Slow pace + pounding the glass + physicality =

[3ball]

90's basketball.

and the Warriors kypronite.. it's obvious that 90's style is the formula to beat them

if Curry and his team can't handle the Spurs' pace, rebounding and physicality, how would they handle the grind-it-out style of the 90's or the Bad Boys?

[lilteapot]

90's basketball.

and the Warriors kypronite.. it's obvious that 90's style is the formula to beat them

if Curry and his team can't handle the Spurs' pace, rebounding and physicality, how would they handle the grind-it-out style of the 90's or the Bad Boys?

[Fallen Angel]

Didn't the Warriors already beat San Antonio, Cleveland, and a healthy Memphis team all this season?

[90sgoat]

You're right.

For the youngins, how the Spurs played last night was very 90s. That was what most 90s ball looked like, low post (Diaw), midrange (Kawhi), pick and roll (Parker, LMA) and tough half court pressure.

Such simple tools with such great success.

[swagga]

Didn't the Warriors already beat San Antonio, Cleveland, and a healthy Memphis team all this season?

a san antonio team that tried to run with the warriors as compared to pounding them like yesterday ... even the commentators were talking about the different pace tactic.
a cleveland team with no horrible pnr defenders (love and kyrie) and lacking a true rim protector, with lebron sapping blatt .. nice pick there son :lol
a memphis team that should play under the red cross sign with all their injuries.

it's obvious you don't even watch the games, you just morey style the boxscore :roll:
red gonna red I guess :facepalm

[hold this L]

90's basketball.

and the Warriors kypronite.. it's obvious that 90's style is the formula to beat them

if Curry and his team can't handle the Spurs' pace, rebounding and physicality, how would they handle the grind-it-out style of the 90's or the Bad Boys?
How would you know 2ball, did an article tell you that? You don't even watch basketball. :pimp:

[3ball]

.
SA.. SPURS OREB%:. 31.8
WARRIORS OREB%:. 15.8

PACE OF GAME:. 87.1


The Spurs won the game with superior rebounding, slow pace and higher physicality... The 90's would do the same:


1996 League-Wide OREB%:. 30.6
2016 League-Wide OREB%:. 23.7

1996 League-Wide PACE:. 91.8
2016 League-Wide PACE:. 95.8

HAND-CHECKING:. legal

[Fallen Angel]

vs. Spurs:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201601250GSW.html

vs. Cleveland:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201512250GSW.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201601180CLE.html

Blowouts vs. Memphis:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201511020GSW.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201511110MEM.html

Three teams that play at their own slow pace, who love to play two bigs, and have physical defenders.

[swagga]

vs. Spurs:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201601250GSW.html

vs. Cleveland:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201512250GSW.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201601180CLE.html

Blowouts vs. Memphis:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201511020GSW.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201511110MEM.html

Three teams that play at their own slow pace, who love to play two bigs, and have physical defenders.

"do you watch the games? "
"yes, here is the link to boxscore"

:roll: :roll: :roll:

[3ball]

vs. Spurs:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201601250GSW.html

vs. Cleveland:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201512250GSW.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201601180CLE.html

Blowouts vs. Memphis:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201511020GSW.html
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201511110MEM.html

Three teams that play at their own slow pace, who love to play two bigs, and have physical defenders.


I never said ANY team from the 90's could beat the Warriors.

I said that if the Spurs can beat the Warriors with slow pace, superior rebounding, and higher physicality, then the Warriors would also lose to the Bad Boys (who had superior players than the 2016 Spurs) and other teams from eras that had slower pace, better rebounding, and higher physicality..

It's clear that slow pace, better rebounding, and higher physicality are the keys to beating the Warriors, which are the 3 exact strengths and advantages of the 90's.

[PistonsFan#21]

People wanna act like 1 game sample is enough to jump to conclusions on how The Warriors would deal against 90s defense? :facepalm

Didnt the 72 win Bulls team lose to the 96 Raptors?

The Spurs won by only 8 at home with Curry shooting 1-12 and Klay 1-7 from 3. Off nights can happen to anybody, they just missed shots that they usually knock down

[Inferno]

I love reactionary threads :oldlol:

[3ball]

People wanna act like 1 game sample is enough to jump to conclusions on how The Warriors would deal against 90s defense? :facepalm


It isn't just one game - the Cavs used the same formula against the Warriors in the 2015 Finals.

The formula of slow pace, superior rebounding and higher physicality is SO effective against the Warriors, that the Cavs won 2 games despite having a badly injured roster and enduring 39% shooting from their star player while his defense allowed a 7 ppg role player to become > Curry.

So even before the Spurs' lockdown of the Warriors, the Cavs showed us that slow pace, superior rebounding, and higher physicality were the Warriors' kyrptonite.. Of course, these three things were the exact strengths and advantages of the 90's era, thus providing the perfect environment to suppress Warriors' basketball.





The Spurs won by only 8 at home with Curry shooting 1-12 and Klay 1-7 from 3. Off nights can happen to anybody, they just missed shots that they usually knock down


8 points is a lot when both teams scored about 80 points.. Slow pace means smaller margins of victory.

And regarding comparisons to previous teams - the Warriors MUST make 3-pointers to be great, which limits them compared to prior all-time great teams.

Prior teams like the 90's Bulls didn't RELY on making 24 footers, and their greatness wasn't BASED on making 24-footers - the Bulls were great because they were superior at scoring in ALL ways, not just 24 footers.

The Bulls' greater versatility and ability to excel without 24-footers makes them better pure basketball players with greater capacity to adjust to any brand of basketball, in any era.
.

[CuterThanRubio]

90s basketball is trash.

The Spurs have the greatest defender in NBA history on their side, their loss has nothing to do with your stupid little fantasies.

[Inferno]

Must suck not being able to watch modern basketball without salivating about how MJ would shit on every team, eh 3ball? I wish you could enjoy the NBA like the rest of us do bud :cheers:

[SouBeachTalents]

Must suck not being able to watch modern basketball without salivating about how MJ would shit on every team, eh 3ball? I wish you could enjoy the NBA like the rest of us do bud :cheers:

Lol, he doesn't even watch modern basketball. He admittedly hasn't watched a game in 5 years

[Inferno]

Lol, he doesn't even watch modern basketball. He admittedly hasn't watched a game in 5 years

:biggums:

[3ball]

The Spurs loss has nothing to do with your stupid little fantasies (slow pace, superior rebounding, higher physicality)


The Cavs used the same formula against the Warriors in the 2015 Finals.

The formula of slow pace, superior rebounding and higher physicality is SO effective against the Warriors, that the Cavs won 2 games despite having a badly injured roster and enduring 39% shooting from their star player while his defense allowed a 7 ppg role player to become > Curry.

So even before the Spurs' lockdown of the Warriors, the Cavs showed us that slow pace, superior rebounding, and higher physicality were the Warriors' kyrptonite.. Of course, these three things were the exact strengths and advantages of the 90's era, thus providing the perfect environment to suppress Warriors' basketball.





90s basketball is trash.


As the Cavs and the Spurs have shown, the formula to defeat the Warriors is slow pace, superior rebounding and higher physicality.

These three things were the primary strengths and advantages of 90's basketball, which means the 90's era was the perfect environment to suppress Warriors' basketball.

Heck, if these Spurs can lockdown the Warriors, than the more talented and tougher Bad Boys would crush the Warriors.





your stupid little fantasies


It's a fantasy that the Warriors could beat previous all-time great teams - the Warriors MUST make 3-pointers to be great, which limits them compared to prior great teams.

Teams like the 90's Bulls didn't RELY on making 24 footers, and their greatness wasn't BASED on making 24-footers - the Bulls were great because they were superior at scoring in ALL ways, not just 24 footers.

The Bulls' greater versatility and ability to excel without 24-footers makes them better pure basketball players with greater capacity to adjust to any brand of basketball, in any era.

[Chadwin]

People wanna act like 1 game sample is enough to jump to conclusions on how The Warriors would deal against 90s defense? :facepalm

Didnt the 72 win Bulls team lose to the 96 Raptors?

The Spurs won by only 8 at home with Curry shooting 1-12 and Klay 1-7 from 3. Off nights can happen to anybody, they just missed shots that they usually knock down

Was that shooting just an off night or the result of good defense?

[navy]

Was that shooting just an off night or the result of good defense?
It was both.

[bigkingsfan]

Warriors missing their best rebounding big and interior defender the other day. Lets take Rodman off that Bulls team.

[SchrOEder]

90's basketball.

and the Warriors kypronite.. it's obvious that 90's style is the formula to beat them

if Curry and his team can't handle the Spurs' pace, rebounding and physicality, how would they handle the grind-it-out style of the 90's or the Bad Boys?

i dont think so. at least you cant generalize it. e.g. barkley would not be dominant in todays league. no midrange game, no threat from three. undersized.
he would be eaten alive by Anthony davis and Co

[hold this L]

Must suck not being able to watch modern basketball without salivating about how MJ would shit on every team, eh 3ball? I wish you could enjoy the NBA like the rest of us do bud :cheers:
It's amazing that 2ball already admitted he doesn't even watch basketball and writes paragraphs about today's game when he doesn't know sh1t. What kind of a complete loser does that? :applause:

2ball, I want you to follow these instructions. Read what my name says and then never talk about modern basketball again. You don't know sh#t.

[SchrOEder]

Actually, you CAN generalize - your statement about Barkley would have some validity, IF Barkley didn't have a killer midrange game and IF you needed to shoot well from midrange to be good today.

But Barkley's midrange game was killer and guys like Lebron and Westbrook are among the league's best scorers with horrible midrange and 3-point efficiency.

Btw, nearly EVERY 20 ppg scorer in previous eras had killer midrange game... But you new fans don't get it - previous eras didn't shoot 3-pointers, so nearly EVERY good scorer had a tremendous midrange game - most points in previous eras were scored from midrange!!!!

Essentially, previous eras replaced all the 3-pointers that today's game takes (nearly 1/3 of all shots) with mostly midrange shots.

barkley didnt have an isolation midrange game like kobe, dirk, durant. in his first 5 season, Barkley shot just ca. 18% of his overall shots from midrange

[3ball]

barkley didnt have an isolation midrange game, like kobe, dirk, durant
You have no clue - Barkley's isolation game was one of the best EVER - they changed the rules because of him.

And again, his midrange game was stellar, just like all good scorers back then - previous eras didn't shoot 3-pointers, so nearly EVERY good scorer had a tremendous midrange game.. Most points in previous eras were scored from midrange!!!!

Of course, Barkley wouldn't need his good midrange game today - Lebron and Westbrook are among the league's best scorers even though they have horrible midrange and 3-point efficiency - this new myth that great shooting is necessary to be a good scorer in today's game is complete BS.

[r0drig0lac]

i dont think so. at least you cant generalize it. e.g. barkley would not be dominant in todays league. no midrange game, no threat from three. undersized.
he would be eaten alive by Anthony davis and Co

http://insidehoops.com/forum/images/smilies/no.gif

[andgar923]

barkley didnt have an isolation midrange game like kobe, dirk, durant. in his first 5 season, Barkley shot just ca. 18% of his overall shots from midrange
:biggums: :biggums: :biggums:

[DoctorP]

They didn't have Bogut. Or do you just ignore variables like this?

[Round Mound]

83-93 b-ball was like that. The mid 90s and late 90s is similar to todays game but still with better post players and centers etc.

[90sgoat]

83-93 b-ball was like that. The mid 90s and late 90s is similar to todays game but still with better post players and centers etc.

Lots of run and gun teams in the 80s.

Around 1995 is when the league changes hand check the first time and the influx of 'I wanna be like Mike' chuckers.

Still teams like Heat, Pacers, Knicks, Sonics play very strong defense better than most of the 80s teams.

[Round Mound]

Lots of run and gun teams in the 80s.

Around 1995 is when the league changes hand check the first time and the influx of 'I wanna be like Mike' chuckers.

Still teams like Heat, Pacers, Knicks, Sonics play very strong defense better than most of the 80s teams.

In the west yes but in east it was exactly what 3-ball is talking about. True regarding the defense for west teams but not east teams in the 80s.

[FKAri]

Slow pace + pounding the glass + physicality

= your dad teaching you a lesson in sexual submission

[Nick Young]

90's basketball.

and the Warriors kypronite.. it's obvious that 90's style is the formula to beat them

if Curry and his team can't handle the Spurs' pace, rebounding and physicality, how would they handle the grind-it-out style of the 90's or the Bad Boys?

[CuterThanRubio]

The Cavs used the same formula against the Warriors in the 2015 Finals.

The formula of slow pace, superior rebounding and higher physicality is SO effective against the Warriors, that the Cavs won 2 games despite having a badly injured roster and enduring 39% shooting from their star player while his defense allowed a 7 ppg role player to become > Curry.

So even before the Spurs' lockdown of the Warriors, the Cavs showed us that slow pace, superior rebounding, and higher physicality were the Warriors' kyrptonite.. Of course, these three things were the exact strengths and advantages of the 90's era, thus providing the perfect environment to suppress Warriors' basketball.



As the Cavs and the Spurs have shown, the formula to defeat the Warriors is slow pace, superior rebounding and higher physicality.

These three things were the primary strengths and advantages of 90's basketball, which means the 90's era was the perfect environment to suppress Warriors' basketball.

Heck, if these Spurs can lockdown the Warriors, than the more talented and tougher Bad Boys would crush the Warriors.



It's a fantasy that the Warriors could beat previous all-time great teams - the Warriors MUST make 3-pointers to be great, which limits them compared to prior great teams.

Teams like the 90's Bulls didn't RELY on making 24 footers, and their greatness wasn't BASED on making 24-footers - the Bulls were great because they were superior at scoring in ALL ways, not just 24 footers.

The Bulls' greater versatility and ability to excel without 24-footers makes them better pure basketball players with greater capacity to adjust to any brand of basketball, in any era.

The Cavs lost that series, moot point.

The Warriors stomped the Spurs earlier this season, explain that?

Kawhi single handedly crushed GSW's rhythm with his defense and timely scoring, there's nothing more to it.

If Curry and Klay hit a few more threes they would have won, and over the course of an entire series they won't be cold every night, so keep dreaming@!

Not to mention, The Spurs are playing 2016 ball, son! Nothing 90s about Pop's planning, hes way ahead of the curve.

[soots]

As a Spurs fan it wouldnt matter if you put the Warriors in the 90s ball era.

They would still dominate, no team, including the 90s Bulls would know how to defend deep 3 shooters in 4-5 positions.

The level of defense in last nights game was on another level. Even bad boy pistons/early 2000s pistons and the twin tower super defensive teams could NOT handle that amount of long range shooting.

Clogging the lane/denying the drive (e.g. Jordan rules, Towers) would just benefit the long range Warriors.

[NZStreetBaller]

Defending the 3 pointer and slowing the game is a huge key to beating the warriors however 90s type defense didnt emphasize the 3 point defense as much as protecting the paint.

[D. Toretto]

Does anybody realize Bogut wasn't even playing? WTF is this overreaction? As if the spurs stomped the warriors.. :roll:

[3ball]

90s type defense didnt emphasize the 3 point defense as much as protecting the paint.


ALL eras defend good shooters tightly on the perimeter, so guys like Reggie Miller, Bird or Dale Ellis were guarded just as tightly as today.

Infact, they were guarded much tighter due to legal hand-checking, whereas today's perimeter defense bans hand-checking - the NBA's hands-off rule requires space between defender and ballhandler, allowing for easier driving and shooting than previous eras.





Defending the 3 pointer and slowing the game is a huge key to beating the warriors


The 90's emphasized slow pace, superior rebounding, and higher physicality, which are the Warriors' kryptonite, as the OP title states.





90s type defense didnt emphasize the 3 point defense as much as protecting the paint.


Teams didn't need to emphasize 3-point defense because the 3-point-producing, drive-and-kick plays of today's game weren't common back then - post-ups were the staple of most offenses, so teams had to emphasize defending the paint instead of the 3-point line.

But now that teams have sufficient 3-point shooting personnel to drive-and-kick for 3-pointers (as opposed to 2-pointers), the drive-and-kick format has become more efficient than the post-up format.. This proves that the decline in post-ups is due to higher efficiency drive-and-kick made possible by 3-pointers, not defensive tactics.. In the absence of 3-pointers, no amount of defensive strategy could prevent post-ups from supplanting drive-and-kick..

Since post-ups, mid-range, off-ball and isolations were the only things left in the 80's without the 3-pointers needed to make drive-and-kick worthwhile, we can say with certainty that many of today's elite players would be lesser players back then - their 3-and-D skill sets exclude elite ability in any of the aforementioned areas.
.

[Showtime80']

I've said it before and I'll say it again, the death of the true dominant low post players combined with the extinction of the pass first PG has made the game HARDER than it really is for the ENTIRE NBA!!! It's ridiculous watching teams with no commitment or options in the post like Warriors running around for 20+ seconds just to get a long 3 pointer, boring and uninventive basketball to say the least.

Watching average post players like Aldridge and Diaw torch the Warriors in the few instances their limited post skills allowed them to only makes me think of how guys like Kareem, Olajuwon, Shaq, Moses, Ewing etc... would absolutely MURDER this small ball era and how many open shots would they create for their teammates from the double and triple teams committed down low. The offense would move a lot quicker and efficiently with those types of players in the paint, believe me.

The Warriors are who they are, they are a 3 point shooting team who are going to look HORRIBLE when that shot is not falling, they really don't have a plan B, that's it! I felt the Spurs should've won by at least 15 points if not for chucking a bunch of ill-advised 3 threes at the other end instead of pounding it down low. The Spurs are NOT a great 3 point shooting team and should limit their attempts to 12-15 and only when they are wide open.

And to the OVERRATED 90's defense, remember that teams in that decade became EASIER to defend thanks to the increase in salaries and teams along with the salary cap and the popular Bulls formula of 2 all-stars surrounded by role players that turned teams from the DEEP offensive powerhouses they were in the 80's to the slow down, possession control snore fest they became in the 90's.

Compare the title teams rosters of the 80's to those of the 90's, NO CONTEST! In the 80's you needed 4 to 5 all-star caliber players to win the title where in the 90's 1 or 2 all-stars could get you titles and to the finals consistently. Hell Hakeem won the 1994 title being the ONLY ALL STAR on that team for God's sake!

The 90's Knicks, Heat, Pacers, Sonics, Jazz and Magic would've gotten their clocks cleaned by teams like the 80's Bucks, Mavs, Cavs, Rockets and Nuggets let alone the superpowers like the 80's Celtics, Lakers, Sixers or Pistons!

[aquaadverse]

LOL. So what 3Balls argument always comes down to is players who adapt their games to the current rules are inferior to past players who do the same thing. Your precious theories assume selective criteria. Current players coming up through the old system would adjust their games to those rules. Older period players would have to do the same for current rules or foul out early every game. But what if didn't have the personnel for 3 point shots. Ok. But what if they did ? How would those paint packing teams fair under current rules ? What if they had the same same 3 second rule they have today ?

I have no idea why a guy who admits to not watching games for 5 years would spend his time and 10,000+ posts and 2 years on this stuff. Plus posting tedious, redundant MJ comments totally off topic. Dude, save yourself and all of us time and put this crap on a Wiki page and post the link. Save us all a bunch of time.

[choppermagic]

90s basketball is trash.

The Spurs have the greatest defender in NBA history on their side, their loss has nothing to do with your stupid little fantasies.

Dennis Rodman no longer plays for the Spurs.

But yeah, the 90s had some weaknesses.

[PP34Deuce]

From watching that game in San Antonio I noticed quite a few things...

Spurs perimeter D refused to give open looks to 3's. I saw Green and Parker along with reserves staying up and picking up curry bringing the ball up.

I saw Kawhi defending Klay more and also roaming on Defense.

they absolutely left Draymond wide open on 3's and I saw Draymond had zero confidence in the 3 ball shot.

They controlled the pace and allowed Lamarcus to work in the post and high post.

Becky and Pop certainly found some ways to combat the multiple screens defenders go through with Golden State.

[feyki]

So , 90's Basketball = Cavs in last year's Finals ?

[Nuff Said]

3ball clearly watches games today as he's counted numerous times on various games including last season's finals so stop with the stupid rhetoric. As annoying as he is he's usually right.

[aquaadverse]

Nice argument. Until he admits he watches games, he sucks.