Just watched some Bird/Jordan 80's defense highlights

[Ariza4three]

Defense back then was topkek worthy

[Droid101]

Although I do agree with you, I can't pass up this opportunity:


https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-4O2KsGkx0GM/UzBONQRzJhI/AAAAAAAAnwQ/VyAXq4UjyoA/w377-h283-no/blank.jpg

[TheMarkMadsen]

Although I do agree with you, I can't pass up this opportunity:


https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-4O2KsGkx0GM/UzBONQRzJhI/AAAAAAAAnwQ/VyAXq4UjyoA/w377-h283-no/blank.jpg

:roll: :roll:

[Poetry]

topkek

What does this mean?

[ArbitraryWater]

kekked hard when I saw regular all stars average 30+ on 50+% in the 80's

[Wade's Rings]

InB4 3ball

[KungFuJoe]

What does this mean?

It's some stupid World Of Warcraft reference.

Kek literally means lol. Dunno what the top part is for. Maybe the resident weirdo, JameerTheQueer, can explain it.

[ArbitraryWater]

It's some stupid World Of Warcraft reference.

Kek literally means lol. Dunno what the top part is for. Maybe the resident weirdo, JameerTheQueer, can explain it.

Has nothing to do with WoW

http://galeri2.uludagsozluk.com/353/portakalli-top-kek_414940.jpg

[KungFuJoe]

Has nothing to do with WoW

http://galeri2.uludagsozluk.com/353/portakalli-top-kek_414940.jpg

I just googled it.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=kek

[ArbitraryWater]

I just googled it.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=kek

He asked for topkek, not kek... google that

[Poetry]

I just googled it.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=kek

Has it really been around since 2006? I don't think I've ever seen it before.

[ralph_i_el]

kekked hard when I saw regular all stars average 30+ on 50+% in the 80's

I keked hard when I saw your punk ass talking to yourself on multiple accounts

[Ariza4three]

kekked hard when I saw regular all stars average 30+ on 50+% in the 80's
Kiki Vanderwhateverthe**** was putting up 29/4/3 on 55% shooting in the 80's :roll:s

[ArbitraryWater]

I keked hard when I saw your punk ass talking to yourself on multiple accounts

http://oi54.tinypic.com/1j6tfl.jpg

[ArbitraryWater]

Kiki Vanderwhateverthe**** was putting up 29/4/3 on 55% shooting in the 80's :roll:s

kekk'd hard :roll:

[Poetry]

Kiki Vanderwhateverthe**** was putting up 29/4/3 on 55% shooting in the 80's :roll:s

Why are you laughing?

Kiki helped turn Dirk and Nash into MVP caliber players.

[3ball]

Kiki Vanderwhateverthe**** was putting up 29/4/3 on 55% shooting in the 80's :roll:s


Kiki's high was 26.7 PPG on 55%.

He was FAR more offensively skilled than Kevin Love, who averaged 26 PPG for a few seasons in today's game.

Unlike Love, Kiki didn't rely on jumpshooting for his offense - Kiki created off the dribble and from the triple-threat for most of his offense - you'd know this if you had seen him enough to pronounce his name.

see Kiki vs. Michael Cooper and Worthy in the 1985 Playoffs - he destroys them while creating for himself in a myriad of ways, dunks all over them, and shows a vastly superior scoring skill than Kevin Love ever has or could.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=360034

[Ariza4three]

Nope. His offensive high was 29.4. Learn about the players you talk about fool

[3ball]

Nope. His offensive high was 29.4. Learn about the players you talk about fool
you can't even pronounce his name.

if kevin love can use the spacing to get 26 PPG on spot-up jumpshots, than Kiki can do the same by creating his own shot, like he did back in the day with NO spacing.

see Kiki vs. Michael Cooper and Worthy in the 1985 Playoffs - he destroys them while creating for himself in a myriad of ways, dunks all over them, and shows a vastly superior scoring skill than Kevin Love ever has or could.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=360034


you DO believe in the eyetest don't you?... so Kiki > Love by a mile.
.

[Ariza4three]

you can't even pronounce his name.

if kevin love can use the spacing to get 26 PPG on spot-up jumpshots, than Kiki can do the same by creating his own shot, like he did back in the day with NO spacing.

see Kiki vs. Michael Cooper and Worthy in the 1985 Playoffs - he destroys them while creating for himself in a myriad of ways, dunks all over them, and shows a vastly superior scoring skill than Kevin Love ever has or could.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=360034


you DO believe in the eyetest don't you?... so Kiki > Love by a mile.
.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-pq2-roB58yE/UgVTWnCbSLI/AAAAAAAAGm8/U6j9t7PtQUY/s1600/Screen+Shot+2013-08-09+at+11.20.16+AM.png
>first .gif is a run into a wide ass open lane.

Thanks for proving my point bud.

[3ball]

http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/ea16365350fc666adcf8befd7cc188ec.gif





first .gif is a run into a wide ass open lane.


in that GIF, all 10 players are hovering around the paint - there isn't ONE GUY behind the 3-point line, or anywhere near the 3-point line.

keep dreaming bud - this is the type of lying and garbage that goes itt as people try to keep their pre-conceived notions of the game alive.

there isn't a basketball person alive that would tell you lanes were more open back then.

of course, all the rest of Kiki's GIFs destroying Michael Cooper and Worthy in the playoffs ALSO show all 10 players hovering around the paint, with zero players out by the 3-point line, or anywhere near the 3-point line:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=360034

[RoundMoundOfReb]

All these gifs show me is how awful the coverage of the 3 point line was. Steph Curry would average 40 ppg.

[Ariza4three]

in that GIF, all 10 players are hovering around the paint - there isn't ONE GUY behind the 3-point line, or anywhere near the 3-point line.

keep dreaming bud - this is the type of lying and garbage that goes itt as people try to keep their pre-conceived notions of the game alive.

there isn't a basketball person alive that would tell you lanes were more open back then.

of course, all the rest of Kiki's GIFs destroying Michael Cooper and Worthy in the playoffs ALSO show all 10 players hovering around the paint, with zero players out by the 3-point line, or anywhere near the 3-point line:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=360034
I don't give two f*cks what those senior citizens think. NBA now>>>> NBA then. Sorry Jordan played in a weak ass era.

[Ariza4three]

All these gifs show me is how awful the coverage of the 3 point line was. Steph Curry would average 40 ppg.
Not to mention the shoddy interior defense.

[3ball]

All these gifs show me is how awful the coverage of the 3 point line was. Steph Curry would average 40 ppg.
they wouldn't let him shoot wide open obviously, just like they didn't let bird shoot wide open.

and steph curry wouldn't score SHIT inside - he wouldn't have anyone spreading the floor for him, so there would be no spacing and the paint would be congested like nothing he's seen.

plus, he'd be getting hand-checked and bumped around a ton, so knowing him, he'd be hurt before he played 5 games.

finally, the NBA allowed a certain degree of paint-camping back then, that was eliminated in today's game, so this adds to the no-spacing, more physical environment.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

they wouldn't let him shoot wide open obviously, just like they didn't let bird shoot wide open.

and steph curry wouldn't score SHIT inside - he wouldn't have anyone spreading the floor for him, so there would be no spacing and the paint would be congested like nothing he's seen.

plus, he'd be getting hand-checked and bumped around a ton, so knowing him, he'd be hurt before he played 5 games.

finally, the NBA allowed a certain degree of paint-camping back then, that was eliminated in today's game, so this adds to the no-spacing, more physical environment.

Okay explain why DRTG was lower in the 80s than it is now, then?

[3ball]

Okay explain why DRTG was lower in the 80s than it is now, then?
Team ORtg and Opponent DRtg (they're the same number) were higher due to the way the stat is calculated - higher offensive rebounding and FT rates increase at team's ORtg in the calculation.

Two-pointers have a higher offensive rebounding and FT rate than 3-pointers, so the higher proportion of two-pointers taken in previous eras caused Team ORtg's (and therefore Opponent DRtg) to be higher than today.

On the flipside, today's game takes far more 3-pointers, which have a lower offensive rebounding and FT rate, and therefore decrease Team ORtg and Opponent DRtg.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

Team ORtg and Opponent DRtg (they're the same number) were higher due to the way the stat is calculated - higher offensive rebounding and FT rates increase at team's ORtg in the calculation.

Two-pointers have a higher offensive rebounding and FT rate than 3-pointers, so the higher proportion of two-pointers taken in previous eras caused Team ORtg's (and therefore Opponent DRtg) to be higher than today.

On the flipside, today's game takes far more 3-pointers, which have a lower offensive rebounding and FT rate, and therefore decrease Team ORtg and Opponent DRtg.

This is flat out false. Yes 2 pointers have a higher offensive rebound rate BUT less 3 pointers are required to score the same amount of points and thus the total amount of offensive rebounds increases.

Example:
Say team A takes 6 2pters resulting in 3 makes = 6 points, 3 offensive rebound opportunities

Team B takes 6 3 pters makes 2 = 6 points, 4 offensive rebound opportunities.

So while the rate may be lower, the volume is higher.

[GimmeThat]

This is flat out false. Yes 2 pointers have a higher offensive rebound rate BUT less 3 pointers are required to score the same amount of points and thus the total amount of offensive rebounds increases.

Example:
Say team A takes 6 2pters resulting in 3 makes = 6 points, 3 offensive rebound opportunities

Team B takes 6 3 pters makes 2 = 6 points, 4 offensive rebound opportunities.

So while the rate may be lower, the volume is higher.


Its kinda like when i play football manager and i have the setting on short passes, i get more goal via strike. And when i set it on medium/long, head shot goal appear more often.


But yes, that "i am 15 and i watch youtube highlights, fits me perfectly."

[3ball]

Yes 2 pointers have a higher offensive rebound rate BUT less 3 pointers are required to score the same amount of points and thus the total amount of offensive rebounds increases.

Example:
Say team A takes 6 2pters resulting in 3 makes = 6 points, 3 offensive rebound opportunities

Team B takes 6 3 pters makes 2 = 6 points, 4 offensive rebound opportunities.

So while the rate may be lower, the volume is higher.


as would be expected from the high level math guys that made these stats, volume differences are accounted for in the calculation - the rate is what matters - it's a common knowledge and not debateable that higher offensive rebounding rate increases ORtg and DRtg.... Flpiii made a post saying as much and explaining the calculation, but i won't big him up and post it unless you still don't believe that it's common knowledge.

just look at the last few columns of this bballref webpage, which shows ORtg and the key factors driving the calculation (Pace, offensive rebounding rate, FT rate, etc.)... even for those not good at math, it's pretty easy to see that higher offensive rebounding rate increases ORtg.... http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_stats.html

also, this next point i'm about to make really doesn't matter, because as i said, the rate is what matters, but 3-pointers result in a slower pace anyway (which can also be seen by looking at that table)... teams run offense specifically to get open shots - 3-pointers need to be more open than two-pointers, so more offense needs to be run to get them, which slows the pace down... There simply were more shots taken period in previous eras due to the lower number of 3-pointers.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

as would be expected from the high level math guys that made these stats, volume differences are accounted for in the calculation - the rate is what matters - it's a common knowledge and not debateable that higher offensive rebounding rate increases ORtg and DRtg.... Flpiii made a post saying as much and explaining the calculation, but i won't big him up and post it unless you still don't believe that it's common knowledge.

just look at the last few columns of this bballref webpage, which shows ORtg and the key factors driving the calculation (Pace, offensive rebounding rate, FT rate, etc.)... even for those not good at math, it's pretty easy to see that higher offensive rebounding rate increases ORtg.... http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_stats.html

ORTG, as i understand it is points/100possesions - so only the the total amount of ORBs would matter, not the percentage of FGA that result in them. And just because ORB has gone down as 3 pt shooting has gone up doesn't mean they're connected.


also, this next point i'm about to make really doesn't matter, because as i said, the rate is what matters, but 3-pointers result in a slower pace anyway (which can also be seen by looking at that table)... teams run offense specifically to get open shots - 3-pointers need to be more open than two-pointers, so more offense needs to be run to get them, which slows the pace down... There simply were more shots taken period in previous eras due to the lower number of 3-pointers.


Once again this is flat out false. Some of the fastest paced modern teams (ex. Dantoni Suns) have been heavy 3 point shooting teams. Now pace as a whole HAS gone down. But that has little to do with 3pt shooting.

[andgar923]

Are you seriously entertaining these fools 3ball?:facepalm

[3ball]

Are you seriously entertaining these fools 3ball?:facepalm
i know... :facepalm .... don't worry... i'm about to give up soon..

[3ball]

Some of the fastest paced modern teams (ex. Dantoni Suns) have been heavy 3 point shooting teams.


yeah, this isn't true AT ALL - the Suns pace was around 96.0 in the mid-2000's, which is NOTHING compared to previous eras.

the entire pace of the league was so slow, that 95.8 was the fastest pace in the league!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!





Now pace as a whole HAS gone down. But that has little to do with 3pt shooting.


as you say, pace as a whole has gone down.

and it's mostly due to 3-point shooting... heck every team in the league shoots more 3's than ever before - 22 attempts per game, per team (44 total per game, which is 27% of all shot attempts).

that requires a TON of offense to be ran and a ton of setting up the spacing and positioning the shooters beyond the arc for that perfect corner 3 or whatever.

[SHAQisGOAT]

Okay explain why DRTG was lower in the 80s than it is now, then?

1st of all, it was more or less the same has it's been for the last 10 years... Oh, and if it was lower you're basically going against yourself :rolleyes: I bet you don't even know what you're talking about :facepalm

Say what you want about 3ball but he comes through with great arguments and he's keeping these kids in check right now.

[colts19]

I don't give two f*cks what those senior citizens think. NBA now>>>> NBA then. Sorry Jordan played in a weak ass era.

No Jordan played in a great era (80's) he just didn't win anything till he played in a weak ass era (90's).

[Nikola_]

http://articles.latimes.com/1990-03-04/sports/sp-2723_1_defense-wins-games


"Detroit has created a defensive mind-set around the league, and teams copy success," Laker Coach Pat Riley said. "In the early 80s, transition defense was non-existent. When a team was running, a coach would say 'Just get back.' Now there's sophistication to defense.


"In the early 80s, we knew we could outrun and outscore you," the Lakers' Magic Johnson said. "That's not the way we look at the game anymore."

[SHAQisGOAT]

http://articles.latimes.com/1990-03-04/sports/sp-2723_1_defense-wins-games

The Bucks, for example, were playing that "type of defense" in the mid 80's (1982 to 1985 more or less) before the Pistons... They didn't have all that bad boy attitude though, they didn't have all those "characters" such as Isiah, Laimbeer or Mahorn, didn't have all those dudes ready to lay you down on your ass... So they're not nearly as publicized (plus, they played in Milwaukee and never made the Finals).

Hubie Brown's Knicks (just before 1985) were playing great defense as a team without even having one elite defensive player.

Dick Motta's Mavericks in the early-to-mid 80's were a team that ran little (compared to the rest of the league) and liked to keep the pace down... Still one of the worst defenses in the league.

Meanwhile this year's Warriors are the 1st in terms of pace, a team that likes to run it... Yet, they have the #1 defense.

I don't know why those showtime Lakers weren't able to do what they're talking about there when Philly were bringing them from 115 PPG on 52.8%FG - in the regular-season - to 100 PPG on 45.2%FG in the 1983 Finals, sweeping them in process.
Early 80's and all...
:confusedshrug:

I'm not denying that the Bad Boys somewhat shook the system with their big success as a defensive-minded team, with their attitude and even more physical basketball. They played amazing defense, they're one of the GOAT teams, they were very hyped (bad way or not)... but let's not even make it more than it was.

Let's just say I'm not buying into all of that...

--> Another major example: 10 years earlier the Seattle SuperSonics were winning a ring as a very defensive-minded team (with one of the "worst" offenses in the league), playing terrific D... How about that?

[3ball]

Now there's sophistication to defense.


of course there is more defensive sophistication now - teams have to guard 3-pointers and cover a lot more ground due to the resulting spacing, which will add sophistication to any defense.

today's defenses also have to deal with easier penetration that was built into the game via the hand-check and physicality ban... finally, defenses have to change the way they position players around the paint due to the paint-camping ban.

so it shouldn't be a surprise that today's defenses need to be more sophisticated to deal with these things... it would be alarming if they weren't - if defenses made no adjustments to accomodate for these things, league-wide offensive rating would shoot through the roof instead of remain in the 105-108 range that it's been for the better part of 35 years... but back when defenses didn't have to guard 3-pointers, could hand-check and be physical, and were allowed a certain degree of paint-camping, these adjustments to the defense weren't necessary.

one thing that i think people forget - it doesn't makes sense to say "well, steph curry would destroy previous eras with his 3-point shooting"... why would he crush from 3 anymore than he does today?... teams wouldn't let him shoot open 3-pointers anymore than they let Bird shoot open 3's.... and Curry would have to deal with no-spacing and congested lanes just like everyone else because he wouldn't have teammates that spread the floor/create spacing for him like he has now.

[BuffaloBill]

Kiki Vanderwhateverthe**** was putting up 29/4/3 on 55% shooting in the 80's :roll:s


:roll: :roll: