Overrated defense of the 80s/90s

[eliteballer]

Except that they weren't playing against equal quality offenses. Offenses back then were substantially better for a variety of reasons (more pass-first PG's, better team play, better fundamentals, less micromanagement by coaches, and most importantly greater concentration of talent (most teams had 3-4 guys who could get you 18-22 ppg on any given night, and good teams had 4-5 such guys).

Today's teams would NOT hold the teams of the 1988 NBA to the same averages that they're holding 2013 teams to. Fact.

What a pile of CRAP These are the BEST players and coaches in the world, and if ANYTHING schemes on both ends have gotten more sophisticated. Again...this isn't you and me, the best players in your rec league, high school, park, or college...these are the 400 best players in the WORLD....basketball isn't that complicated. There has NEVER existed "substantially" better offenses than the ones they run. It's illogical.

You always talk about the eye test(which some of us dont need since we SAW IT)...well the eye test says the league was offense centric back then

[Pushxx]

Oh, look! Another "tear down a past era in order to prop up the one I actually watched!"

This.

[sundizz]

This.

In reality who knows. I've watched maybe 40 games from 80's and 90's end to end in my lifetime (on youtube). I've watched NBA heavily every year from 1997 onwards.

My opinion is similar to that of the OP. They didn't play great (or even good by today's standards) defense in that era. The difference is that they occasionally got into more arguments, or fights, or hard fouls and those weren't made into a big deal (i.e ejections). This is what was 'tougher' about that era.

In general though everyone played a much higher pace, more fun/team oriented style. At the same time, nowadays generally players don't get the same sort of free layups they allowed back then. Usually, they get hacked or put on the line.

[Leviathon1121]

What a pile of CRAP These are the BEST players and coaches in the world, and if ANYTHING schemes on both ends have gotten more sophisticated. Again...this isn't you and me, the best players in your rec league, high school, park, or college...these are the 400 best players in the WORLD....basketball isn't that complicated. There has NEVER existed "substantially" better offenses than the ones they run. It's illogical.

You always talk about the eye test(which some of us dont need since we SAW IT)...well the eye test says the league was offense centric back then

And yet, according to certain fans, "substantially" better defenses do exist. Amazing how the mind of a Kobe stan works.

[Deuce Bigalow]

In reality who knows. I've watched maybe 40 games from 80's and 90's end to end in my lifetime (on youtube). I've watched NBA heavily every year from 1997 onwards.

My opinion is similar to that of the OP. They didn't play great (or even good by today's standards) defense in that era. The difference is that they occasionally got into more arguments, or fights, or hard fouls and those weren't made into a big deal (i.e ejections). This is what was 'tougher' about that era.

In general though everyone played a much higher pace, more fun/team oriented style. At the same time, nowadays generally players don't get the same sort of free layups they allowed back then. Usually, they get hacked or put on the line.

Agreed. Good post.

[97 bulls]

This is why its hard to compare eras. Ive argued with both sides of this debate.

The old school side loves to try and compars eras scoring stats as a means to show the how dominant an 80s superstar would be. But when the script is turned, and thos high offensive numbers equate to low or relatively bad defensive numbers by today's standards, they want to put things into context.

By the same token, the new school side wants to claim defenses today are tougher now than back then. Are defenses really better? Or is it a case of bad basketball due to isos and pick and rolls as well as a lack of bigmen post presence.

All eras stand on their own merit. The 80s have their strengths as the 90s, 00s etc. And they all have their weaknesses. Compare teams and players based on how dominant and successful the person or team in question was when they played.

[Chapallaz]

What a pile of CRAP These are the BEST players and coaches in the world, and if ANYTHING schemes on both ends have gotten more sophisticated. Again...this isn't you and me, the best players in your rec league, high school, park, or college...these are the 400 best players in the WORLD....basketball isn't that complicated. There has NEVER existed "substantially" better offenses than the ones they run. It's illogical.

You always talk about the eye test(which some of us dont need since we SAW IT)...well the eye test says the league was offense centric back then

Don't forget there's about 40, or 80 if you count the Heat, Magic and Hornets, weaker talents added to that pool.

[andgar923]

Larry Bird one of the greatest shooters of all time shot a career high 227 3pt attempts for the entire season.

Meanwhile

[bdreason]

I'm sorry, but those late 80's champs would murk the current NBA champs. I honestly believe the '86 Celtics, '87 Lakers, and '88 Pistons would have their way with the '10 Lakers, '11 Mavs, or '12 Heat. I think it could even end up being borderline embarrassing.

[Kiddlovesnets]

[TheMan]

Those teams in the 80s and early to mid 90s had some things that few teams today have...ball movement, legit bigmen and basic bball fundamentals.

Dwight Howard wouldn't sniff top 5 C in that era, today's game is different, it's more iso oriented, the 86 Celtics would murder the 12 Heat because of three things, a big FC, high b ball IQ and BALL MOVEMENT.

[jlip]

This is why its hard to compare eras. Ive argued with both sides of this debate.

The old school side loves to try and compars eras scoring stats as a means to show the how dominant an 80s superstar would be. But when the script is turned, and thos high offensive numbers equate to low or relatively bad defensive numbers by today's standards, they want to put things into context.

By the same token, the new school side wants to claim defenses today are tougher now than back then. Are defenses really better? Or is it a case of bad basketball due to isos and pick and rolls as well as a lack of bigmen post presence.

All eras stand on their own merit. The 80s have their strengths as the 90s, 00s etc. And they all have their weaknesses. Compare teams and players based on how dominant and successful the person or team in question was when they played.

This

[Round Mound]

[QUOTE=andgar923]Larry Bird one of the greatest shooters of all time shot a career high 227 3pt attempts for the entire season.

Meanwhile

[brain drain]

OK, in order find out whether the change in FG% was more due to defenses or talent dilution / worse players / shooters, I got some data on some players who were drafted in the mid / late eighties. I only tried to chose players with a decent longevity over 1990, so that declining athleticism wouldn't be too much of an issue.
So here it is: FG% of some players drafted in the mid / late 80s:



We probably need to ignore the last years of the chart, but the general trend starts too early in these players' careers to be ignored or attributed to aging effects.
To me, that looks like defenses got better starting around '90. We'd probably need more data, but that's my first impression.

[atljonesbro]

If you think that 80s 90s and teams would dominate teams today you are either:

1. An old fella who doesnt wanna let go of his child hood and prop his era up by downing todays

2. A young kid who's trying to attempt to sound smart by saying old is better than new.

3. A young kid trying to gain credibility from older posters by saying that.

80s 90s would NOT dominate current in the least. You have to be stupid to think say. Neither would dominate either.