Leave it to an ACTIVE PLAYER to clarify the difference between eras...

[Showtime80']

Here's Vince Carter and the recently retired Paul Pierce youngins, sit down and listen:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qm2r49yIr3s&t=160s

Everybody bows down to the 80's-90's and it is no accident. Game, set and match!

[sportjames23]

:bowdown:

[superduper]

But what does fking Gunbert 'inthe' Arena think :oldlol:

[sdot_thadon]

Here's Vince Carter and the recently retired Paul Pierce youngins, sit down and listen:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qm2r49yIr3s&t=160s

Everybody bows down to the 80's-90's and it is no accident. Game, set and match!
except we know without even watching neither of them played in the 80s and debuted in the nba in 1999. I'm not sure what this is supposed to prove about the 80s or 90s?:wtf:

[NBAGOAT]

i seriously wonder wat op thinks about the thread with wilt and russell where wilt said he avg 70 and russell essentially said the 80s celtics and lakers and 90 bulls couldnt beat his celtics teams. Add on some not so positive comments from guys like oscar and kareem

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

i seriously wonder wat op thinks about the thread with wilt and russell where wilt said he avg 70 and russell essentially said the 80s celtics and lakers and 90 bulls couldnt beat his celtics teams. Add on some not so positive comments from guys like oscar and kareem

This is a little different.

Vince actually played in both eras (college/professionally in the late 90s). If anyone is without bias? Its him.

Dude has seen different rule changes, and gone against a number of ATG players / teams.

[Showtime80']

That's exactly the point sdot, Carter and Pierce got to play against the waayyy past their primes Jordan, Pippen, Stockton, Malone, Olajuwon, Robinson to name a few and were still in awe of their physicality and level of execution even when that aspect of the game was already being curtailed by the league in 1999 when they came in. They can imagine it was even MORE INTENSE in the 80's to mid 90's when all those guys were in their primes.

Carter and Pierce are more qualified than ANYBODY to assess the deterioration of NBA physicality, fundamentals and overall basketball IQ over the past 20 years.

[NBAGOAT]

This is a little different.

Vince actually played in both eras (college/professionally in the late 90s). If anyone is without bias? Its that dude whose seen different rule changes, gone against a number of ATG players AND teams.

eh everyone's got bias even though vince is one of the better guys to ask. kareem played most of the 80's so knows the oscar, west, wilt group and the mj, larry, magic group and I would say it's obvious he has some biases. Obviously gilbert shouldnt be taken too seriously but he came in like 3-4 years before rule changes too.

I'll trust guys who were player evaluators more, vince isnt a front office guy or coach yet. hell even elgin baylor even though he was a terrible gm, at least he was a gm.

[Phoenix]

Can we just....accept that people who grew up or played in an era, for the most part, are gonna defend their territory? And that a player's opinion will either be validated or trivialized accordingly? I'd feel like a jackass walking into a barber shop thinking youtube footage or basketball reference gives me fair license to argue with some 70 year old about Wilt or Oscar. You can call me 'old man in the clouds' ignorant or absolute, but anyone born 20 years ago, your opinion on 80s/90's basketball really means sweet **** all. At least have the humility to realize that not all opinions are informed, and being entitled to one doesn't make it valid.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

eh everyone's got bias even though vince is one of the better guys to ask. kareem played most of the 80's so knows the oscar, west, wilt group and the mj, larry, magic group and I would say it's obvious he has some biases. Obviously gilbert shouldnt be taken too seriously but he came in like 3-4 years before rule changes too.

I'll trust guys who were player evaluators more, vince isnt a front office guy or coach yet. hell even elgin baylor even though he was a terrible gm, at least he was a gm.

I think that's an understatement.

Vince basically went against a majority of players...who fans deem Top 20 All-Time. His career is...different. In a unique, but rare way.

[NBAGOAT]

I think that's an understatement.

Vince basically went against a majority of players...who fans deem Top 20 All-Time. His career is very unique.

eh thats true. there are guys like garnett, duncan, kobe, allen etc who arent too far off however

[elementally morale]

Vince Carter is LESS biased than someone who has not seen it (at) 'all'. But he IS biased. Everyone is. When did he have better results? 15 years ago. When was he the better player? 15 years ago. So which era was 'better'? Yeah, okay.


I personally think all eras are the same. The same in being different. But still the same. It was not any easier to be a scientist in 1850 even though there was a lot less known about science. But great scientists back then were equally good as today's best ones.


The best players in any are were great players. You owning a computer doesn't make you smarter than Newton. You can calculate faster and with more precision. Plus you know more about the world. But when was science more 'real' or when it was 'better'... it means nothing.


Today's basketball isn't any worse or better than 90s basketball.

[Showtime80']

Wilt always was about gaudy individual stats, notice not once when he says he would score 70 ppg he talks about his team winning the title in the same sentence, that's what separated him from Russell and the other all time winners. Adjusting for pace and the amount of missed shots, I could see Wilt averaging between 30 to 35 ppg in the 80's/90's sure, make it 37-40 ppg if they were force feeding him. The dude was a great athlete with insane stamina.

Russell's Celtics were absolutely STACKED so who knows what they could've done against other great all time teams but they have scoreboard over EVERYBODY in NBA history regarding titles even though the league had just 8-14 teams and 2/3 playoff rounds for most of their reign.

One thing you ALWAYS noticed about those 60's/70's players is the respect they gave to the 80's guys because they knew that was the LAST GENERATION of players that learned the game THE RIGHT WAY as they did way back when and still went through the physical punishment they could also relate to.

Here's Wilt and Russell putting Jordan, Bird, Magic, Barkley and Olajuwon (all 80's guys) in their top players OF ALL TIME:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N71Pv48erIc

The players of the 80's DON'T RESPECT the players that came after them because the league BENT OVER BACKWARDS to cater them with absurd money without proving themselves as well as altering multiple rules for them to succeed and thus that era is were the chasm happened between NBA generations. Those guys would NEVER mention anybody other than maybe LeBron as part of their greatest players.

Here's Dennis Rodman in 1996 talking about the resentment that started brewing in the 90's regarding the generation that was coming in (forward to 5:22):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0uvYj9B-dI&t=335s

Scottie Pippen also expanded on it talking about Larry Johnson:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIJA2rGVDIY

That's why MJ always made it a point to dunk on Alonzo Mourning's head whenever he had the chance and Pippen along Rodman took turns baiting him because he was the guy that famously said in the mid 90's "I don't work for the Hornets, I work for Nike". That remark basically stamped the attitude 80's players had for the new overhyped, money first primadonnas 90's NBA players.

That's the way those players basically feel about today's generation in a nutshell.

[NBAGOAT]

Can we just....accept that people who grew up or played in an era, for the most part, are gonna defend their territory? And that a player's opinion will either be validated or trivialized accordingly? I'd feel like a jackass walking into a barber shop thinking youtube footage or basketball reference gives me fair license to argue with some 70 year old about Wilt or Oscar. You can call me 'old man in the clouds' ignorant or absolute, but anyone born 20 years ago, your opinion on 80s/90's basketball really means sweet **** all. At least have the humility to realize that not all opinions are informed, and being entitled to one doesn't make it valid.

i dont argue with old dudes irl either. I think we're underestimating how inconsistent fans can be with their views. Like imagine a kid in 30 years completely accepting stalkers views on lebron and kobe. Also wat you see pre like 12 years old isnt even that valuable. You're not even doing algebra at that age, how likely is it you're a good evaluator. ofc bias can come in to.

anecdote but I remember one guy old enough to be an adult during the 80s told me dominique was better than bird and bird only won/was overrated because he had way better teammates. Like wat he said was true and I just went along but inside I was thinking come on. Ofc he was a lakers/magic fan

[sdot_thadon]

i dont argue with old dudes irl either. I think we're underestimating how inconsistent fans can be with their views. Like imagine a kid in 30 years completely accepting stalkers views on lebron and kobe. Also wat you see pre like 12 years old isnt even that valuable. You're not even doing algebra at that age, how likely is it you're a good evaluator. ofc bias can pick in to.

anecdote but I remember one guy old enough to be an adult during the 80s told me dominique was better than bird and bird only won/was overrated because he had way better teammates. Like wat he said was true and I just went along but inside I was thinking come on. Ofc he was a lakers/magic fan
I agree with the idea of not arguing with old schools about their respective eras totally, but i can't respect it from guys like op when they sit here and rant on Wilt or Russell like they know better at the same time. It's highly hypocritical imho. So i prefer not to play the you weren't old enough to have seen blank card because I myself haven't seen anything prior to the late 80s. And with enough age to properly disect? Anything before the mid 90s. Alot of guys are living in unrealistic fantasy worlds where being 5 years old in 1990 makes then an authority on the 90s era. It's laughable.

[3ball]

Spacing........................................... .. No spacing
Hands-off defense........................... Hands-on defense
No paint-camping............................. Paint-camping
Freedom of movement rules........... No freedom of movement rules
Flagrant fouls/no physicality........... No flagrant fouls/physicality
Record ORtg and TS......................... Lower ORtg and TS

No opinion necessary - it's a simple fact that today's league is way easier

The left column is the beginner game and the right column is the advanced version that requires superior skill

[Showtime80']

For me I definitely can't talk in depth about basketball pre 1980 as I really started consuming the game from 1985 onward but for people who came of age in that period of time (like Vince Carter and Paul Pierce) you clearly saw a decay in the game that is UNDENIABLE when comparing to the late 90's all the way to the present. It started subtly with the early 90's draft classes and it continued a downward spiral thereafter.

You see the NBA got a level of quality and relevance thanks to the MJ, Magic and Bird era (specially from 1984 to 1991) combined with the other cast of characters that came in from 1979 to 1986 that was going to be virtually IMPOSSIBLE to maintain and that sent the league offices on a paranoid tailspin that started just after MJ retired the first time in 1993 and continues today with incessant rule changes to guarantee their ability to market the newest players as "the next best thing" thus maintaining some sort of relevance even though they are still a niche sport.

The late 90's generation onward values hops, cross overs and 3' point heaves over everything else thus the league went out of their way to appease them but in the process they have cheapened the game to a degree that it is no longer recognizable and have lost the respect from fans and PLAYERS alike that played and grew up in the 80's/90's.

[ArbitraryWater]

i'll take bird's word

[Showtime80']

Vince and Pierce are speaking from actual ON COURT knowledge as they bridged the gap between 4 generations unlike Bird or Magic who only got to play against 70's/80's guys (Magic briefly did in 96).

Here's another guy who IS STILL PLAYING and has gone up against OLD Jordan, Kobe, LeBron and Curry with his take:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HMaoKYuA8U

Thank you Jamal.

Listen to what he says about FUNDAMENTALS kiddos, a dirty word in the NBA since around 1996!

[bigkingsfan]

Overlap with MJ career.

Robert Parish-

“Now Michael was great in his era, but you think about this: Michael didn’t beat great teams, in my opinion,” Parish told Elvin Hayes on In The Post on SB Nation Radio. “When Larry, Kevin and myself were in our heyday, he couldn’t beat us. He couldn’t get past the Pistons until Joe Dumars and Isiah Thomas got old. He couldn’t beat the Lakers in their prime.”

[TheCorporation]

Spacing........................................... .. No spacing
Hands-off defense........................... Hands-on defense
No paint-camping............................. Paint-camping
Freedom of movement rules........... No freedom of movement rules
Flagrant fouls/no physicality........... No flagrant fouls/physicality
Record ORtg and TS......................... Lower ORtg and TS

No opinion necessary - it's a simple fact that today's league is way easier

The left column is the beginner game and the right column is the advanced version that requires superior skill

You forgot some:

WNBA 3point line ................................ Regulation NBA 3point line
Watered down expansion era....................Highly competitive era
Mechanics and Grocery baggers starting ........... No Mechanics and Grocery baggers starting
No one knows how to shoot .................. Everyone knows how to shoot
No one knows how to play defense............. Everyone knows how to play defense

[TheCorporation]

[QUOTE=bigkingsfan]Overlap with MJ career.

Robert Parish-

[I]

[Showtime80']

Of course a 2nd/3dr year MJ was not going to beat the 86 or 87 Celtics with Orlando Wooldridge and Charles Oakley as his second options for God's sake! Same for the Pistons in 88 and 89'.

The 80's Lakers, Pistons and Celtics were teams that were built throughout the years and they had a lot more overall talent than the Bulls had even in their 90's run. Even still Michael was giving the Bad Boys ALL THEY COULD handle in the EFC in both 89 and 90. Give 80's MJ the same rosters Magic, Bird and Isiah and see what happens.

The fallacy of the 1991 Pistons and Lakers continues without any context, here are the ages of the main players on those teams:

Pistons

Isiah 29
Dumars 27
Rodman 27
Aguirre 31

Lakers

Magic 31 (MVP runner up)
Worthy 29
Scott 29
Green 27

Those teams were not old, the Jazz and Bulls of 97/98 were really old by comparison!!!

Michael and the Bulls were just ready to take over the NBA in 1991 and it didn't matter if the 86 Celtics, 87 Lakers or 89 Pistons had been in front of them. it was their time.

Magic and Larry are lucky Michael didn't join a team like Dallas, Milwaukee, Portland or Houston in 84', the landscape of the NBA would've looked entirely different in the second half of the decade.

[ArbitraryWater]

Of course a 2nd/3dr year MJ was not going to beat the 86 or 87 Celtics with Orlando Wooldridge and Charles Oakley as his second options for God's sake! Same for the Pistons in 88 and 89'.

The 80's Lakers, Pistons and Celtics were teams that were built throughout the years and they had a lot more overall talent than the Bulls had even in their 90's run. Even still Michael was giving the Bad Boys ALL THEY COULD handle in the EFC in both 89 and 90. Give 80's MJ the same rosters Magic, Bird and Isiah and see what happens.

The fallacy of the 1991 Pistons and Lakers continues without any context, here are the ages of the main players on those teams:

Pistons

Isiah 29
Dumars 27
Rodman 27
Aguirre 31

Lakers

Magic 31 (MVP runner up)
Worthy 29
Scott 29
Green 27

Those teams were not old, the Jazz and Bulls of 97/98 were really old by comparison!!!

Michael and the Bulls were just ready to take over the NBA in 1991 and it didn't matter if the 86 Celtics, 87 Lakers or 89 Pistons had been in front of them. it was their time.

Magic and Larry are lucky Michael didn't join a team like Dallas, Milwaukee, Portland or Houston in 84', the landscape of the NBA would've looked entirely different in the second half of the decade.

back then that was old.

both teams well on the come-down and past it.

[Showtime80']

"Back then that was old" WHAAAATTT?!?! Rodman and Dumars played for like 5+ years of elite basketball after 1991 and Isiah would be an all-star for the next two years as well!

The 1991 Pistons just got their clocks handed to them by the Bulls who had been taking some of their scalps for the previous two years. Hell 5 of all 7 losses in the 1989 and 90 playoffs came at the hands of the Bulls. They were getting close every year.

You want to talk about old, look no further than the 2013 Spurs which LeBron took 7 games to beat after Ray Allen saved his behind in game 6:

Duncan 36
Ginobilli 35
Parker 30

Prime Spurs came in the 2000's my friend.

[tpols]

[QUOTE=bigkingsfan]Overlap with MJ career.

Robert Parish-

[I]

[sdot_thadon]

For me I definitely can't talk in depth about basketball pre 1980 as I really started consuming the game from 1985 onward but for people who came of age in that period of time (like Vince Carter and Paul Pierce) you clearly saw a decay in the game that is UNDENIABLE when comparing to the late 90's all the way to the present. It started subtly with the early 90's draft classes and it continued a downward spiral thereafter.

You see the NBA got a level of quality and relevance thanks to the MJ, Magic and Bird era (specially from 1984 to 1991) combined with the other cast of characters that came in from 1979 to 1986 that was going to be virtually IMPOSSIBLE to maintain and that sent the league offices on a paranoid tailspin that started just after MJ retired the first time in 1993 and continues today with incessant rule changes to guarantee their ability to market the newest players as "the next best thing" thus maintaining some sort of relevance even though they are still a niche sport.

The late 90's generation onward values hops, cross overs and 3' point heaves over everything else thus the league went out of their way to appease them but in the process they have cheapened the game to a degree that it is no longer recognizable and have lost the respect from fans and PLAYERS alike that played and grew up in the 80's/90's.
and every era has been seen as a decay of the previous era by people who lived in/played in said eras. Without fail. I don't believe for a single second you're that old if you can't see the same thing happening over and over again. Our generation have just become the old fuddy duddies unwilling to let go of the past.

I love every era from what I've got to see in the form of archived video and so forth. Each one offers different advantages and disadvantages from the last, each are their own world. Do i think today's rules are soft? Sure I do and old guys in the 90s probably thought it was soft when the league introduced flagrants in 91. That's just one of many examples we could explore. The thing i feel this era and probably each successive era has over the previous is base level talent. The modern end of the bench guy is probably a better player than the previous era most times. The stars are the same, top of the line now is top of the line in any era of the league.

[Showtime80']

NEVER in NBA history has there been an era were players that are STILL ACTIVE are calling it soft like they are now, players in the 80's/early 90's complained it was TOO PHYSICAL thus like you said provoked the flagrant foul rule in 1991 which only curtailed cheap shots and not overall physical play (look no further than Riley's Knicks or Miller's Pacers). Removing the hand check rule in 1994 is what started the downward spiral of constant rule changes, that I agree.

Talent is relative in my opinion. In a physical league like the 80's/90's with dominant inside stars like Kareem, Moses, Shaq, Ewing, Robinson, Olajuwon, Mourning, Mutombo, Barkley and Malone are you looking to fill out your roster with small fancy dribbling 3-D players or big tough enforcers than can command the paint and nail the occasional 15 footer like Oakley, Lucas, Grant, Mason, Buck, McDaniel, Mahorn, Ostertag, Longley, Rodman etc...?

The softer offensively oriented rules (European influenced) have opened the door for smaller more shifty players to look A LOT BETTER than they would have with the 90's more physical style.

[sdot_thadon]

NEVER in NBA history has there been an era were players that are STILL ACTIVE are calling it soft like they are now,.....
nah. wrong buddy.

Said Knicks teammate Anthony Mason, "The game has become sissified. Let us play. People started appreciating banging and defense -- it became a skill thing, offense against defense. ... If they leave things the way they are now, you're not going to have any choice but to make it work, but people are going to get bored with the games. It's going to get ridiculous."



Talent is relative in my opinion. In a physical league like the 80's/90's with dominant inside stars like Kareem, Moses, Shaq, Ewing, Robinson, Olajuwon, Mourning, Mutombo, Barkley and Malone are you looking to fill out your roster with small fancy dribbling 3-D players or big tough enforcers than can command the paint and nail the occasional 15 footer like Oakley, Lucas, Grant, Mason, Buck, McDaniel, Mahorn, Ostertag, Longley, Rodman etc...That's perfectly understandable due to style of play, but still doesn't really change my point. I think today's base level players are better. And for the record those guys aren't base level, they're starting caibur in that era.



The softer offensively oriented rules (European influenced) have opened the door for smaller more shifty players to look A LOT BETTER than they would have with the 90's more physical style.
Would you like to specify which rules are Euro influenced? Because as I remember Kobe once said the European game was rougher than our game.....

[90sgoat]

The league is worse today because the players are not as skilled. The players are younger coming into the league and they have less fundamentals due to the decline in the AAU system.

[sdot_thadon]

The league is worse today because the players are not as skilled. The players are younger coming into the league and they have less fundamentals due to the decline in the AAU system.
Such a tired angle, care to be more specific? What skills don't players have now that they had back in the days? All i can gather is post game and mid range shooting.

-The post game isn't as valuable today as being 7 feet and handling the ball like a guard unfortunately, so its more of a swap than guys being less skilled.

-Mid range shooting has been traded for shooting from a greater distance because modern philosophy favors space.

-Role players now have handles that would be considered elite in previous eras.

-Footwork has changed with the rules to accompany them and as far as the step back game and euro steps it may he even become more sophisticated on a large scale. It's another swap case.

-there is a much smaller number of one handed dribblers now when you could see it clearly in past eras.

-isolation moves are far more widespread even with mediocre level guys than back in the days too.

-it requires better defensive fundamentals to be a high level defender in this hands off era than the past eras. Not to mention iq as every team damn near uses switching principles now days.

I'm curious to what fundamental trade off you're seeing? To me things are similar just different skills took the forefront in this era.

[FKAri]

Here's Vince Carter and the recently retired Paul Pierce youngins, sit down and listen:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qm2r49yIr3s&t=160s

Everybody bows down to the 80's-90's and it is no accident. Game, set and match!
I can respect VC's opinion but Paul Pierce is mentally ill. Dude has a highlight reel of stupid takes. I'd rather take the opinions of Larry Bird and Jerry West.

[scuzzy]

MJ fangirls sure are trimming down their supply line aren’t they

Soon we’ll be hearing only HOFs born in February on a Tuesday, are credible BBall doctrine

Hella desperate :lol

But at least they leave us these gems to bump on future reference

[3ball]

Such a tired angle, care to be more specific? What skills don't players have now that they had back in the days? All i can gather is post game and mid range shooting.


^^^ that's everything, you just don't realize it... :confusedshrug:

Firstly, it isn't just mid-range "shooting"... The reason Giannis lost this year is because he had no mid-range GAME (repertoire and overall scoring in that area), not just shooting...

And that includes all the post footwork - mid-range and post skills overlap... Today's player is weaker at all of that - Giannis is a product of the threes/layups skillset that today's spacing has created/allows





Such a tired angle, care to be more specific? What skills don't players have now that they had back in the days? All i can gather is post game and mid range shooting.



Again, that's everything:



The difference between many good and great teams — and, indeed, many good and great players — is what they do in the last five seconds of the shot clock when the plan breaks down. Even the most prepared teams will run into those situations, particularly against great defenses. The deeper a team gets in the 24-second shot clock, the more difficult it becomes for that team to find layup and three-point opportunities, and the ability to knock down the mid-range jumper thus becomes king.

https://the-cauldron.com/lost-art-the-mid-range-jumper-64b64fa0f081






Footwork has changed with the rules to accompany them and as far as the step back game and euro steps it may he even become more sophisticated on a large scale. It's another swap case

.
Nonsense - today's player has developed a couple gimmick moves to avoid learning the sustainable, expansive footwork that won MJ, Hakeem, Kobe, Bird, Duncan and Dirk all their rings





isolation moves are far more widespread even with mediocre level guys than back in the days too.


The threes/layups shot allocation of today's game is designed to get open looks - that's the point of this shot allocation..

Accordingly, previous eras were better at making contested 2-pointers, since the lack of spacing forced them to take more contested shots and didn't allow today's open shot allocation





-it requires better defensive fundamentals to be a high level defender in this hands off era than the past eras. Not to mention iq as every team damn near uses switching principles now days.


And yet teams give up more points per possession than ever before - the league broke records for ORtg and TS for each of the last 3 seasons

Btw, every era switches on screens.. that isn't a new or novel strategy.. it's been standard since the game began to switch or shade (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=372613) screens.

And you claim today's players have better defensive fundamentals, but their capacity is limited to those fundamentals - they can't have good fundamentals AND hand-checking.. so advantage previous eras, who could do both

Furthermore, today's defensive strategy is a result of the spacing.. the lack of spacing in previous eras made defense easier, and scoring harder... Ultimately, it's an offensive player's league now with the spacing and rule changes.. so you have no case

Finally, most of today's scoring attempts happen on the perimeter, so perimeter defenders have more opportunity to impact the game than previous eras, when most scoring attempts occurred on the interior.. So it was harder for perimeter players to be recognized as a great defender back then - only the very best were, and they'd be even more celebrated today where their perimeter talents would be utilized on more possesssions.. many guys that were unrecognized in prior eras would be recognized today as all-league defenders, like Stacey Augmon, Reggie Lewis, Jerome Kersey, etc, etc, etc
.

[sdot_thadon]

[QUOTE=3ball]^^^ that's everything, you just don't realize it... :confusedshrug:

Firstly, it isn't just mid-range "shooting"... The reason Giannis lost this year is because he had no mid-range GAME (repertoire and overall scoring in that area), not just shooting...

And that includes all the post footwork - mid-range and post skills overlap... Today's player is weaker at all of that - Giannis is a product of the threes/layups skillset that today's spacing has created/allows




Again, that's everything:


[INDENT][I]The difference between many good and great teams 

[LostCause]

back then that was old.


:biggums:

[nayte]

I think this play offs have shown the value of midrange. I'm not gonna get into all the rest. LeBron tweeted I think analytics be damned. If LeBron says it says something

[Phoenix]

I think this play offs have shown the value of midrange. I'm not gonna get into all the rest. LeBron tweeted I think analytics be damned. If LeBron says it says something

I was thinking the same thing. The league has gone to 3point shooting, but an elite midrange game is still the most dependable weapon especially in the playoffs. Over-reliance on the 3ball can come back to bite you in the ass unless you have a plethora of all-time shooters like Golden State has enjoyed, but they're an aberration. Look at how the 3 betrayed Houston in game 7 last year. What was Steph Curry's final shot in game 6 this year? A missed 3. As Stephen A likes to say, palms get sweaty and backsides get tight in those moments. When the game came down to crutch time, Kawhi was mostly operating in the mid-range working himself into high percentage looks, not jacking up 25 footers. If Durant was playing, he'd have been doing the same.

[sdot_thadon]

I think this play offs have shown the value of midrange. I'm not gonna get into all the rest. LeBron tweeted I think analytics be damned. If LeBron says it says something


I was thinking the same thing. The league has gone to 3point shooting, but an elite midrange game is still the most dependable weapon especially in the playoffs. Over-reliance on the 3ball can come back to bite you in the ass unless you have a plethora of all-time shooters like Golden State has enjoyed, but they're an aberration. Look at how the 3 betrayed Houston in game 7 last year. What was Steph Curry's final shot in game 6 this year? A missed 3. As Stephen A likes to say, palms get sweaty and backsides get tight in those moments. When the game came down to crutch time, Kawhi was mostly operating in the mid-range working himself into high percentage looks, not jacking up 25 footers. If Durant was playing, he'd have been doing the same.
I can respect that, and for the reasons you guys state it's a valid point of view. I'm just arguing it doesn't represent basketball fundamentals as a whole. It's a single facet.

However, it's easy for us armchair Qbs to say what players need, but what about guys fighting for contracts, playing time, or even a roster spot in camp? Or even guys trying to extend their playing career? A mid range jumper won't secure your basketball life these days, ask Melo if you need to verify that. A guy like Vince Carter who prompted this topic is still playing due to becoming a serviceable shooter.

[Phoenix]

I can respect that, and for the reasons you guys state it's a valid point of view. I'm just arguing it doesn't represent basketball fundamentals as a whole. It's a single facet.

However, it's easy for us armchair Qbs to say what players need, but what about guys fighting for contracts, playing time, or even a roster spot in camp? Or even guys trying to extend their playing career? A mid range jumper won't secure your basketball life these days, ask Melo if you need to verify that. A guy like Vince Carter who prompted this topic is still playing due to becoming a serviceable shooter.


Melo at his best was a streaky shooter who couldn't be bothered with defense. He doesn't shoot as well now as he did then, his already non-existent defense is a negative, and he can't drive anymore. Using him as an example isn't evidence of much of anything, except saying 'here, a 35 year old former superstar who can't accept he's half as good as he used to be'. Vince Carter, in the meantime, accepted his mortality years ago and has an underrated IQ for the game. That's why he's still in the league at 42, and Melo isn't. We're here acting like Melo wasn't dropping 22ppg 2 years ago. When you hit the wall, you hit it fast and the other aspects of his game and especially his mindset failed him. Vince is shooting 38% on 4 attempts from 3, so it's not as if he's a knock down shooter by today's standards. He clearly has value as a veteran presence moreso than his offense at this stage. Melo is his own deluded worst enemy, as to why he's not in the league now providing offensive spark off the bench for some middle of the road team. Clearly, neither his experience playing with Iverson nor seeing A.I crash and burn at the end was heeded.

So, Melo doesn't disprove anything I said about the mid-range game and it's reliability in the playoffs especially when you are elite at it. The finals MVP award the last 3 years was won by players who have elite mid-range games, with the 3 being used as a complement and not the foundation. KD in the playoffs against the Clippers dropped 38 with three 3s, 45 with five 3's, and 50 with six 3's. By 2019 standards those aren't excessively high volumes of 3 pointers, not when you got guys like Steph or Klay taking turns breaking the 3 point record, or 54% of Harden's field goal attempts being 3's.

So I'm not armchair quarterbacking what any professional basketball player needs, nor am I arguing that the league hasn't moved from the mid-range and post. I'm simply looking at the available evidence and coming to the conclusion that an elite mid-range game at the end of the year, when everyone is tired, injured and dead-legged, is the most reliable offense when the 3ball fails you.

[FKAri]

^^^ that's everything, you just don't realize it... :confusedshrug:

Firstly, it isn't just mid-range "shooting"... The reason Giannis lost this year is because he had no mid-range GAME (repertoire and overall scoring in that area), not just shooting...

And that includes all the post footwork - mid-range and post skills overlap... Today's player is weaker at all of that - Giannis is a product of the threes/layups skillset that today's spacing has created/allows




Again, that's everything:



The difference between many good and great teams — and, indeed, many good and great players — is what they do in the last five seconds of the shot clock when the plan breaks down. Even the most prepared teams will run into those situations, particularly against great defenses. The deeper a team gets in the 24-second shot clock, the more difficult it becomes for that team to find layup and three-point opportunities, and the ability to knock down the mid-range jumper thus becomes king.

https://the-cauldron.com/lost-art-the-mid-range-jumper-64b64fa0f081




Nonsense - today's player has developed a couple gimmick moves to avoid learning the sustainable, expansive footwork that won MJ, Hakeem, Kobe, Bird, Duncan and Dirk all their rings



The threes/layups shot allocation of today's game is designed to get open looks - that's the point of this shot allocation..

Accordingly, previous eras were better at making contested 2-pointers, since the lack of spacing forced them to take more contested shots and didn't allow today's open shot allocation



And yet teams give up more points per possession than ever before - the league broke records for ORtg and TS for each of the last 3 seasons

Btw, every era switches on screens.. that isn't a new or novel strategy.. it's been standard since the game began to switch or shade (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=372613) screens.

And you claim today's players have better defensive fundamentals, but their capacity is limited to those fundamentals - they can't have good fundamentals AND hand-checking.. so advantage previous eras, who could do both

Furthermore, today's defensive strategy is a result of the spacing.. the lack of spacing in previous eras made defense easier, and scoring harder... Ultimately, it's an offensive player's league now with the spacing and rule changes.. so you have no case

Finally, most of today's scoring attempts happen on the perimeter, so perimeter defenders have more opportunity to impact the game than previous eras, when most scoring attempts occurred on the interior.. So it was harder for perimeter players to be recognized as a great defender back then - only the very best were, and they'd be even more celebrated today where their perimeter talents would be utilized on more possesssions.. many guys that were unrecognized in prior eras would be recognized today as all-league defenders, like Stacey Augmon, Reggie Lewis, Jerome Kersey, etc, etc, etc
.
To summarize the above pile of shit of a post:

3ball: Players are worse at playing defense today because of the higher ORTG. Players are also worse at playing offense today because of the rules

:roll: :roll: :roll:

Pick one you phaggit.

[NBAGOAT]

Melo at his best was a streaky shooter who couldn't be bothered with defense. He doesn't shoot as well now as he did then, his already non-existent defense is a negative, and he can't drive anymore. Using him as an example isn't evidence of much of anything, except saying 'here, a 35 year old former superstar who can't accept he's half as good as he used to be'. Vince Carter, in the meantime, accepted his mortality years ago and has an underrated IQ for the game. That's why he's still in the league at 42, and Melo isn't. We're here acting like Melo wasn't dropping 22ppg 2 years ago. When you hit the wall, you hit it fast and the other aspects of his game and especially his mindset failed him. Vince is shooting 38% on 4 attempts from 3, so it's not as if he's a knock down shooter by today's standards. He clearly has value as a veteran presence moreso than his offense at this stage. Melo is his own deluded worst enemy, as to why he's not in the league now providing offensive spark off the bench for some middle of the road team. Clearly, neither his experience playing with Iverson nor seeing A.I crash and burn at the end was heeded.

So, Melo doesn't disprove anything I said about the mid-range game and it's reliability in the playoffs especially when you are elite at it. The finals MVP award the last 3 years was won by players who have elite mid-range games, with the 3 being used as a complement and not the foundation. KD in the playoffs against the Clippers dropped 38 with three 3s, 45 with five 3's, and 50 with six 3's. By 2019 standards those aren't excessively high volumes of 3 pointers, not when you got guys like Steph or Klay taking turns breaking the 3 point record, or 54% of Harden's field goal attempts being 3's.

So I'm not armchair quarterbacking what any professional basketball player needs, nor am I arguing that the league hasn't moved from the mid-range and post. I'm simply looking at the available evidence and coming to the conclusion that an elite mid-range game at the end of the year, when everyone is tired, injured and dead-legged, is the most reliable offense when the 3ball fails you.

It’s a matter of perspective. It’ll certainly help your individual scoring game in the playoffs to have a midrange game sure but idk about teams overall. As teams Gs and the raptors are quite reliant on the 3. Top third of playoff teams I think. Lot of the other supporting players are heavy 3pt shooters.

Like yes a problem with the 3 is high variance you can have some cold shooting nights. Variance can be a good thing too however if you’re the less talented team. How come people don’t consider that maybe a reason hou was competitive with a more talented gs imo was their “ridiculous” style being more efficient on average and the higher variance also allowed them to steal games they should’ve lost.

Idk if losing close series is definitive that hou or mils style don’t work even though they’re important data points(and they’re the only teams who truly don’t rely much on midrange at all). On the other hand many people though mil would lose to Boston for similar reasons and they didn’t, why isn’t that data point meaningful too? Kind of also showed midrange shooting has quite a bit of variance too

[Phoenix]

[QUOTE=NBAGOAT]It

[NBAGOAT]

I'm trying to piece the various points of your post together, forgive me if this isn't a suitable answer as my brain is in weekend mode. But anyways, I think we need to consider how much of an aberration a team like Golden State is. They have a credible case of having 3 of the top 7-8 shooters in the history of the league, in a league that emphasizes shooting. In the 90's and before where the emphasis was more on inside play, having Curry and Durant together would have been like having Shaq and Hakeem on opposite posts as the basis on your offense. Already an embarrassment of riches right? Then you throw Klay into the mix, which would be like having David Robinson at the elbow playing off the aforementioned dominant bigs. That's simply too much era-tailored firepower that nobody else can hope to match. At some point though another team, or dominant star, will come along and the league will have to adapt to that. Right now the Warriors and analytics have forced the rest of the league to play copy-cat to that style.

Saying all that and realizing it has little to do with my earlier point about the mid-range, I guess I'm just saying at some point the league may realign and 3's won't be so much a focus, either by rules, a specific team with a style/makeup that other contenders will need to counter, or just an acceptance that having a varied offensive attack provides more options than over reliance on a specific shot, especially one that's prone to be affected by fatigue the deeper you go into the playoffs. Bear in mind that Kawhi wasn't even 100% in the finals but having that in-between game is a great fall-back.

the aberration is a good response honestly. gs is one both talent wise and how elite they are at their style so you're right, their success doesnt necessarily prove that style is the correct way to play either.

for me personally, I think the main way teams might swing the pendulum back is an emphasis on crashing the boards 80s style. Modern coaches are averse to that because they dont want to concede transition buckets but the analytics arent definitive on whether crashing the boards is a bad strategy. That leads to more interior/post play since it's hard to rebound with 4 shooters and you're more fine with taking less efficient shots knowing you'll get the rebound.

I dont think teams are ever okay with taking long 2's however. It just doesnt make much sense. Floaters or 12-18footers, sure they can have value for stars who get affected by fatigue.

FYI: good article on oreb from like 3 years ago https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/14505051/transition-defense-left-offensive-rebounds-cutting-room-floor

[sdot_thadon]

Melo at his best was a streaky shooter who couldn't be bothered with defense. He doesn't shoot as well now as he did then, his already non-existent defense is a negative, and he can't drive anymore. Using him as an example isn't evidence of much of anything, except saying 'here, a 35 year old former superstar who can't accept he's half as good as he used to be'. Vince Carter, in the meantime, accepted his mortality years ago and has an underrated IQ for the game. That's why he's still in the league at 42, and Melo isn't. We're here acting like Melo wasn't dropping 22ppg 2 years ago. When you hit the wall, you hit it fast and the other aspects of his game and especially his mindset failed him. Vince is shooting 38% on 4 attempts from 3, so it's not as if he's a knock down shooter by today's standards. He clearly has value as a veteran presence moreso than his offense at this stage. Melo is his own deluded worst enemy, as to why he's not in the league now providing offensive spark off the bench for some middle of the road team. Clearly, neither his experience playing with Iverson nor seeing A.I crash and burn at the end was heeded.

So, Melo doesn't disprove anything I said about the mid-range game and it's reliability in the playoffs especially when you are elite at it. The finals MVP award the last 3 years was won by players who have elite mid-range games, with the 3 being used as a complement and not the foundation. KD in the playoffs against the Clippers dropped 38 with three 3s, 45 with five 3's, and 50 with six 3's. By 2019 standards those aren't excessively high volumes of 3 pointers, not when you got guys like Steph or Klay taking turns breaking the 3 point record, or 54% of Harden's field goal attempts being 3's.

So I'm not armchair quarterbacking what any professional basketball player needs, nor am I arguing that the league hasn't moved from the mid-range and post. I'm simply looking at the available evidence and coming to the conclusion that an elite mid-range game at the end of the year, when everyone is tired, injured and dead-legged, is the most reliable offense when the 3ball fails you.
I can dig that, but my point wasn't a referendum on Melo and why his career is done. :D Just the element of his game that sent him on his way. Again mid range is an important skill for a scorer to possess in his toolbox for all the reasons i already agreed with. But again on a macro scale mid range isn't a tool for ever player. Can we name any end of the bench guys that only have a job because they are money from mid range? If you can name a few I'd be shocked. Because the ideal role player nowdays is 3 and D.....even if he's a big which is insane. The rockets needed Melo to basically be 3 and D and he wasn't really fit for the role. Vince does it as good as any geezer could. Guys trying to make a living won't get contracts shooting midrange with today's philosophy.

[baudkarma]

Can we just....accept that people who grew up or played in an era, for the most part, are gonna defend their territory? And that a player's opinion will either be validated or trivialized accordingly? I'd feel like a jackass walking into a barber shop thinking youtube footage or basketball reference gives me fair license to argue with some 70 year old about Wilt or Oscar. You can call me 'old man in the clouds' ignorant or absolute, but anyone born 20 years ago, your opinion on 80s/90's basketball really means sweet **** all. At least have the humility to realize that not all opinions are informed, and being entitled to one doesn't make it valid.

This. Players of any era tend to think that their time was the most talented. The guys they went up against were better, the rules were tougher, and nobody respects what they went through. I've yet to hear a pro athlete in any sport say "Yeah, todays players are much more talented, the game is more violent, me and my teammates wouldn't stand a chance against these guys."

[TheMan]

nah. wrong buddy.


That's perfectly understandable due to style of play, but still doesn't really change my point. I think today's base level players are better. And for the record those guys aren't base level, they're starting caibur in that era.


Would you like to specify which rules are Euro influenced? Because as I remember Kobe once said the European game was rougher than our game.....
Huh, wtf :wtf:

I don't know how the Euroleague is today but it was common knowledge in the 90s that it was a softer league...that was the main concern about Toni Kukoc's transition from the EL to the NBA, that the NBA was much more physical, and yes, he struggled mightily against the Masons and Davis Boys :facepalm

[Phoenix]

I can dig that, but my point wasn't a referendum on Melo and why his career is done. :D Just the element of his game that sent him on his way. Again mid range is an important skill for a scorer to possess in his toolbox for all the reasons i already agreed with. But again on a macro scale mid range isn't a tool for ever player. Can we name any end of the bench guys that only have a job because they are money from mid range? If you can name a few I'd be shocked. Because the ideal role player nowdays is 3 and D.....even if he's a big which is insane. The rockets needed Melo to basically be 3 and D and he wasn't really fit for the role. Vince does it as good as any geezer could. Guys trying to make a living won't get contracts shooting midrange with today's philosophy.

I don't think we're far apart on what we're saying. I'm not making the case that the average player necessarily needs to have a mid-range shot, most teams are trying to fill out their benches with those 3 and D guys. I understand that, and I agree.

What I'm referring to, in terms of needing that 'in-between' game, are your upper echelon talents who are driving teams to title contention. Your KDs. Your Kawhis. Your Hardens. Your Currys. Your Greek freaks. Harden's limitations are exposed annually if the 3 isn't falling and the refs go into playoff officiating mode. They're not going to allow him to manipulate the defensive rules into spamming free throws. They want you to make plays to win in the playoffs, not BS the rulebook. The fact that he can't get down and dirty in the midrange and manufacture points that way is why he underperforms in the playoffs( relative to the regular season). Giannis looked poised to take the Bucks to the finals, until the Raptors defense took away his driving lanes and then oh shit, what does he do then? Giannis with a respectable mid-range game would be a damn cheat code. Even worse if he developed a 3pointer. But his athleticism in the mid-range area with some touch out to 18 feet? Ain't a damn human being on earth stopping that. Steph is such a threat from 3 that he's got the defense scrambling, has elite off-ball movement, and he can find his way into an open midrange because he's being run off the line. Every little twitch, eye blink or shoulder fake has the defense committing because of his shooting prowess. But his lack of size means he can't physically impose his will on the game if his 3 is off. That's ultimately why KD has been the finals MVP twice during Golden State's run. He doesn't have a spot. He doesn't have a shot you can take away from him. And when the offense breaks down, what's their first 'we need a fukking basket' option? Isoing KD 18 feet out.

As for Melo, even without a strong 3ball, if he played a lick a defense, if he had some facilitating ability, if he adapted his mentality to accept what he is, he'd be in the league. Melo is still good enough to drop 15 points in 20 mins a night on the opposing teams bench. The biggest problem, like I said, is he still thinks he's a star in this league and while the midrange game has become niche, he doesn't offer anything else but an inflated ego at this point.

[Showtime80']

Vince Carter BARELY played in the 90's, his generation and peak came in the early to mid 2000's and even while he still plays today he can clearly see how SOFT the league has become in the last 20 years and knows the 90's were wayyy more physical.

Here's Steve Kerr, the coach that has won 3 of the last five titles talking about the league altering their rules to suit players like Stephie and Nash before him:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHoD9UCBgcs

The Europpeans or internationals have ALWAYS been more perimeter oriented going back to Vlade Divac, DIno Radja, Tony Kukoc, Petrovic, Schmidt and even Sabonis had a softer more finness style so part of the NBA's attempt to make the league softer and curtail physicality was to make the league more appealing to those international players who would've been SEVERELY outmatched had they come in with the atmosphere of 80's early 90's.

The NBA now has gotten so soft and perimeter oriented that they have made the Euros look physical by comparison, something that would've been unthinkable 20+ years ago.