Bigger.Faster.Stronger

[90sgoat]

World Records in Athletics

100m dash: Usain Bolt - 2009
200m dash: Usain Bolt - 2009
400m dash: Michael Johnson - 1999

High Jump: Javier Sotomayor - 1993
Long Jump: Mike Powell - 1991
Tripple Jump: Jonathan Edwards - 1995

Shot Put: Randy Barnes - 1990
Discus Throw: Jurgen Schult - 1986
Hammer Throw: Yuriu Sedykh - 1986
Javelin Throw: Jan Zelezny - 1996

[GIF REACTION]

Randy Barnes

What an alpha name

[LAZERUSS]

World Records in Athletics

100m dash: Usain Bolt - 2009
200m dash: Usain Bolt - 2009
400m dash: Michael Johnson - 1999

High Jump: Javier Sotomayor - 1993
Long Jump: Mike Powell - 1991
Tripple Jump: Jonathan Edwards - 1995

Shot Put: Randy Barnes - 1990
Discus Throw: Jurgen Schult - 1986
Hammer Throw: Yuriu Sedykh - 1986
Javelin Throw: Jan Zelezny - 1996

Obviously athletes have become worse since 2009.

[90sgoat]

Average Height NBA by year

1986 - 6'7.6''
1996 - 6'7.3''
2006 - 6'6.3''

[90sgoat]

Obviously athletes have become worse since 2009.

Usain Bolt is a freak, MJ, Wilt like ahtlete. Take him out and Michael Johnson also has the 200m dash record set in the 90s.

[LAZERUSS]

Usain Bolt is a freak, MJ, Wilt like ahtlete. Take him out and Michael Johnson als has the 200m dash record set in the 90s.

I agree 100%.
Bolt may very well be a once-in-a-generation, or even lifetime, athlete.

[ShawkFactory]

What's your point?

[sundizz]

Average Height NBA by year

1986 - 6'7.6''
1996 - 6'7.3''
2006 - 6'6.3''

Yes, because we know all 6'7 people all created equal. There is a 6'9 guy that I play with nowadays that can shoot, dribble, pass, and is mobile. In the 60's he would of easily been a NBA player, but now he's at best a college player or low professional player.

[feyki]

Average Height NBA by year

1986 - 6'7.6''
1996 - 6'7.3''
2006 - 6'6.3''

1951 - 6-4
1955 - 6-5
1963 - 6-6
1981 - 6-7

[Showtime80']

Let's also add to the fact de decay in fundamentals and the SUBTLE increase in athleticism nowadays in the NBA is really nothing to brag about when comparing it to past generations.

Where advances in modern science have excelled is in EXTENDENDING careers on average rather than creating these superhuman specimens people seem to think are roaming around. Let's also take into account the modern equipment today's athletes also benefit from not to mention cough cough "STEROIDS"

[90sgoat]

What's your point?

I am always told that players today are bigger.faster.stronger as it is some law of nature, but it is really weird that all the jumping records in athletics are from the 90s, are they also not bigger.faster.stronger?

[ShawkFactory]

I am always told that players today are bigger.faster.stronger as it is some law of nature, but it is really weird that all the jumping records in athletics are from the 90s, are they also not bigger.faster.stronger?
Basketball players aren't inherently bigger, stronger, and faster.

The talent pool is larger however, thus leading to a higher quantity of big, fast, and strong players.

[90sgoat]

Let's also add to the fact de decay in fundamentals and the SUBTLE increase in athleticism nowadays in the NBA is really nothing to brag about when comparing it to past generations.

Where advances in modern science have excelled is in EXTENDENDING careers on average rather than creating these superhuman specimens people seem to think are roaming around. Let's also take into account the modern equipment today's athletes also benefit from not to mention cough cough "STEROIDS"

Absolutely. Longevity is a massive breakthrough, but one that is led by HGH and various semi-legal means, blood doping etc. The average weight of the players has increased somewhat and that's the steroids, but the steroids also contribute to a lot more ligament tear injuries.

[90sgoat]

Basketball players aren't inherently bigger, stronger, and faster.

The talent pool is larger however, thus leading to a higher quantity of big, fast, and strong players.

Why do you keep saying this?

Prove to me they are bigger stronger faster.

[LAZERUSS]

Basketball players aren't inherently bigger, stronger, and faster.

The talent pool is larger however, thus leading to a higher quantity of big, fast, and strong players.

That explains a 6-9 1/2 Cousins, with a 27" vertical, can put up 24-13 seasons in 34 mpg.

Or that a 6-3 Rubio can't hit a shot to save his life.

Or that a 6-8 Kevin Love, who can barely dunk, can runaway with the rpg title at 15 rpg in 35 mpg.

Thank gawd for these modern marvels.

[ShaqTwizzle]

Prime Wilt would easily smoke Bolt in any race if you put him in modern shoes and gave him all the other advantages of our era.

:pimp:

[ShawkFactory]

Why do you keep saying this?

Prove to me they are bigger stronger faster.
Watch games from 30 years ago and then watch games now.

[90sgoat]

Watch games from 30 years ago and then watch games now.

1986 you mean?

MJ, Moses Malone, Hakeem, Karl Malone, Barkley, Drexler, Bird, Magic, Isaiah Thomas, Kareem, Ewing.

What are you on about seriously.

[Akrazotile]

I agree 100%.
Bolt may very well be a once-in-a-generation, or even lifetime, doper.


fixed

[FKAri]

Average Height NBA by year

1986 - 6'7.6''
1996 - 6'7.3''
2006 - 6'6.3''

Average NBA player's eyeline's angle from the floor while dribbling:

1986: 80

[ShawkFactory]

1986 you mean?

MJ, Moses Malone, Hakeem, Karl Malone, Barkley, Drexler, Bird, Magic, Isaiah Thomas, Kareem, Ewing.

What are you on about seriously.
You named 12 players.

The National Basketball Association consists/consisted of a lot more guys than that.

No one has ever argued (besides trolls) that an elite athlete is elite regardless of era. There were certainly elite athletes in the NBA in the 60s/70s.

[Hey Yo]

"We have the power to rebuild him.

Bigger.....Stronger.....Faster.

He is:



https://ronetlcnaptown.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/sixmillion-splsh.jpg

[SpanishACB]

how many 170cm players could dunk in the 60s?

[90sgoat]

how many 170cm players could dunk in the 60s?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5wBI98NXEE

http://www.jump36.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/supd.jpg

[90sgoat]

6'1'' Dee Brown

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bu-PU1Rk6TA

http://www.sikids.com/sites/default/files/multimedia/photo_gallery/0902/nba.dunk.contest.winners/images/1991-dee-brown.jpg

[90sgoat]

John Starks, 6'2''

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCTfxOrX4k8

https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/3230846862/1b4e391f65416bf181ecc78148f597ba_400x400.jpeg

[90sgoat]

6'1'' Kevin Johnson

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifx_gRF-ouU

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/47/67/3a/47673a55a236830511ffda53059f1c31.jpg

[f0und]

well then explain Porzingus who is 9'7" and can move like iverson

[90sgoat]

well then explain Porzingus who is 9'7" and can move like iverson

Shawn Bradley was 10 feet and moved like Lebron James.

[sdot_thadon]

Absolutely. Longevity is a massive breakthrough, but one that is led by HGH and various semi-legal means, blood doping etc. The average weight of the players has increased somewhat and that's the steroids, but the steroids also contribute to a lot more ligament tear injuries.
I always wondered something about the people who constantly chime in with steroids comments: you fellas truly think if there are steroids in the league (which I can't argue for or against honestly, but wouldn't be surprised) that they just became available yesterday? The 90's era had some of the biggest bodybuilder looking players in nba history, wilt lifted with the terminator, etc. Every single sport was in the midst of steroids during that time period. What makes our league so special besides not digging for them as they still do to this day? Let's not be silly here folks.

On topic, I don't think the issue was ever that elite athletes today are on average better than those of the past. It's that on average the overall athletic level is higher today. More elite athletes, higher general level of athleticism.

[90sgoat]

I always wondered something about the people who constantly chime in with steroids comments: you fellas truly think if there are steroids in the league (which I can't argue for or against honestly, but wouldn't be surprised) that they just became available yesterday? The 90's era had some of the biggest bodybuilder looking players in nba history, wilt lifted with the terminator, etc. Every single sport was in the midst of steroids during that time period. What makes our league so special besides not digging for them as they still do to this day? Let's not be silly here folks.

On topic, I don't think the issue was ever that elite athletes today are on average better than those of the past. It's that on average the overall athletic level is higher today. More elite athletes, higher general level of athleticism.

For sure there are A LOT of steroids in the league and well, every American sport, because the US drug testing agency is a joke.

You're right, steroids were already widespread among Sovjet olympic lifters in the 50s to 60s, maybe even before and by the 70s they were well known and widespread. I am sure Wilt was on steroids in his later career as he was massive and worked out with Arnie who was of course a user.

As I understand it, the widespread NBA use began in the latter 80s, so yeah Jordan, Barkley all those guys probably used at some point.

Here's the thing, it is well known that Ben Johnson was a doper, but Carl Lewis was too, yet they don't look anywhere near the freak athletes in athletics today. That's not because today's athletes are some biological new breed, but because dosage is higher and they have much, much more effective cycles. This is the same with the NBA I think. Most of superior athleticism is simply doping.

Obviously Karl Malone, Mason, Rodman, those guys are suspect.

The thing is with doping, there are clear tells, a basketball player should not have massive deltoids (outer shoulder muscles) like Dwight. In fact, massive deltoids are a clear sign of doping as these are incredibly difficult to grow even for serious bodybuilders.

I just wonder, why if sport is so advanced do those old records still hold? My guess is that by the late 80s sport science had in fact already pushed the human body almost as far as is humanly possible.

I will say that there is now a stronger focus on athletes over skills, you have to, because no one has good skills coming into the league anymore, so you draft on athletics. That's why you have a lot of dumb ass athletes like Javale and so on.

In the 80s there were quite a few 'stiffs' but I would say that was as much about the role they played as big men.

I am really not sure this small increase in pure natural athleticism really means much in basketball, again this is a game, not athletics.

What matters is that for every athletic superstar today I can pick someone just as athletic from the 90s. You say Blake Griffin I say Shawn Kemp. You say Nate Robinson I say Spudd Webb, you say Dwight Howard I say David Robinson, you say Westbrook I say MJ, you say PG I say Dominique. You say Wade I say Drexler. Lebron? I say Barkley. I really do not see an athletic edge on the star level.

[ShawkFactory]

For sure there are A LOT of steroids in the league and well, every American sport, because the US drug testing agency is a joke.

You're right, steroids were already widespread among Sovjet olympic lifters in the 50s to 60s, maybe even before and by the 70s they were well known and widespread. I am sure Wilt was on steroids in his later career as he was massive and worked out with Arnie who was of course a user.

As I understand it, the widespread NBA use began in the latter 80s, so yeah Jordan, Barkley all those guys probably used at some point.

Here's the thing, it is well known that Ben Johnson was a doper, but Carl Lewis was too, yet they don't look anywhere near the freak athletes in athletics today. That's not because today's athletes are some biological new breed, but because dosage is higher and they have much, much more effective cycles. This is the same with the NBA I think. Most of superior athleticism is simply doping.

Obviously Karl Malone, Mason, Rodman, those guys are suspect.

The thing is with doping, there are clear tells, a basketball player should not have massive deltoids (outer shoulder muscles) like Dwight. In fact, massive deltoids are a clear sign of doping as these are incredibly difficult to grow even for serious bodybuilders.

I just wonder, why if sport is so advanced do those old records still hold? My guess is that by the late 80s sport science had in fact already pushed the human body almost as far as is humanly possible.

I will say that there is now a stronger focus on athletes over skills, you have to, because no one has good skills coming into the league anymore, so you draft on athletics. That's why you have a lot of dumb ass athletes like Javale and so on.

In the 80s there were quite a few 'stiffs' but I would say that was as much about the role they played as big men.

I am really not sure this small increase in pure natural athleticism really means much in basketball, again this is a game, not athletics.

What matters is that for every athletic superstar today I can pick someone just as athletic from the 90s. You say Blake Griffin I say Shawn Kemp. You say Nate Robinson I say Spudd Webb, you say Dwight Howard I say David Robinson, you say Westbrook I say MJ, you say PG I say Dominique. You say Wade I say Drexler. Lebron? I say Barkley. I really do not see an athletic edge on the star level.
That's the point being made though. On the star level there is no edge. The league as a whole? You'd have a difficult time convincing someone that the average player in the league was as athletic in the 60s/70s as they are now.

And just no to the bolded...come on now.

[TomBrady]

Bo Jackson was a greater athlete than every name you listed. Records mean nothing.

[90sgoat]

That's the point being made though. On the star level there is no edge. The league as a whole? You'd have a difficult time convincing someone that the average player in the league was as athletic in the 60s/70s as they are now.

And just no to the bolded...come on now.

See this is the problem I have with newer fans.

Barkley not as athletic as Lebron?

That fat ass was maybe the best rebounder of all time (at least 2nd) at 6'6''. He had insane jumping ability and strength. In his Philly days he went coast to coast for thunderous slams.

Again, Lebron might jump higher and from further distance off one leg, but he can barely even dunk off two legs. Barkley could explode and dunk with no space from very little distance, Lebron simply can't do that. Barkley was strong as an ox, pushing huge 7 foot centers out of the way for rebounds.

How is that not incredible athleticism?

[90sgoat]

Bo Jackson was a greater athlete than every name you listed. Records mean nothing.

Lol. Athletics is the most competitive sport there is. Victory is decided by inches and miliseconds. Those records are the hardest records to beat in sports.

[dhsilv]

Drug use is likely going down or more likely the power is going down to beat tests at the Olympic level.

Basketball however is getting better.

http://i.imgur.com/fU4qzUd.jpg

Now, keep in mind the bigger faster and stronger is not saying at each extreme they are getting better, but that the populate as a whole is trending that way. If the average (not the elite) are bigger, faster, and stronger that is far far more meaningful than the extreme tail ends of the bell curve.

[TomBrady]

Lol. Athletics is the most competitive sport there is. Victory is decided by inches and miliseconds. Those records are the hardest records to beat in sports.

Bo Jackson > every athlete you listed. By a lot.

[plowking]

What is the average weight of today's NBA athlete compared to previously? Would be interesting to see. I'm going to guess it is at least 10lbs heavier now.

EDIT: As I post this, above appears my answer...

Players heavier, stronger, and jumping higher than ever. Seems like every great prospect these days has a 40 inch vertical.

[dhsilv]

See this is the problem I have with newer fans.

Barkley not as athletic as Lebron?

That fat ass was maybe the best rebounder of all time (at least 2nd) at 6'6''. He had insane jumping ability and strength. In his Philly days he went coast to coast for thunderous slams.

Again, Lebron might jump higher and from further distance off one leg, but he can barely even dunk off two legs. Barkley could explode and dunk with no space from very little distance, Lebron simply can't do that. Barkley was strong as an ox, pushing huge 7 foot centers out of the way for rebounds.

How is that not incredible athleticism?

Barkley was a FREAK athlete. Lebron is more of one.

David Robinson however....that guy was a mutant!

[ShawkFactory]

See this is the problem I have with newer fans.

Barkley not as athletic as Lebron?

That fat ass was maybe the best rebounder of all time (at least 2nd) at 6'6''. He had insane jumping ability and strength. In his Philly days he went coast to coast for thunderous slams.

Again, Lebron might jump higher and from further distance off one leg, but he can barely even dunk off two legs. Barkley could explode and dunk with no space from very little distance, Lebron simply can't do that. Barkley was strong as an ox, pushing huge 7 foot centers out of the way for rebounds.

How is that not incredible athleticism?
You think Barkley is as good of an overall athlete as Lebron?

It has nothing to do with the era. Lebron is a freak unlike anything we've seen in the league really.

[dhsilv]

What is the average weight of today's NBA athlete compared to previously? Would be interesting to see. I'm going to guess it is at least 10lbs heavier now.

posted above, I can add a table if you really want, but not 10 pounds in the nba (well ok depends on when you start).

If you want, height is basically flat. 87 through 2015 the average height was 6'7. Before that however...

[90sgoat]

What is the average weight of today's NBA athlete compared to previously? Would be interesting to see. I'm going to guess it is at least 10lbs heavier now.

EDIT: As I post this, above appears my answer...

Players heavier, stronger, and jumping higher than ever. Seems like every great prospect these days has a 40 inch vertical.

Weight is definitely higher.

Is that better though?

Is a heavier basketball player a better basketball player?

[dhsilv]

Weight is definitely higher.

Is that better though?

Is a heavier basketball player a better basketball player?

All else equal, yes. If it is making them slower or jump lower, then no. If they were somehow oddly weaker again, bad.

Are players slower? They run a lot more. They jump as high or higher than ever. We have more freaks imo (more teams too).

[90sgoat]

All else equal, yes. If it is making them slower or jump lower, then no. If they were somehow oddly weaker again, bad.

Are players slower? They run a lot more. They jump as high or higher than ever. We have more freaks imo (more teams too).

They run more compared to the 00s but not the 80s. Not even close. They walk the ball up most of the time, even in the 90s you still ran the ball up a lot of the time. That's also why 80s players are skinnier and why you should be Lebron or Dwight size in a sport which consists of so much running.

Lebron gets tired now because he is heavier, he was a lot more active in his early career.

[90sgoat]

You think Barkley is as good of an overall athlete as Lebron?

It has nothing to do with the era. Lebron is a freak unlike anything we've seen in the league really.

Yes, but in basketball terms I don't think Lebron is a better ahtlete than Sir Charles, it depends on what you do with your athleticism. Let me know when Lebron grabs 33 rebounds in a game or when he just gets 20+ and he is a couple of inches taller.

Lebron is faster than Barkley in the open court, his two feet juming ability is worse, his first step not faster, he is a much worse second jumper

[PistonsFan#21]

They run more compared to the 00s but not the 80s. Not even close. They walk the ball up most of the time, even in the 90s you still ran the ball up a lot of the time. That's also why 80s players are skinnier and why you should be Lebron or Dwight size in a sport which consists of so much running.

Lebron gets tired now because he is heavier, he was a lot more active in his early career.

or maybe because hes almost 31 years old and out of his athletic prime... :confusedshrug: Was Jordan faster before his 1st retirement simply because he was lighter?

[dhsilv]

They run more compared to the 00s but not the 80s. Not even close. They walk the ball up most of the time, even in the 90s you still ran the ball up a lot of the time. That's also why 80s players are skinnier and why you should be Lebron or Dwight size in a sport which consists of so much running.

Lebron gets tired now because he is heavier, he was a lot more active in his early career.

Running with the ball is the slowest way to play basketball.

The running is happening on defense as teams run far more motion offenses and they are counted by zone defenses. Teams used to shoot more and have more plays. But the movement was far less.

edit


Oh and Lebron lost a good bit of weight. He's also 30 now...and still asked to carry the load.

[dhsilv]

For sure there are A LOT of steroids in the league and well, every American sport, because the US drug testing agency is a joke.

You're right, steroids were already widespread among Sovjet olympic lifters in the 50s to 60s, maybe even before and by the 70s they were well known and widespread. I am sure Wilt was on steroids in his later career as he was massive and worked out with Arnie who was of course a user.

As I understand it, the widespread NBA use began in the latter 80s, so yeah Jordan, Barkley all those guys probably used at some point.

Here's the thing, it is well known that Ben Johnson was a doper, but Carl Lewis was too, yet they don't look anywhere near the freak athletes in athletics today. That's not because today's athletes are some biological new breed, but because dosage is higher and they have much, much more effective cycles. This is the same with the NBA I think. Most of superior athleticism is simply doping.

Obviously Karl Malone, Mason, Rodman, those guys are suspect.

The thing is with doping, there are clear tells, a basketball player should not have massive deltoids (outer shoulder muscles) like Dwight. In fact, massive deltoids are a clear sign of doping as these are incredibly difficult to grow even for serious bodybuilders.

I just wonder, why if sport is so advanced do those old records still hold? My guess is that by the late 80s sport science had in fact already pushed the human body almost as far as is humanly possible.

I will say that there is now a stronger focus on athletes over skills, you have to, because no one has good skills coming into the league anymore, so you draft on athletics. That's why you have a lot of dumb ass athletes like Javale and so on.

In the 80s there were quite a few 'stiffs' but I would say that was as much about the role they played as big men.

I am really not sure this small increase in pure natural athleticism really means much in basketball, again this is a game, not athletics.

What matters is that for every athletic superstar today I can pick someone just as athletic from the 90s. You say Blake Griffin I say Shawn Kemp. You say Nate Robinson I say Spudd Webb, you say Dwight Howard I say David Robinson, you say Westbrook I say MJ, you say PG I say Dominique. You say Wade I say Drexler. Lebron? I say Barkley. I really do not see an athletic edge on the star level.

Weight training and diet knowledge is NIGHT AND DAY better today and I"ll be blunt even with the more cutting edge parts of it, there's HUGE potential in sports science. We're still learning how to use things like amino acids correctly. I think there is MASSIVE potential here. Back when I was younger and workedout instead of drinking beer and watching basketball, high dose BCAA's was just getting into vogue (80+ gram doses). The real issue was that it's hard to do the blood and insulin testing needed to get ratios dead on. EAA's were then added to the mix.

These made a dramatic difference for me and a lot of others. The room for growth needed a lab but the potential was huge.

Strength training keeps getting better. I remember a time when sleds and prowlers were barely known. Kettle bells weren't anywhere in the US. Strength training today has gotten better. As horrible as cross fit is, it is taking good sound concepts and sure bastardized them, but the elite strength coaches know this and know how to correctly use these things. This understanding is slowly moving even down to the high school level athletes.

Drugs are better, yes. That said testing is starting to catch up big time. Players are taking less powerful drugs to get around this.

We also have higher pay, bringing more and more people into the sport. A larger population. All this more and more pushes the freak athletes to stay with sports.

The ratio of drugs to better science and more athletic people in sports....who knows? It's pretty hard to tell. Large deltoids is hardly proof of anything. How many near 7 foot tall people do you know?

[dhsilv]

Barkley was a FREAK athlete. Lebron is more of one.

David Robinson however....that guy was a mutant!

Sorry quoting myself, but I missed something.

Second best rebounder?

Moses, Rodman, Russel, and Wilt would all be ahead of Sir Charles. Now after them...he's likely the next in line.

[Sarcastic]

Basketball players aren't inherently bigger, stronger, and faster.

The talent pool is larger however, thus leading to a higher quantity of big, fast, and strong players.

The increased talent pool is coming from Euro whites, who are less athletic than African Americans. So the talent pool is getting less athletic not more. There hasn't been an increase in African American population.

[dhsilv]

The increased talent pool is coming from Euro whites, who are less athletic than African Americans. So the talent pool is getting less athletic not more. There hasn't been an increase in African American population.

Do you have numbers behind the second statement?

And white people can be athletic but whatever....I'll not waste time addressing that one.

[Round Mound]

Charles Barkley 6`4 5/8 ft. No Player Today Can Do What He Did. :bowdown:

[90sgoat]

Charles Barkley 6`4 5/8 ft. No Player Today Can Do What He Did. :bowdown:

Once in a lifetime :cheers:

[tontoz]

Basketball players aren't inherently bigger, stronger, and faster.

The talent pool is larger however, thus leading to a higher quantity of big, fast, and strong players.


Then why do today's big men suck compared to 20-25 years ago?

[90sgoat]

Then why do today's big men suck compared to 20-25 years ago?

Bigger.Faster.Dumber

[Hey Yo]

Yes, but in basketball terms I don't think Lebron is a better ahtlete than Sir Charles, it depends on what you do with your athleticism. Let me know when Lebron grabs 33 rebounds in a game or when he just gets 20+ and he is a couple of inches taller.

Lebron is faster than Barkley in the open court, his two feet juming ability is worse, his first step not faster, he is a much worse second jumper
He grabbed 19 in a must win playoff game against Boston...27-19-10.

[ralph_i_el]

Basketball players aren't inherently bigger, stronger, and faster.

The talent pool is larger however, thus leading to a higher quantity of big, fast, and strong players.
^This. More American players due to more economic incentive+ the advent of a lot of foriegn players entering the league means that the talent pool is much larger.

Players also come back from injury with more of their athletecisim intact

[Round Mound]

Lebron and Phily Sixers Barkley are very comparable. Lebron is a Point-Forward though a better ball handler. Young Barkley was as good in the open court as Lebron though in terms of going coast to coast and finishing. Barkley was a more efficient scorer and a much better rebounder. Lebron may appear faster because he is longer and taller 6`8 ft while Barkley was just a bit below 6`5 ft. What made Barkley more increidlbe is that he played the game inside like a 7footer. Barkley wasn`t a perimeter player he was an inside player. Lebron maybe faster or more agil and more of a ballhandler but Barkley was stronger. Him and Karl Malone where the strongest forwards in their primes.

[The.Juice]

Basketball is sorta tough example since it's hard compare eras with how limited the NBA footage is before the 80s
Football with all its combine testing and extensive video whould be easier to compare.

[dhsilv]

[QUOTE=Round Mound]ebron and Phily Sixers Barkley are very comparable. Lebron is a Point-Forward though a better ball handler. Young Barkley was as good in the open court as Lebron though in terms of going coast to coast and finidshing. Barkley was a more efficient scorer and a much bette rebounder. Lebron may appear faster because he is longer and taller 6`8 ft while Barkley was just a bit below 6`5 ft. What made Barkley more increidlbe is that he played the game inside like a 7footer. Barkley wasn`t a perimeter player he was an inside player. Lebron maybe faster or more agil and more of a ballhandler but Barkley was stronger. Him and Karl Malone where the strongest forwards in their primes./QUOTE]

1 stop posting in bold.
2 now that I don't have to read that crap and can see what you said.

Barkley had real basketball skills lebron doesn't. Lebron athletically is not as strong however he's playing against bigger players today. Thus his size is less impressive than it would be in the 80's.

He's still a better athlete. But that's not going to diminish Charles. His peak is still imo at worst the 3rd best of any power forward (Duncan and KG being the only two you can discuss as better).

[plowking]

Then why do today's big men suck compared to 20-25 years ago?

They don't. Each position goes through a golden generation though.

Why are wing players so much better than before?

[Round Mound]

[QUOTE=Round Mound]ebron and Phily Sixers Barkley are very comparable. Lebron is a Point-Forward though a better ball handler. Young Barkley was as good in the open court as Lebron though in terms of going coast to coast and finidshing. Barkley was a more efficient scorer and a much bette rebounder. Lebron may appear faster because he is longer and taller 6`8 ft while Barkley was just a bit below 6`5 ft. What made Barkley more increidlbe is that he played the game inside like a 7footer. Barkley wasn`t a perimeter player he was an inside player. Lebron maybe faster or more agil and more of a ballhandler but Barkley was stronger. Him and Karl Malone where the strongest forwards in their primes./QUOTE]

1 stop posting in bold.
2 now that I don't have to read that crap and can see what you said.

Barkley had real basketball skills lebron doesn't. Lebron athletically is not as strong however he's playing against bigger players today. Thus his size is less impressive than it would be in the 80's.

He's still a better athlete. But that's not going to diminish Charles. His peak is still imo at worst the 3rd best of any power forward (Duncan and KG being the only two you can discuss as better).

Its my style to write in bold :confusedshrug:. Height doesnt determine strength. Charles Barkley was stronger than Lebron and physically young Chuck in Phily was as fast as Lebron (Watch the films). Chuck`s era was also more physical than todays game which pretty much perimeter oriented. Barkley was a great rebounder even when he was overweight and constantly injured in the late 90s.

[MMKM]

There is no significant difference in vertical jump or speed in the NBA today vs 25 years ago. For my kinesiology masters I did a year by year case study of NBA players combine tests since it started in the 1990's. This data can be found on draft press.com. There was no significant change in any measurement but weight (increased). Vertical jump has actually slightly decreased over the last 2 decades. In terms of injury prevention there has actually been an increased incidence of injuries since the 1980s. There is literally no statistical evidence of bigger faster stronger, it is a myth.

[Showtime80']

Yeah the 80's only had wings like Jordan (Goat), Bird, Drexler, Wilkins, English, Worthy, Aguirre, Dantley, King, Chambers, Dr J, Moncrief etc...

The PG and C were also deeper. In fact the ONLY position which could be deeper now a days would probably be PF and the 80's still produced guys like Karl Malone, Barkley, McHale, Buck Williams, Oakley, Larry Nance and Rodman to name a few!

I would say that there is an overall INCREASE in athleticism (running, jumping, size) because the NBA fell in love with those traits after Michael Jordan came along but it came at the expense of BASIC FUNDAMENTALS! and that is why the game is not as fluid or cerebral as it once was.

I always tell people who chime in on the athleticism trumps EVERYTHING agenda to rewatch some of the series from 1995 to 1998 when OLDER Jordan, Pippen, Rodman, Stockton, Malone, Olajuwon, Drexler took turns raping the SUPREMELY athletic 90's generation of Kemp, Penny, Shaq, Payton, Zo, Kobe, Jones, Garnett, Marbury , LJ etc...' It was a lesson in IQ and fundamental given by the veteran 80's guys.

Cerebral fundamental basketball with ALWAYS trump superior athleticism!

[2swift4u]

There is no significant difference in vertical jump or speed in the NBA today vs 25 years ago. For my kinesiology masters I did a year by year case study of NBA players combine tests since it started in the 1990's. This data can be found on draft press.com. There was no significant change in any measurement but weight (increased). Vertical jump has actually slightly decreased over the last 2 decades. In terms of injury prevention there has actually been an increased incidence of injuries since the 1980s. There is literally no statistical evidence of bigger faster stronger, it is a myth.

this is very interesting. The lower verticals may have something to do with the fact that players have gotten havier over the years due to more muscle mass. Even if it's pure muscle mass those pounds will hurt your vertical at some point.

Overall it seems logical that human beings can't continuesly get stronger or faster. There is a certain limit. Also we should keep in mind that there was a time when doping was a big factor in sports because it was either not yet called doping and therefore not illegal or it simply couldn't be detected at that time. So some records probably were set by doped athlets.

[r0drig0lac]

The question is: what are the Bolt records without peds?

[Round Mound]

Yeah the 80's only had wings like Jordan (Goat), Bird, Drexler, Wilkins, English, Worthy, Aguirre, Dantley, King, Chambers, Dr J, Moncrief etc...

The PG and C were also deeper. In fact the ONLY position which could be deeper now a days would probably be PF and the 80's still produced guys like Karl Malone, Barkley, McHale, Buck Williams, Oakley, Larry Nance and Rodman to name a few!

I would say that there is an overall INCREASE in athleticism (running, jumping, size) because the NBA fell in love with those traits after Michael Jordan came along but it came at the expense of BASIC FUNDAMENTALS! and that is why the game is not as fluid or cerebral as it once was.

I always tell people who chime in on the athleticism trumps EVERYTHING agenda to rewatch some of the series from 1995 to 1998 when OLDER Jordan, Pippen, Rodman, Stockton, Malone, Olajuwon, Drexler took turns raping the SUPREMELY athletic 90's generation of Kemp, Penny, Shaq, Payton, Zo, Kobe, Jones, Garnett, Marbury , LJ etc...' It was a lesson in IQ and fundamental given by the veteran 80's guys.

Cerebral fundamental basketball with ALWAYS trump superior athleticism!

:applause:

[MMKM]

this is very interesting. The lower verticals may have something to do with the fact that players have gotten havier over the years due to more muscle mass. Even if it's pure muscle mass those pounds will hurt your vertical at some point.

Overall it seems logical that human beings can't continuesly get stronger or faster. There is a certain limit. Also we should keep in mind that there was a time when doping was a big factor in sports because it was either not yet called doping and therefore not illegal or it simply couldn't be detected at that time. So some records probably were set by doped athlets.

I think these are all good points however with regards to muscle mass, NFL athletes (minus offensive line) have much higher vertical jumps than NBA players on average. So, NBA players are nowhere near a weight that would negatively effect their vertical jump.... Regarding PED's, PED's were rampant in the early 80's and athletes have stayed ahead of the curve ever since. Even with drug testing as strict as it is today, look up SARMS. They are currently legal, undetectable on a blood or urine test and they are every bit as effective as anabolic steroids. I would suspect a large chunk of pro athletes in every sport are using them at this point. So yeah, it's hard to compare across generations but like you said, humans are humans and have natural limits. Look at cadaver studies with throwing a baseball. Sports Scientists have determined that for an mlb pitcher to throw any faster than the current record, a pitchers arm will literally tear itself apart. At this point in order to really push past those human limits, it is going to take new drugs, genetic modification, or Nano technology. There just isn't much room for improvement left.

[sdot_thadon]

Yes, but in basketball terms I don't think Lebron is a better ahtlete than Sir Charles, it depends on what you do with your athleticism. Let me know when Lebron grabs 33 rebounds in a game or when he just gets 20+ and he is a couple of inches taller.

Lebron is faster than Barkley in the open court, his two feet juming ability is worse, his first step not faster, he is a much worse second jumper 2 things, Lebron is faster than barkely ever was, second he is a sf while chuck was a pf. I'm sure that's where all those rebounds went.....that said chuck was a freak of nature in his own right.


There is no significant difference in vertical jump or speed in the NBA today vs 25 years ago. For my kinesiology masters I did a year by year case study of NBA players combine tests since it started in the 1990's. This data can be found on draft press.com. There was no significant change in any measurement but weight (increased). Vertical jump has actually slightly decreased over the last 2 decades. In terms of injury prevention there has actually been an increased incidence of injuries since the 1980s. There is literally no statistical evidence of bigger faster stronger, it is a myth.
This is pretty intriguing, so guys weigh more now but basically put up the same numbers. That's actually the gist of it. Bigger guys being able to move the same as lighter guys. Was it a tangible difference in the vertical leap?

[MMKM]

2 things, Lebron is faster than barkely ever was, second he is a sf while chuck was a pf. I'm sure that's where all those rebounds went.....that said chuck was a freak of nature in his own right.


This is pretty intriguing, so guys weigh more now but basically put up the same numbers. That's actually the gist of it. Bigger guys being able to move the same as lighter guys. Was it a tangible difference in the vertical leap?

To the best of my recollection it was almost 2 inches, so yes. Lane shuttle times got a little better, however you could only speculate that with the extra weight, "functional" shuttle times while fatigued in an actual game situation are probably slower in today's game due to heavier athletes with less stamina. Basically, not one statistic showed that NBA athletes have gotten better since testing began in the early 1990's, except weight and agility drill (not to a statistically significant degree).

And also worth mentioning, pace statistics from the 1980s and early 90s support the theory that the game has slowed down, which would make it less aerobically/anaerobically demanding today than it used to be. So in terms of raw data, players in the 80s/90s were jumping higher, running a greater total distance per game, and most likely based on their endurance, were quicker in-game when fatigue is an actual variable.

[jstern]

this is very interesting. The lower verticals may have something to do with the fact that players have gotten havier over the years due to more muscle mass. Even if it's pure muscle mass those pounds will hurt your vertical at some point.

Overall it seems logical that human beings can't continuesly get stronger or faster. There is a certain limit. Also we should keep in mind that there was a time when doping was a big factor in sports because it was either not yet called doping and therefore not illegal or it simply couldn't be detected at that time. So some records probably were set by doped athlets.

It's not even that they're getting faster, stronger, etc. Because when you take external things into consideration you find that humans then are pretty much like humans today.

Watch this Ted video that I posted on ISH many times before https://www.ted.com/talks/david_epstein_are_athletes_really_getting_faster_b etter_stronger?language=en

I'm going off of memory, but when you take into account, for example the surface that was used, the difference in times between Jesse Owens and Usain Bolt is almost insignificant.

Or if you think back to the 2008 Olympics. Most of the swimming records were expected to be broken, not because the athletes were better, or faster, but simply because of a new suit that they were using. That was the thing that they kept talking about back then. The new suits. Not in vs past era kind of way, the way we discuss it here. But in a, this is something interesting kind of way. No agenda.

Or if I remember correctly. The minute mile has been destroyed. But not because of bigger stronger faster, but really because it was something that back then someone was doing in a more of a part time, non serious hobby kind of way.

If anything, genetically, eventually humans are going to get less athletic. Since it's required so much less for survival in the modern world. Also when you considered that less healthy humans are being kept alive and reproduce, due to advances in modern medicine.

You can built on top of new technology, and medicine. Since all you have to do is take it and improve on it. But you cannot do that with human genetics. Modern parents cannot just take Michael Jordan's gene, poke around with it, and improve it, and have a bigger faster kid.

[3ball]

So in terms of raw data, players in the 80s/90s were jumping higher, running a greater total distance per game, and most likely based on their endurance, were quicker in-game when fatigue is an actual variable.


sdot_thadon destroyed

this destruction reminds me of when DonDadda took sdot to the woodshed a while back - sdot swore that Lebron would destroy a 6'6" 210 pound player like Jordan - DonDadda pointed out that Lebron just finished shooting 33% against a 6'6" 207 pound player in Iggy.... Yikes... Other posters started posting gifs of old Mortal Kombat fatalities..

sdot didn't post for at least a week after that... :oldlol:

[dhsilv]

[QUOTE=dhsilv]

Its my style to write in bold :confusedshrug:. Height doesnt determine strength. Charles Barkley was stronger than Lebron and physically young Chuck in Phily was as fast as Lebron (Watch the films). Chuck`s era was also more physical than todays game which pretty much perimeter oriented. Barkley was a great rebounder even when he was overweight and constantly injured in the late 90s.

You need a new style. The bold makes reading what you're saying annoying and well I didn't finish reading to be honest. It's rather rude really.

[dhsilv]

There is no significant difference in vertical jump or speed in the NBA today vs 25 years ago. For my kinesiology masters I did a year by year case study of NBA players combine tests since it started in the 1990's. This data can be found on draft press.com. There was no significant change in any measurement but weight (increased). Vertical jump has actually slightly decreased over the last 2 decades. In terms of injury prevention there has actually been an increased incidence of injuries since the 1980s. There is literally no statistical evidence of bigger faster stronger, it is a myth.

If they are bigger and the same speed. They are bigger faster stronger...

It should also be pointed out and I mean how a guy in a masters program (even a lesser one) should have noticed the downward trend in age of the ELITE talent. The longer careers of elite talent which all create skewing in the on court data.

Combines to my knowledge also aren't really doing much to test strength unless I'm unaware of something?

BTW do you recall wingspan to height ratios or even wingspan as a whole? Also hand size?

Did you look just first round picks vs the second rounds?

This would actually be interesting data to play with. Is this data easily downloaded or would I have to do a lot of data manipulation and copy and paste?

[MMKM]

If they are bigger and the same speed. They are bigger faster stronger...

It should also be pointed out and I mean how a guy in a masters program (even a lesser one) should have noticed the downward trend in age of the ELITE talent. The longer careers of elite talent which all create skewing in the on court data.

Combines to my knowledge also aren't really doing much to test strength unless I'm unaware of something?

BTW do you recall wingspan to height ratios or even wingspan as a whole? Also hand size?

Did you look just first round picks vs the second rounds?

This would actually be interesting data to play with. Is this data easily downloaded or would I have to do a lot of data manipulation and copy and paste?

Data was taken from first and second round. The data was taken from Draftxpress.com.

[sdot_thadon]

To the best of my recollection it was almost 2 inches, so yes. Lane shuttle times got a little better, however you could only speculate that with the extra weight, "functional" shuttle times while fatigued in an actual game situation are probably slower in today's game due to heavier athletes with less stamina. Basically, not one statistic showed that NBA athletes have gotten better since testing began in the early 1990's, except weight and agility drill (not to a statistically significant degree).

And also worth mentioning, pace statistics from the 1980s and early 90s support the theory that the game has slowed down, which would make it less aerobically/anaerobically demanding today than it used to be. So in terms of raw data, players in the 80s/90s were jumping higher, running a greater total distance per game, and most likely based on their endurance, were quicker in-game when fatigue is an actual variable.
Cool thanks for the info, sounds legit but I'll take anything in can't see for myself with a grain of salt. You could also speculate that previous eras while higher in pace were more lax and less intense defensively than now. I'd imagine in most cases weight could decrease lift but whether or not it's tangible kinda hinges on the weight differences in comparison as well. Lots of speculation can be made, but I'd like to know the actual meat and potatoes. Also the numbers don't seem to correlate with what we've seen on the floor, shouldn't really be a discrepancy there. It doesn't seem to account for the role player types we're seeing in the dunk contest yearly now. I'd like to know more.


sdot_thadon destroyed

this destruction reminds me of when DonDadda took sdot to the woodshed a while back - sdot swore that Lebron would destroy a 6'6" 210 pound player like Jordan - DonDadda pointed out that Lebron just finished shooting 33% against a 6'6" 207 pound player in Iggy.... Yikes... Other posters started posting gifs of old Mortal Kombat fatalities..

sdot didn't post for at least a week after that... :oldlol:
What a sad, sad clown. This is what an actual discussion looks like 3ball, im sure you can't relate. Nobody really knows what you're getting at bro, I'm pretty sure it was one of those threads where you/him present baseless data then walk away with your hands up like you did something. Sad, sad fellow. Shouldn't you be off making gifs from vhs tapes, or taking acting classes?

[Marchesk]

The question is: what are the Bolt records without peds?

Without PEDs, modern track surface, modern shoes, and starting blocks is he faster than Jesse Owens?