can't guard a man should get off the court or get help. "You put in zone, you take away stars," he said. "It takes away from what the NBA game was."

Backs up everything I said. Takes away from the star players.

[Jasper]

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-ball-dont-lie/gary-payton-don-t-modern-nba-payton-basically-175801742--nba.html

No way is the game better. Watch the vid of Jabbar in the Bucks forum.
No hand checking , weak a$$ defense , and no post players in the league anymore.

Scores are up by 8-15 points , but the game has suffered.

Why .. revenue was needed for a faster paced game, and villians were showing up because of the defense.
That era brought some of the best HOF'ers into the history books(.)

[mehyaM24]

Who exactly are you talking about here? Kobe is old and injured. Wade is frequently injured and one of the worst 3 point shooters ever. Harden is good but a flopper taking advantage of the new rules.

After those guys, who are the quality 2s?

just last season: carmelo,kobe,durant,lebron are better than most swingmen in the 90s. that is an indisputable fact.

[TheMan]

The game is so much greater today and so much better to watch, NBA ratings are at all time highs...oh wait:rolleyes:

in b4 "everyone is watching online!" :oldlol:

[TheMan]

just last season: carmelo,kobe,durant,lebron are better than most swingmen in the 90s. that is an indisputable fact.
Cool story.

MJ > carmelo, kobe, durant, lebron

[DonDadda59]

Who cares what Vogel says?

:facepalm

Yes, who cares what the coach of the team says about his team's defensive philosophies? Serious question- were you dropped on your head as a baby?


Doc Rivers said the same thing about the Celtics, yet they used it excessively in the 08 finals to stop Kobe Bryant.

As if it wasn't obvious enough you were using Alborz's bullshit that was debunked in 2009. :lol

It's clear you have no clue what you're talking about and don't have the ability to differentiate between a 'zone' and man defense with help. If you want to see what real zone looks like, watch the NCAA tournament not the damn NBA you dunce.

But just to drive home the point (and since you brought up the Cs)...


Boston played zone on about 3.7 percent of its defensive possessions during the season, slightly more than average, according to Synergy.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketball/nba/blogs/nba-point-forward/2012/05/29/celtics-zone/

No team played zone on more than 10 percent of defensive possessions last season, per Synergy Sports. Dallas became known as the zone team in 2010-11, but they played a hybrid man zone more than a straight zone, and they did that on a small minority of possessions.

The league overall actually scored more efficiently against zone than man last season, according to Synergy.

http://grantland.com/features/what-next-trend-sweep-nba/

But facts be damned, right? You've got video showing traditional help man defense w/ no hand checking and 3 second violations.

Here, this will save you a ton of future embarrassment. All of the bullshit you were so clearly tricked into believing by one lone misguided Bean apologist was addressed and debunked back in 2009:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=136831

That one's on the house :cheers:


Honestly I think modern basketball hasn't changed that much since the mid-90s.

The Bad Boy Pistons and Knicks and Bulls basically created the modern notion of NBA defence, and offence has largely stayed the same too. To counter this the NBA opened up the rules to allow wing players to score more easily once their TV ratings dipped in the post-Jordan era.

D'Antoni tried to bring back a different style of basketball, which is basically 70s/80s run n' gun bball, but most coaches still adhere to the same basic style of play.

The main difference in today's game is the Jordan effect ... no kid wants to play as a big. They all want to play the 2/3 positions so they can play the flashier style of game.

And development of big men has completely fallen apart. There are no great bigs left, because no one wants to play in the post. It's not cool/sexy/flashy, heck even Shaq would routinely get the spotlight taken away by Penny/Kobe/Wade.

Exactly :applause:

Although I don't think it's the 'Jordan effect' so much as the influx of Euro style players. Toni Kukoc was 6'11, the size of a traditional PF but played more like a guard- had handles, could shoot the 3, etc. Then you had Dirk and so on. Now you have guys like Kevin Love who takes 6 3s per game. The death of the traditional big man (save for a few like Al Jefferson and old man Duncan), the influx of the Euro style of play/proliferation of the 3, and the perimeter player favoring rules are the key differences between the game now and then.

Not the nonsense Kobe stan bullshit that was debunked last decade that a LeBron stan is trying to pass off as real :lol