Why is the defense in the NBA in the 90's so romanticized?

[Vino24]

I may be in the minority but I believe defenses in the 90's is overated for 1 reason

I really dont understand why illegal defense isnt talked about. If you wanted to double team someone , you had to fully commit to it and if someone had no 3pt shot you had to stay close to them. This makes life soo much easier for perimeter players because all they have to do is run screen plays until they got a favourable match up , then isolate them on one side of the court with the other 4 defenders watching on the other side of the court.

Say what you want about the physicality but there was no strategy to defenses in the 90s

[ImKobe]

The early 2000s defenses shit on the 90s. I agree, it's a little overrated.

[3ball]

.
1-defender strongsides


http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/6-05-2015/XIjX_w.gif

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/6-05-2015/P5Zone.gif

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/6-05-2015/I7p0lg.gif


Otoh, previous eras faced 5-defender strongsides because there were no shooters on far corner (weakside spacing) to.pull defenders to weak side


https://i.makeagif.com/media/6-23-2015/CKpLH1.gif

https://media.giphy.com/media/xT0BKishrkuHZV0IDK/giphy.gif[/QUOTE]

[3ball]

The early 2000s defenses shit on the 90s. I agree, it's a little overrated.

It's not overrated compared to today's open court... Not overrated at all... UNDERRATED infact

[keep-itreal]

People act like they were like gladiators back then. How if you drive to the rim, you'll get mauled to death.

Reality:

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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekHYxTHEHf0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STr5YGeG4TA

:roll:

[Roundball_Rock]

1-9ball is on both sides of this issue, on an almost hourly basis. Recall just the other day he was hyping Butler up for putting up 28/5/5 71% TS across three games--something no one in MJ's era sniffed (not even MJ himself)--but suddenly the easier defenses didn't matter because he had another agenda.

Same as 1-9ball Jr. above. As if there was a massive change in defenses from 1999 and 2000--the only change was Kobe became a star in 2000...

If you look at games from, say, 1995 and compare it to today, players have less spacing and are taking a ton more contested shots than today. The games today sometimes look like glorified shooting practice with how open players are.

[3ball]

.
Advanced format - no spacing, legal paint camping, physicality


https://i.makeagif.com/media/9-04-2020/vMZ4ZR.gif



beginner format - spacing, open paint, hands-off, no physicality


https://i.makeagif.com/media/9-04-2020/SdmqXl.gif

[TheCorporation]

-No double teams allowed
-Traffic cone defenders
-Unskilled era
-WNBA 3pt line

It was an ugly time

[Manny98]

People act like they were like gladiators back then. How if you drive to the rim, you'll get mauled to death.

Reality:

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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekHYxTHEHf0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STr5YGeG4TA

:roll:

Grueling :lol

[3ball]

.
League average DRTG

80's and early 90's.... 108

mid-late 90's............. 106

early 00's.................. 104

2010's...................... 110



The real lack of defense started with the hand-check ban and defensive 3 seconds rule changes in 2005 - this caused the largest 1-year increase in ortg - all perimeter players saw huge increases, even though the league average was only 106 drtg.. it benefitted perimeter players but hurt bigs (they became lesser options in the offensive scheme)

[TheCorporation]

Beginner format = double teams illegal (pre 2004)
Advanced format = double teams legal (post 2004)

[Gray GOAT]

Other than nostalgia warriors, the consensus seems to be that 90's defense and athletes were the equivalent of car mechanics and grocery baggers. Oh wait, that's exactly what the 90's were.

[Kblaze8855]

I may be in the minority but I believe defenses in the 90's is overated for 1 reason

I really dont understand why illegal defense isnt talked about. If you wanted to double team someone , you had to fully commit to it and if someone had no 3pt shot you had to stay close to them. This makes life soo much easier for perimeter players because all they have to do is run screen plays until they got a favourable match up , then isolate them on one side of the court with the other 4 defenders watching on the other side of the court.

Say what you want about the physicality but there was no strategy to defenses in the 90s



If it were actually that easy you would see a lot more one on one with all 4 defenders on the other side of the court than you actually see in clips.

It did occur to teams to just move everyone to let stars go one on one....and that brought about the illegal offense rule which you never hear about because most people talking about that era online googled it and don’t actually know what went on.


In the late 80s the nba added illegal offense for the express purpose of slowing down guys like Jordan and Nique who couldn’t be guarded if you moved all the help D.


It made it illegal to have more than I think 2 people at the top of the key at the 3 point line which allowed guys to attack at the corners. You could still spread them out but certain spots were illegal to keep all your guys. It was a weird rule I don’t remember word for word but the point was....don’t just keep everyone in one spot and let your star go one on one.

You could make some players move in the general direction you wanted when guarded man to man but it didn’t work nearly as well as you envision partly because of illegal offense.

A lot of the clips people post now are from situations where a coach decides to let someone go one on one to take the rest of the team out of the game. The bullshit Barkley vs Warriors one that’s no doubt gonna be posted for example.

Don Nelson literally told Chuck he could score all he wanted and they weren’t gonna double because he’d picked them apart with passing previously. He had 56 that game and kept taunting Nelson about it and they still wouldn’t double. That wasn’t normal. That was a single coaching decision to try to see if one man could beat them. Kinda like when the Spurs turned Nash to a scorer and he went off by design because they wouldn’t leave any of his shooters.

Coaching call not the league as a whole but it’s easy to mislead 22 year olds who don’t even remember Shaq/Kobe about a league from when their parents were 12 so a gif here and there makes a good point to them.

[Roundball_Rock]

Some of the blowback from younger posters is from the ridiculous lengths people go in arguing how much more certain players in the 90's would score today. Guys who were not even top 10 scorers in their era would KD today and MJ would go from 33 to 45 or 50 PPG. I can see why they would be annoyed but it isn't hard to see scoring is up, especially for star perimeter players (another thing that doesn't come up much is the big decline in shot blockers parked in the paint compared to past eras).

The counter argument that is interesting that sometimes comes up is the argument that today's players simply are more skilled and up against a tougher talent pool. The obvious problem with that line is: if players today are better, why does that apply on only one end of the floor?

[Kblaze8855]

The Barkley situation explained:


After scoring the Suns’ first 12 points, he ran by Warrior Coach Don Nelson and asked him: “You gonna double me?”
Nelson and the Warriors chose not to, and Barkley went on to score 27 points in the quarter, two shy of Sleepy Floyd’s playoff record, despite his aching back.
“Obviously, I was making a lot of shots tonight,” he said. “They kind of forced the issue by not doubling me. I hope it’s not the last time I see single coverage. I kind of like it.”

Said Nelson: “Nobody thought he was going to make all his shots. He had one of the most spectacular games I ever witnessed, as a player and as a coach.”



Don told him they wouldn’t double and they let him have the mismatch. It worked too. They were within 2 in the last couple minutes but the Suns pulled away.

It was a coach trying something while being swept not a normal game plan.

Yet every tome illegal D comes up here comes someone who didn’t even see it to suggest that’s what the 90s were.

[Overdrive]

I may be in the minority but I believe defenses in the 90's is overated for 1 reason

I really dont understand why illegal defense isnt talked about. If you wanted to double team someone , you had to fully commit to it and if someone had no 3pt shot you had to stay close to them. This makes life soo much easier for perimeter players because all they have to do is run screen plays until they got a favourable match up , then isolate them on one side of the court with the other 4 defenders watching on the other side of the court.

Say what you want about the physicality but there was no strategy to defenses in the 90s

You could quadteam in the 90s if you pleased. And could leave open nonshooters. Just not randomly. You could close the paint under most circumstances.

The present strategy is perma switching on PnRs.

[DMAVS41]

.
League average DRTG

80's and early 90's.... 108

mid-late 90's............. 106

early 00's.................. 104

2010's...................... 110



The real lack of defense started with the hand-check ban and defensive 3 seconds rule changes in 2005 - this caused the largest 1-year increase in ortg - all perimeter players saw huge increases, even though the league average was only 106 drtg.. it benefitted perimeter players but hurt bigs (they became lesser options in the offensive scheme)

Again, you can not list the numbers and only talk about rules.

The offensive strategy has evolved to a far more optimal style today. Shrinking the court and taking a lot of long 2's was not optimal. It made teams easier to guard from a strategy standpoint in the past than today. You have to factor that in, at least on some level, when talking about league ratings today vs the past.

[TheCorporation]

You could quadteam in the 90s if you pleased. And could leave open nonshooters. Just not randomly. You could close the paint under most circumstances.

The present strategy is perma switching on PnRs.

NO. Double teams/zone was illegal until 2004

[3ball]

Again, you can not list the numbers and only talk about rules.

The offensive strategy has evolved to a far more optimal style today. Shrinking the court and taking a lot of long 2's was not optimal. It made teams easier to guard from a strategy standpoint in the past than today. You have to factor that in, at least on some level, when talking about league ratings today vs the past.

Shrinking the court forces players to be more skilled offensively

Threes and layups is a weaker skillset than tough shot-making, thread-needle passes, and more instinctual play due to a more random movement of players

Today's spaced out marching band-like spacing is infact the beginner version of the game, and therefore a devolvment of the game

[DMAVS41]

Shrinking the court forces players to be more skilled offensively

Threes and layups is a weaker skillset than tough shot-making, thread-needle passes, and more instinctual play due to a more random movement of players

Today's spaced out marching band-like spacing is infact the beginner version of the game, and therefore a devolvment of the game

Shrinking the court and taking long 2's is poor strategy. I don't care, at all, to debate if the players were better in the 90's or today. That isn't my point.

What we all know is...the strategy back then was not as good compared to now. In 1998, for example, 21% of the shots came from long 2's. That is not optimal...that is poor strategy given the rules of the game...it makes you easier to guard for no reason. Today, only 8% of the shots come from there. I won't argue that I know 8% is the right amount, but we all know 21% is too much given the rules of basketball.

[tpols]

You don't get a cookie for making it harder on yourself.

Sure it's easier for a star to score nowadays, but it's a fact that TEAMS just play a smarter brand of basketball with the incorporation of 50% bonus and added spacing.

[Kblaze8855]

NO. Double teams/zone was illegal until 2004


Double teaming was never illegal. An off the ball double-team was difficult because of clear outs. Once he caught the ball you could put all five players on the same man.

Not that I think you aren’t just trolling anyway.

[3ball]

Shrinking the court and taking long 2's is poor strategy. I don't care, at all, to debate if the players were better in the 90's or today. That isn't my point.

What we all know is...the strategy back then was not as good compared to now. In 1998, for example, 21% of the shots came from long 2's. That is not optimal...that is poor strategy given the rules of the game...it makes you easier to guard for no reason. Today, only 8% of the shots come from there. I won't argue that I know 8% is the right amount, but we all know 21% is too much given the rules of basketball.

The strategy was great in the 90's if we're talking about basketball

3-pointers aren't basketball.. it's a gimmick that has ultimately made players less skilled at pure basketball

There's much more to basketball than today's robotic threes and layups.. the NBA should be embarrassed for dumbing the game down like that...

[DMAVS41]

The strategy was great in the 90's if we're talking about basketball

3-pointers aren't basketball.. it's a gimmick that has ultimately made players less skilled at pure basketball

There's much more to basketball than today's robotic threes and layups.. the NBA should be embarrassed for dumbing the game down like that...

You can dislike like them, but that doesn't change the official rules of the game they are playing.

Based on the actual rules, the offensive strategy was not optimal. Sorry if you don't like it, but that is just the way it is.

Also, where did I argue just 3's and layups? I merely said that taking so many long 2's was suboptimal. I never said every team should play like the Rockets. In fact, I don't think they should at all.

[FireDavidKahn]

The NBA was so easy back then that several midgets were star players:roll:

[3ball]

You can dislike like them, but that doesn't change the official rules of the game they are playing.

Based on the actual rules, the offensive strategy was not optimal. Sorry if you don't like it, but that is just the way it is.

It was optimal for the maximum skill and ability of players

3-pointers aren't basketball - it was literally invented as a gimmick to interest dumb fans

Now the most talented players literally don't take any contested jumpers (lebron, giannis).. yet you think they're as good scorers as English or Vandeweghe?.... you're DREAMING bro.. you have no idea what you're talking about

[Roundball_Rock]

...

You were raving about Butler's stats just the other day (before that it was Paul George, Brandon Ingram, etc. etc.). He is averaging 25/5/4 on 66% TS against the Bucks (the #1 defense). What would those numbers be against a 90's #1 defense like the Knicks or Bulls? Let's see your agendas collide and how it shakes out. :lol

[Bronbron23]

I may be in the minority but I believe defenses in the 90's is overated for 1 reason

I really dont understand why illegal defense isnt talked about. If you wanted to double team someone , you had to fully commit to it and if someone had no 3pt shot you had to stay close to them. This makes life soo much easier for perimeter players because all they have to do is run screen plays until they got a favourable match up , then isolate them on one side of the court with the other 4 defenders watching on the other side of the court.

Say what you want about the physicality but there was no strategy to defenses in the 90s

illegal defense was rarely called especially come playoff time. Its a myth that mj never faced zones. Like nowadays zones dont work but teams would throw them in once in awhile to change shit up and give a different look. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bQ9dBEcI_hE

The reason why its so romanticized is because of the physicality that was allowed. It was the closest thing to regular basketball you see on the streets. It was a mans game and real men respect it. What we have now isnt real basketball. You'd get laughed out the gym if called the game the way its called in the nba. Imagine calling a foul at a run because you fought through a screen. Imagine calling a foul because someone contested your shout and landed near you after the shots gone. You'd get called bitch and fakkit on a regular.

Proponents of this era wont acknowledge this because they want to feel like their era is as manly and tough as the next but its not. The world in general is getting softer and softer and basketball is no exception.

[DMAVS41]

It was optimal for the maximum skill and ability of players

3-pointers aren't basketball - it was literally invented as a gimmick to interest dumb fans

Now the most talented players literally don't take any contested jumpers (lebron, giannis).. yet you think they're as good scorers as English or Vandeweghe?.... you're DREAMING bro.. you have no idea what you're talking about

I'm not comparing players. Already told you that.

I'm comparing strategies...and the teams in the 90's would have been much harder to guard if they stopped taking long 2's and took more 3's. This is obvious to anyone with a brain. They made help defense and recovery defense easier...and took a lot of shots worth a full point less.

League shot like 42% back then on long 2's...just 30% from 3 blows that out of the water...and the league is gonna shoot better than 30% from 3 for sure.

So, harder to guard and you get more points...but, tell me more...

[DMAVS41]

You were raving about Butler's stats just the other day (before that it was Paul George, Brandon Ingram, etc. etc.). He is averaging 25/5/4 on 66% TS against the Bucks (the #1 defense). What would those numbers be against a 90's #1 defense like the Knicks or Bulls? Let's see your agendas collide and how it shakes out. :lol

:applause:

[3ball]

You were raving about Butler's stats just the other day (before that it was Paul George, Brandon Ingram, etc. etc.). He is averaging 25/5/4 on 66% TS against the Bucks (the #1 defense). What would those numbers be against a 90's #1 defense like the Knicks or Bulls? Let's see your agendas collide and how it shakes out. :lol

Are there 2nd options in today's game that aren't good shooters and/or iso players?.. I don't think so.

So I don't believe that poor shooters who can't iso would see a statistical increase in today's game because they wouldn't be primary options.. they would infact become Andre Roberson/Draymond/PJ Tucker role players and specialists.

That's what Pippen would be.. he wouldn't be a Jimmy Butler, who can shoot and iso.. ditto Paul George.. he couldn't be a primary option like that in today's game, so his stats would decline as a tertiary option

[Roundball_Rock]

You were raving about Butler's stats just the other day (before that it was Paul George, Brandon Ingram, etc. etc.). He is averaging 25/5/4 on 66% TS against the Bucks (the #1 defense). What would those numbers be against a 90's #1 defense like the Knicks or Bulls? Let's see your agendas collide and how it shakes out. :lol

Simple question. Why can't you answer it, 1-9ball? We all know why. :lol


Are there 2nd options in today's game that aren't good shooters and/or iso players?


he couldn't be a primary option like that in today's game, so his stats would decline as a tertiary option

In other words, today's players are much better--90's superstars would be third options today (e.g., Eric Gordon, Kuzma, Dragic, Williams are the type of #3 options on contenders today).

So you agree with LeBron fans after all that MJ played in a cake era and that today's higher stats are due to vastly higher skill and talent levels? :lebronamazed:

[3ball]

Simple question. Why can't you answer it, 1-9ball? We all know why. :lol





In other words, today's players are much better--90's superstars would be third options today (e.g., Eric Gordon, Kuzma, Dragic, Williams are the type of #3 options on contenders today).

So you agree with LeBron fans after all that MJ played in a cake era and that today's higher stats are due to vastly higher skill and talent levels? :lebronamazed:

all the 2nd options of the 90's were good shooters and/or iso players.. Pippen was the exception.

Look at any modern 1st option that won 2+ rings - they all had sidekicks that played way better than Pippen (they all got a fmvp or 25-30 ppg).. Pippen was the forward version of Larry Hughes.. only MJ can win multiple rings with a sidekick like that

And Butler would average less back then, which doesn't change the fact that pippen would average less today as a tertiary option.

[Roundball_Rock]

Your hypocrisy has been exposed yet again. We can return to ignoring you and resuming the actual basketball discussion.

[FromDowntown]

Simple question. Why can't you answer it, 1-9ball? We all know why. :lol





In other words, today's players are much better--90's superstars would be third options today (e.g., Eric Gordon, Kuzma, Dragic, Williams are the type of #3 options on contenders today).

So you agree with LeBron fans after all that MJ played in a cake era and that today's higher stats are due to vastly higher skill and talent levels? :lebronamazed:

:lebronamazed:

He knows it, hard for him to admit it, but he knows it deep down.

[FromDowntown]

all the 2nd options of the 90's were good shooters and/or iso players.. Pippen was the exception.

Look at any modern 1st option that won 2+ rings - they all had sidekicks that played way better than Pippen (they all got a fmvp or 25-30 ppg).. Pippen was the forward version of Larry Hughes.. only MJ can win multiple rings with a sidekick like that

And Butler would average less back then, which doesn't change the fact that pippen would average less today as a tertiary option.

Scottie Pippen, a top 5 player in the 90s, by your own admission would be less than a top 20 player, Jimmy Butler, in the modern era.

Thanks for confirming that MJ played in a cupcake era and that today's higher stats are due to vastly higher skill and talent levels

[Roundball_Rock]

Scottie Pippen, a top 5 player in the 90s, by your own admission would be less than a top 20 player, Jimmy Butler, in the modern era.

Thanks for confirming that MJ played in a cupcake era and that today's higher stats are due to vastly higher skill and talent levels

Yeah, he--and his other MJ stans--basically "admit" (without grasping it because of Pippen Derangement Syndrome) the 90's were a weak era where a top 5 player then would be Khris Middleton or Draymond or Iggy today, per their own argument. This is a guy who was ahead of guys like prime Malone, prime Barkley in all-NBA voting (Barkley every year after 93', Malone in 94', 96'--Pip a bit behind in 95'). Remember, these are the great #1 options we hear about that MJ faced in 93' and 97'/98' (i.e., half his finals). Yet the year after in Barkley's case, the year before in Malone's, they are outpolled by what--per MJ stans themselves--would at best be Khris Middleton or Draymond today?

Playing out their logic, that would be like LeBron beating a team with Durant or Kawhi as its best player and Draymond being ahead of Durant in all-NBA or Middleton ahead of Kawhi the year after or year before. This would obviously never happen because Kawhi, KD are that good--but that would be the equivalent of what MJ stans like 1-9ball are arguing, if we accept their own claims as accurate.

It is bizarre. They are nuking their own core argument for MJ as GOAT. :lol

[3ball]

Scottie Pippen, a top 5 player in the 90s, by your own admission would be less than a top 20 player, Jimmy Butler, in the modern era.

Thanks for confirming that MJ played in a cupcake era and that today's higher stats are due to vastly higher skill and talent levels

Pippen wasn't a top 30 player of the 90's

MJ, Hakeem, Duncan, Shaq, Ewing, Barkley, Malone, Dominique (93' 1st Round), Drexler, Robinson, Hill, Penny, Derrick Coleman, Alonzo Mourning, KJ, Kidd, Gary Payton, Iverson, Kemp, Mullin, Tim Hardaway, Webber, Kobe, Garnett, Dikembe

Many more infact

[Roundball_Rock]

Pippen wasn't a top 30 player of the 90's

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

[Kblaze8855]

Considering he doesn’t acknowledge defense in an evaluation imagine the shit 3ball would talk about Mutombo as Jordan’s sidekick. We would hear about that 7 ppg playoff run in 95 3 times a day.

[pandiani17]

Pippen wasn't a top 30 player of the 90's

MJ, Hakeem, Duncan, Shaq, Ewing, Barkley, Malone, Dominique (93' 1st Round), Drexler, Robinson, Hill, Penny, Derrick Coleman, Alonzo Mourning, KJ, Kidd, Gary Payton, Iverson, Kemp, Mullin, Tim Hardaway, Webber, Kobe, Garnett, Dikembe

Many more infact


Derrick Coleman, Mutombo, KJ, Kidd, etc. were better than Pippen in the 90's?:biggums:

[Roundball_Rock]

Considering he doesn’t acknowledge defense in an evaluation imagine the shit 3ball would talk about Mutombo as Jordan’s sidekick. We would hear about that 7 ppg playoff run in 95 3 times a day.

:lol True--no defense and nothing about offense except scoring (playmaking doesn't matter nor does being an elite offensive rebounder for a perimeter player).

Not only that, he acts like there were all these big scoring star perimeter players in the 90's. There was MJ, Wilkins and that was it. Even Drexler was 23 PPG as his prime average (1988-1995). Guys he raves about like Hill were at 22, Miller was at 21, T. Hardaway 20, Penny 21, Stockton 15, etc. That's the context of Pippen's 20 PPG (22 PPG as a #1 option).

[Akeem34TheDream]

Pippen wasn't a top 30 player of the 90's

MJ, Hakeem, Duncan, Shaq, Ewing, Barkley, Malone, Dominique (93' 1st Round), Drexler, Robinson, Hill, Penny, Derrick Coleman, Alonzo Mourning, KJ, Kidd, Gary Payton, Iverson, Kemp, Mullin, Tim Hardaway, Webber, Kobe, Garnett, Dikembe

Many more infact

I actually laughed out loud.

[Roundball_Rock]

Forgot Price and Payton. 18 PPG for Price's prime, 21 PPG for Payton's.


I actually laughed out loud.

Pippen Derangement Syndrome is powerful. :lol

[3ball]

I actually laughed out loud.

I'm actually very happy with the list

Pippen < prime Vin Baker

Look at the stats from the 96' Finals - Payton and Kemp were much better players, which is why Krause wanted to trade Pippen in 97'

there"s no 2nd options today that can"t shoot or iso, so Pippen can't be 2nds option today.. he"d be 4th or 5th option today and should"ve been back then.. only MJ won without a 2nd option that could get FMVP or 30 ppg

[3ball]

Derrick Coleman, Mutombo, KJ, Kidd, etc. were better than Pippen in the 90's?:biggums:

KJ led multiple 55-win teams to the WCF in 89' and 90', including the upset of Magic's 1 seeded Lakers.

KJ also had 2 games of 45+ while averaging 28/7/9 against the champion Rockets in 94' and 95' Playoffs (both were 7 game series)..

So KJ was a better scorer, passer and leader than Pippen.. he was 1a and 1b with Barkley, while Pippen was never on par with any elite 1st option.. 33-year Pippen was instantly 3rd option behind 36-year Barkley and Hakeem in 99'

Pippen sucked

[FromDowntown]

Pippen wasn't a top 30 player of the 90's

MJ, Hakeem, Duncan, Shaq, Ewing, Barkley, Malone, Dominique (93' 1st Round), Drexler, Robinson, Hill, Penny, Derrick Coleman, Alonzo Mourning, KJ, Kidd, Gary Payton, Iverson, Kemp, Mullin, Tim Hardaway, Webber, Kobe, Garnett, Dikembe

Many more infact

1994 MVP voting says otherwise

Anyone care to post the vote results?

[Roundball_Rock]

1994 MVP voting says otherwise

Anyone care to post the vote results?

So does the consensus where every expert list has him top 30 all-time at minimum and he is as high as #21 (ESPN) or #22 (Slam) on some lists. MJ stans are furiously trying to revise history because they are insecure about MJ. We don't see LeBron stans doing the same with Wade because LeBron fans are secure about LeBron.

In all-NBA Pippen crushed Malone 94-68 and guys like Barkley, Kemp were even further behind on the second team. Pippen was the leading vote getter for all-NBA in 94' and in 96' was second behind MJ.

1994 All-NBA First Team Voting

1) Pippen (forward) 94
2) Hakeem (center) 68
3) Malone (forward) 65
4) Stockton (guard) 56
5) Sprewell (guard) 29

Remember, MJ stans tell us how great Malone and Barkley were and how hard it was for MJ to beat their teams in 93', 97', 98' (half his finals) because of how great they were. Well, all-NBA voters thought Pippen was better than them at times when Pippen and them were in their primes--and in 94' it wasn't even close.

Logically, if Pippen sucked, then MJ's competition sucked if they couldn't beat a Khris Middleton level player in all-NBA (the corollary is Middleton would be doing the same in the 90's, whereas he is top 20-25 in today's league).

In other words, all-NBA voters thought Pippen was the best forward in the league in multiple seasons with guys like Malone, Barkley, Kemp, Hill, Webber around in those seasons. If Pippen sucked, and was considered that good, the era is a joke and can't be taken seriously.

[3ball]

So does the consensus where every expert list has him top 30 all-time at minimum and he is as high as #21 (ESPN) or #22 (Slam) on some lists. MJ stans are furiously trying to revise history because they are insecure about MJ. We don't see LeBron stans doing the same with Wade because LeBron fans are secure about LeBron.

In all-NBA Pippen crushed Malone 94-68 and guys like Barkley, Kemp were even further behind on the second team. Pippen was the leading vote getter for all-NBA in 94' and in 96' was second behind MJ.

1994 All-NBA First Team Voting

1) Pippen (forward) 94
2) Hakeem (center) 68
3) Malone (forward) 65
4) Stockton (guard) 56
5) Sprewell (guard) 29

Remember, MJ stans tell us how great Malone and Barkley were and how hard it was for MJ to beat their teams in 93', 97', 98' (half his finals) because of how great they were. Well, all-NBA voters thought Pippen was better than them at times when Pippen and them were in their primes--and in 94' it wasn't even close.




Voting is determined by the comp at each position, which is affected by injuries.. it means nothing - Pippen's 94' isn't a peak worthy of an elite 1st option.. and if we include the playoffs - he was horrible






Logically, if Pippen sucked, then MJ's competition sucked if they couldn't beat a Khris Middleton level player in all-NBA



No, MJ is goat for what winning with a khris Middleton level sidekick... The only modern sidekick with 2+ rings that didn't get a FMVP or 25-30 ppg, other than Gasol
.

[Vino24]

A 90’s defense style team (clippers) are getting shredded by a modern offensive team (nuggets)

[FromDowntown]

So does the consensus where every expert list has him top 30 all-time at minimum and he is as high as #21 (ESPN) or #22 (Slam) on some lists. MJ stans are furiously trying to revise history because they are insecure about MJ. We don't see LeBron stans doing the same with Wade because LeBron fans are secure about LeBron.

In all-NBA Pippen crushed Malone 94-68 and guys like Barkley, Kemp were even further behind on the second team. Pippen was the leading vote getter for all-NBA in 94' and in 96' was second behind MJ.

1994 All-NBA First Team Voting

1) Pippen (forward) 94
2) Hakeem (center) 68
3) Malone (forward) 65
4) Stockton (guard) 56
5) Sprewell (guard) 29

Remember, MJ stans tell us how great Malone and Barkley were and how hard it was for MJ to beat their teams in 93', 97', 98' (half his finals) because of how great they were. Well, all-NBA voters thought Pippen was better than them at times when Pippen and them were in their primes--and in 94' it wasn't even close.

Logically, if Pippen sucked, then MJ's competition sucked if they couldn't beat a Khris Middleton level player in all-NBA (the corollary is Middleton would be doing the same in the 90's, whereas he is top 20-25 in today's league).

In other words, all-NBA voters thought Pippen was the best forward in the league in multiple seasons with guys like Malone, Barkley, Kemp, Hill, Webber around in those seasons. If Pippen sucked, and was considered that good, the era is a joke and can't be taken seriously.

Well that was easy

Dr. Roundball schooling the kids again

[GimmeThat]

'athletes' were getting into the pro-league then turning to drugs. and now, pot is legalized.

[BigShotBob]

I think it's fair to say that Pippen would have never reached his peak without Jordan

[Pipes2.0]

Pippen wasn't a top 30 player of the 90's

MJ, Hakeem, Duncan, Shaq, Ewing, Barkley, Malone, Dominique (93' 1st Round), Drexler, Robinson, Hill, Penny, Derrick Coleman, Alonzo Mourning, KJ, Kidd, Gary Payton, Iverson, Kemp, Mullin, Tim Hardaway, Webber, Kobe, Garnett, Dikembe

Many more infact

Made me spit the water I was drinking when I read this.

I always ignore your posts but I couldn't ignore this. Wow.

[3ball]

Made me spit the water I was drinking when I read this.

I always ignore your posts but I couldn't ignore this. Wow.

It's funny because I look at that list and I'm very confident that pippen is inferior to all of them AND WAS VIEWED AS SUCH AT THE TIME

the average person thought Derrick Coleman and Ewing were easily better than Pippen, regardless of any accolades that the winning spotlight garnered for him.. Pippen was the only primary option that was a "flow scorer", aka couldn't shoot or iso.. only MJ could win rings with a weak-scoring sidekick like that.. an igoudala-type player

[GimmeThat]

It's funny because I look at that list and I'm very confident that pippen is inferior to all of them AND WAS VIEWED AS SUCH AT THE TIME

the average person thought Derrick Coleman and Ewing were easily better than Pippen, regardless of any accolades that the winning spotlight garnered for him.. Pippen was the only primary option that was a "flow scorer", aka couldn't shoot or iso.. only MJ could win rings with a weak-scoring sidekick like that.. an igoudala-type player

so, players that were all stars, who missed the playoff, were easily better than another all star, winning championship.

this guy is a recession machine, all from being too busy bailing out the dead.

[3ball]

so, players that were all stars, who missed the playoff, were easily better than another all star, winning championship.

this guy is a recession machine, all from being too busy bailing out the dead.

MJ carried Pippen bro

He averaged 10-30 more than Pippen in every series and assisted 30% more often, while getting more DPOY votes every year.. otoh, lebron, Kawhi, KD and others need equal-scoring sidekicks to win

Let me know if you need the yearly dpoy voting or the playoff assist percentage stats

[GimmeThat]

MJ carried Pippen bro

He averaged 10-30 more than Pippen in every series and assisted 30% more often, while getting more DPOY votes every year

Let me know if you need the yearly dpoy voting or the playoff assist percentage stats

what you can't tell was that MJ played with another human being, and had another human being to help him in a multi-person sport. instead of the human animals that at one point, fluttered the league.

we all know you're the animal for the inability to use historical data to predict future behavior. we take away a certain timeline from your argument for the game of basketball, and all of a sudden you're ready to publicly admit to us, you never even liked the game of basketball.

[3ball]

.
All these guys have better peaks and many series in the 90's where they played better than Pippen ever did:


MJ, Hakeem, Duncan, Shaq, Ewing, Barkley, Malone, Dominique (93' 1st Round), Drexler, Robinson, Hill, Penny, Derrick Coleman, Alonzo Mourning, KJ, Kidd, Gary Payton, Iverson, Kemp, Mullin, Tim Hardaway, Webber, Kobe, Garnett, Dikembe

[r0drig0lac]

I may be in the minority but I believe defenses in the 90's is overated for 1 reason

I really dont understand why illegal defense isnt talked about. If you wanted to double team someone , you had to fully commit to it and if someone had no 3pt shot you had to stay close to them. This makes life soo much easier for perimeter players because all they have to do is run screen plays until they got a favourable match up , then isolate them on one side of the court with the other 4 defenders watching on the other side of the court.

Say what you want about the physicality but there was no strategy to defenses in the 90s ??

[Sulico]

People idolized players that played in the 90's so it's hard for them to say negative things about that era. And a lot of todays analysts are players or fans from that time.

I always try to be objective and unbiased, and I still have my judgements clouded sometimes by fandom of some team or a player.

But sure, any unbiased fan can see how stagnant and simplistic defense was in the 90's, not to mention really poor quality of players compared to todays NBA.

Then you add up little things like heavy minutes top players had to play, inferior staff and medical service quality, fewer information avaliable to players etc. and you get the product we had back then. I recently watched full Rockets-Jazz playoff game from 97 and it was very sad experience from the standpoint of quality of play, yet very satisfying due to nostalgia.

[Bronbron23]

A 90’s defense style team (clippers) are getting shredded by a modern offensive team (nuggets)

In what era and rules? 90's was way more physical and we've seen how much harder it is for some of these guys to get their 3's off in the games where the refs are allowing more physicality. Murray goes from looking like steph to looking like a lesser version mitch richmond. And thats still with less physicality than the 90's. Bring back physical defense and watch the scores go from 110 plus to mid low 90's and watch guys like murry go from 30 plus to low 20's

[aj1987]

In what era and rules? 90's was way more physical and we've seen how much harder it is for some of these guys to get their 3's off in the games where the refs are allowing more physicality. Murray goes from looking like steph to looking like a lesser version mitch richmond. And thats still with less physicality than the 90's. Bring back physical defense and watch the scores go from 110 plus to mid low 90's and watch guys like murry go from 30 plus to low 20's

I was literally just watching this video and reading the comments:

https://youtu.be/wKaxaAsG6hQ

People saying how MJ would drop 50 today and that LeBron can't even come close to doing anything like that. How MJ is much stronger than LeBron, etc..

Except for the fact:

https://youtu.be/hi_2lEw5CHI

LeBron has made baskets through contact a shit ton of times in his career. Only problem is, he doesn't have a rabid frothing at the mouth fanbase like MJ has. That's why you don't see as many good videos of his. Whether it's his defense or other stuff.

Point is, Murray, after G6 of the 1st round has been a bit cold. He did have a pretty good G2 though. Even in this game, he was missing open shots. It's not like he was only bricking shots which were contested. As for Murray scoring in the low 20's, you do know that that would still put him somewhere in the top 10 in scoring in the '90's, right? ~23 PPG would put probably put him at #7 or #7.

[Bronbron23]

I was literally just watching this video and reading the comments:

https://youtu.be/wKaxaAsG6hQ

People saying how MJ would drop 50 today and that LeBron can't even come close to doing anything like that. How MJ is much stronger than LeBron, etc..

Except for the fact:

https://youtu.be/hi_2lEw5CHI

LeBron has made baskets through contact a shit ton of times in his career. Only problem is, he doesn't have a rabid frothing at the mouth fanbase like MJ has. That's why you don't see as many good videos of his. Whether it's his defense or other stuff.

Point is, Murray, after G6 of the 1st round has been a bit cold. He did have a pretty good G2 though. Even in this game, he was missing open shots. It's not like he was only bricking shots which were contested. As for Murray scoring in the low 20's, you do know that that would still put him somewhere in the top 10 in scoring in the '90's, right? ~23 PPG would put probably put him at #7 or #7.

Well im a mj guy but ive never thought hed get anywhere near 50 in this era. For one he played in the triangle. Second 50 is just dumb. In the triangle i coukd see him averaging 35 or so. In a more ball dominant system maybe a few more points than harden.

As far as Murray its easy to say he's just been cold but it was a physical game 7 and then 2 games against a physical defense with the clippers. This is gonna be more of the norm for him come playoff time.

And i meant low 20's in this era. Put him in the 90's its not just the rules and physicality thats gonna drop his production but its also the style of play. Gaurds weren't shooting 8-10 threes a game it was maybe half if that.

[3ball]

Well im a mj guy but ive never thought hed get anywhere near 50 in this era. For one he played in the triangle. Second 50 is just dumb. In the triangle i coukd see him averaging 35 or so. In a more ball dominant system maybe a few more points than harden.

As far as Murray its easy to say he's just been cold but it was a physical game 7 and then 2 games against a physical defense with the clippers. This is gonna be more of the norm for him come playoff time.

And i meant low 20's in this era. Put him in the 90's its not just the rules and physicality thats gonna drop his production but its also the style of play. Gaurds weren't shooting 8-10 threes a game it was maybe half if that.
MJ has 3 series where he averaged 44-45 ppg, and 2 of those were in the triangle.. he has 6 series of 40+.

So he would absolutely average 50 today in a series or playoff run

He might literally average 57 in a series, aka peak Jamal Murray level for an entire series.. seems doable for MJ

[insidious301]

MJ has 3 series where he averaged 44-45 ppg, and 2 of those were in the triangle.. he has 6 series of 40+.

So he would absolutely average 50 today in a series or playoff run

He might literally average 57 in a series, aka peak Jamal Murray level for an entire series.. seems doable for MJ

Jordan wouldn't average 50 for a playoff run. There aren't enough possessions in a game for that number to make sense.

[Roundball_Rock]

Jordan wouldn't average 50 for a playoff run. There aren't enough possessions in a game for that number to make sense.


He might literally average 57 in a series, aka peak Jamal Murray level for an entire series.. seems doable for MJ

1-9ball is talking about MJ averaging 57 for a series. No one is going to average 57 for a series. Even in a short series, if you go 100, 35, 42, 25, 40 that still comes out to "only" 48.

[insidious301]

1-9ball is talking about MJ averaging 57 for a series. No one is going to average 57 for a series. Even in a short series, if you go 100, 35, 42, 25, 40 that still comes out to "only" 48.

That's funny, Roundball. Fairytales in their basement give them courage for their convictions.

[3ball]

Jordan wouldn't average 50 for a playoff run. There aren't enough possessions in a game for that number to make sense.

Don't make claims you can't support

Jordan averaged 41 in an 89 paced Finals

He averaged 43-45 in numerous series - so he's already averaged nearly 50 and just needs the court to.open up a little more to get 50 or 60

[3ball]

Jordan wouldn't average 50 for a playoff run. There aren't enough possessions in a game for that number to make sense.

Jordan averaged 44 in a 92-pace series

41 in a 89-paced Finals

So you don't know what you're talking about

He already nearly averaged 50, and simply needed the court to open up more to get 50-60

[insidious301]

Jordan averaged 44 in a 92-pace series

41 in a 89-paced Finals

So you don't know what you're talking about

He already nearly averaged 50, and simply needed the court to open up more to get 50-60

41 isn't close to 50. So if you cant even do elementary math don't debate. Listen, nothing suggests Jordan gets a 10 point boost for an extended PO run. In a single series that is possible because of sample and the 3 point shot, however you actually claimed 57 which gets you laughed out of a room.

[Roundball_Rock]

That's funny, Roundball. Fairytales in their basement give them courage for their convictions.

:lol


Jordan averaged 44 in a 92-pace series

41 in a 89-paced Finals

Jordan averaged 44 in a 3 game "series" (remember, No Pip around ; ) ). He scored 49, 63, and 19. This era it would be at least 4 games. Can you play winning ball with a player shooting 39 times a game like MJ did in that series? I don't think a coach is letting that fly knowing what we know now about hero ball (MJ had Woolridge on his team, who was 12th in scoring the year before at 23 PPG). That kind of style leads to 1-9.


41 isn't close to 50.

Exactly. It's like the Reggie thread. 41 to 50. 21 to 30. These are big leaps.

Mitchell averaged 36 PPG in a 7 game series--but that was in the bubble (no fans being the main factor it seems) and was shooting 70% TS (only 22 FGA). Mitchell also was making 5 threes a game, and we know MJ struggled with the 3ball.

For MJ to score 50 PPG he would need extreme volume and to be shooting lights out (did MJ ever shoot 70% TS in a series?). No one is taking 39 shots a game these days--and MJ's inability to shoot the 3ball hinders him compared to guys like Harden who can.

He scored 41 PPG in a real series so maybe 45, 46, 47 is doable but 50 is hard to see and 57 laughable.

[Bronbron23]

MJ has 3 series where he averaged 44-45 ppg, and 2 of those were in the triangle.. he has 6 series of 40+.

So he would absolutely average 50 today in a series or playoff run

He might literally average 57 in a series, aka peak Jamal Murray level for an entire series.. seems doable for MJ

i disagree man. Doing it for a serious isn't the same as doing it for a whole season plus playoffs. 50 is alot even for mj.

[3ball]

:lol



Jordan averaged 44 in a 3 game "series" (remember, No Pip around ; ) ). He scored 49, 63, and 19. This era it would be at least 4 games. Can you play winning ball with a player shooting 39 times a game like MJ did in that series? I don't think a coach is letting that fly knowing what we know now about hero ball (MJ had Woolridge on his team, who was 12th in scoring the year before at 23 PPG). That kind of style leads to 1-9.



Exactly. It's like the Reggie thread. 41 to 50. 21 to 30. These are big leaps.

Mitchell averaged 36 PPG in a 7 game series--but that was in the bubble (no fans being the main factor it seems) and was shooting 70% TS (only 22 FGA). Mitchell also was making 5 threes a game, and we know MJ struggled with the 3ball.

For MJ to score 50 PPG he would need extreme volume and to be shooting lights out (did MJ ever shoot 70% TS in a series?). No one is taking 39 shots a game these days--and MJ's inability to shoot the 3ball hinders him compared to guys like Harden who can.

He scored 41 PPG in a real series so maybe 45, 46, 47 is doable but 50 is hard to see and 57 laughable.

You aren't baking some things into the cake..

We must assume that MJ breaks the single game scoring record again - 63 points becomes 69... So we have a 69-point game baked into a 4-game sweep loss series (we already know he dragged a lottery cast to the 8 seed (say, the 19 Lakers) and is facing KD's 1-seeded Warriors).

So with 69 guaranteed in one of the games, Jordan would need only 130 points in the remaining 3 games to average 50 for the series.. 130/3 = 43.3... that's nothing for Jordan - he had many 3-game stretches and even series of 43 ppg

So mj would average 50 in a series today... Now could he get 57?.. well, that would depend on how much he broke the record by - I thought 69 was pretty conservative

[Roundball_Rock]

In this thread he is saying MJ would be scoring 57--in another thread he is saying MJ would be scoring 24 on the Knicks. In other words, he would be scoring 57 in an era where no one else is scoring 40 but on the 90's Knicks he would basically be peak Starks plus 5 points.

This guy will say anything. :lol