Coach Thibbs: "When Jordan was playing..."

[SpanishACB]

nice article

some of those videos would make lazarus cry

[3ball]

it's dumb to ponder how jordan would do today, when lesser players do better than he ever did: wade averaged 33.2 ppg on 66% TS against Thibb's Celtics defense in 2010 playoffs, Durant got 30 ppg on 65% TS against the Spurs, and others have similar ridiculous percentages against today's spaced out defenses - it is impossible for a defense to be good if players can get that type of shooting percentage.

Jordan never got those percentages against any playoff team, and was NOWHERE NEAR those percentages against top defenses like the Pistons and Knicks - if he HAD gotten those ridiculous percentages, that would have meant those defenses were bad - that would have been unheard of against a top defense in previous eras, but today it happens all the time.

plus, lebron does just fine with his clunky style and molasses slow first step, which gets him locked up by gordon hayward - look how horrible his first step is at 29::






NO COMPARISON to a 30 year-old MJ.. there isn't anyone in the league doing it like this or this easy (and blowing by super-athlete doug west.. youtube doug west if you don't know how athletic he was):







and even in lebron's prime, lebron never slid between defenders like this.. and he never changed direction or got off his feet this quickly either (and this is against paul pressey, then the in-out on terry cummings, not gordon hayward):

[houston]

game changed alot since jordan hey day

[Dr.J4ever]

3ball? What the hell are you talking about.... In the 90s, teams had to actually defend every player on the court unless they sent a hard double-team.... today you are allowed to amplify your entire roster on one player and get away with it.... http://www.sbnation.com/2014/3/25/55...michael-jordan

Great article. Pretty much settles the thread.

[navy]

Great article. Pretty much settles the thread.

It should, but it doesnt.

[jzek]

Confirmed: Jordan is GOAT to everyone who watched the NBA in the 90s.

Goes to show how unlucky youngsters are who only got to see the likes of Kobe and LeBron...

[3ball]

It should, but it doesnt.

why the hell should it?

i have the facts and RULES on my side dumbass - i just posted the ACTUAL RULES that show previous eras were allowed to camp in the paint... i don't need to hide behind some inaccurate article written by someone that has no more special knowledge about the game than any fan like you or me.

you can read right?... okay.. then stfu, because the rules are posted at the top of this page - previous eras could camp in the lane, and today they can't.

[VengefulAngel]

why the hell should it?

i have the facts and RULES on my side dumbass - i just posted the ACTUAL RULES that show previous eras were allowed to camp in the paint... i don't need to hide behind some inaccurate article written by someone that has no more special knowledge about the game than any fan like you or me.

you can read right?... okay.. then stfu, because the rules are posted at the top of this page - previous eras could camp in the lane, and today they can't.

Please can you stop. I don't want to hear the same argument 100 times.

[3ball]

.
No Spacing = Defenders in Close Proximity = Easier/Better Help Defense























... See Bill Walton Waiting in Lane

[Blue&Orange]

It should, but it doesnt.

It does.

That article is a bonanza of cherry picking screenshots. Anyone who writes an article trying to prove todays paint is more packed, is in two words, a colossal retard.


Today you have coaches that take away their bigs out of the game, Hibbert and Duncan (huge stupid mistake in my opinion), but nevertheless they did it, because they were to "slow" to protect the paint and somehow the paint is more packed today. The fact that the only angle favoring Lebron in that article is this stupid fantasy that paint is more packed today should definitely end this discussion.

Facts Vs delusion

[LAZERUSS]

what?

MJ's last season was in 97-98. I don't count the shell of an MJ after that.

But the point stands. It was more difficult to score, and to score efficiently in '98, than in '14.

[Elosha]

Interesting thread, but it's somewhat problematic for anyone, even a guru like Thibs, to make categorical statements about differences for even one specific play scenario such as modern defenders' reaction to Jordan catching in the high post. Those problems increase exponentially when we try to to extrapolate as to the entire level of defensive prowess of 80-90's v. 2000-10's. Not to say that Thibs isn't making a valid point, but we can go tit for tat, and find other scenarios Jordan would find easier to exploit in today's game. And Thibs' comments in the article as a whole, acknowledge that fact.

Personally, I think Jordan would have a bit more offensive success today than in the past and would be the acknowledged best player. However, even the 90's Bulls game would need to be adjusted to today's game, or they would be at a disadvantage. The Bulls would have to adjust to the emphasis and need to defend the three point line at all times, and they would have to adjust to the explosiveness and athleticism of many scoring point guards today. The Bulls were always capable of being exploited at the pg position, even though Paxon and Kerr were serviceable and clutch. But at the same time, slap this year's Spurs, OKC or GS team into the 80's and 90's and they'd have to adjust to more physical defenses and bruising fouls, aggressive trapping and more contested and congested paint.

To be honest, basketball "progresses" just like any other sport, in fits and spurts, some for the better, some for the worse. Some might argue that the 90's ultra-physical defenses such as NY and Miami were brutal and ugly to watch, but others might argue that it ground down all but the best teams such as the Bulls and that it would likely grind down most or all of the elite offenses today, were it allowed to be executed. Some might claim the emphasis on player and team efficiency makes for a more pure, team-oriented game, others claim it diminishes the ability/need for transcendent players, who traditionally most great championship teams require. It all boils down to preferences and assumptions that none of us can ever know about how different eras would have performed against each other.

Lastly, in reference 3ball's point about players like KD and Wade having individual playoff series in which they scored "better" or more efficiently than Jordan's and that being a referendum on poor modern day defenses: I'm not sure such small sample sizes indicate anything other than that we are talking about three all time greats. I certainly would argue that Jordan had greater and more dominant scoring series than either Wade in 2010 against Boston or KD against the Spurs, even if these players scored with more efficiency.

You can put all three players in either 80's and 90's or today and all three will have overall great playoff careers. But in my opinion, Jordan's body of work as far as scoring will be collectively better than someone like Wade, Kobe, KD, or Lebron no matter what era they are playing. because as great as they are, each of those players has areas of offensive weaknesses, either from a skillset or from a mental aspect, that can be exploited. Jordan was, of course not perfect, but it usually much harder to hold him down over the course of a 7 game series or probe any areas of weakness than it is for these other players.

Just my two cents worth; very good observations here by a number of posters.

it's dumb to ponder how jordan would do today, when lesser players do better than he ever did: wade averaged 33.2 ppg on 66% TS against Thibb's Celtics defense in 2010 playoffs, Durant got 30 ppg on 65% TS against the Spurs, and others have similar ridiculous percentages against today's spaced out defenses - it is impossible for a defense to be good if players can get that type of shooting percentage.

Jordan never got those percentages against any playoff team, and was NOWHERE NEAR those percentages against top defenses like the Pistons and Knicks - if he HAD gotten those ridiculous percentages, that would have meant those defenses were bad - that would have been unheard of against a top defense in previous eras, but today it happens all the time.

plus, lebron does just fine with his clunky style and molasses slow first step, which gets him locked up by gordon hayward - look how horrible his first step is at 29::






NO COMPARISON to a 30 year-old MJ.. there isn't anyone in the league doing it like this or this easy (and blowing by super-athlete doug west.. youtube doug west if you don't know how athletic he was):







and even in lebron's prime, lebron never slid between defenders like this.. and he never changed direction or got off his feet this quickly either (and this is against paul pressey, then the in-out on terry cummings, not gordon hayward):

[La Frescobaldi]

Exactly... this was a huge advantage for 80s-90s scorers... allowed you to have many one-on-one situations.... I mean literally speaking, like if you faced your man up and looked behind him there was no wall there behind ready to contest & take charges, you blew by your man and it was over, defenders could only then run in to help/contest the easy basket which is a whole bit harder...

Illegal defense was a bit different to say the least....

...and while fans think handchecking made it tougher for players to score, i think it actually HELPED if you were a bigger/stronger guy, why? Because you as an offensive player were allowed to counter that physically with your own hands & body aswell, you could get away with many more elbow/off-hand push ofs, body riding and you could slap the defenders arms away from your vicinity (like Jordan used to do alot).... so if you were strong/athletic (and smart) as Jordan no guy at your position was really at an advantage....

Jordan was great, but this indeed helped alot....

No.
A man with a powerful forearm throws a guy off balance. Sure there are tricks an offensive guy can use, but there's no denying a powerful defender has an enormous advantage over a defender who can only move his feet.

[Da_Realist]

Interesting thread, but it's somewhat problematic for anyone, even a guru like Thibs, to make categorical statements about differences for even one specific play scenario such as modern defenders' reaction to Jordan catching in the high post. Those problems increase exponentially when we try to to extrapolate as to the entire level of defensive prowess of 80-90's v. 2000-10's. Not to say that Thibs isn't making a valid point, but we can go tit for tat, and find other scenarios Jordan would find easier to exploit in today's game. And Thibs' comments in the article as a whole, acknowledge that fact.

Personally, I think Jordan would have a bit more offensive success today than in the past and would be the acknowledged best player. However, even the 90's Bulls game would need to be adjusted to today's game, or they would be at a disadvantage. The Bulls would have to adjust to the emphasis and need to defend the three point line at all times, and they would have to adjust to the explosiveness and athleticism of many scoring point guards today. The Bulls were always capable of being exploited at the pg position, even though Paxon and Kerr were serviceable and clutch. But at the same time, slap this year's Spurs, OKC or GS team into the 80's and 90's and they'd have to adjust to more physical defenses and bruising fouls, aggressive trapping and more contested and congested paint.

To be honest, basketball "progresses" just like any other sport, in fits and spurts, some for the better, some for the worse. Some might argue that the 90's ultra-physical defenses such as NY and Miami were brutal and ugly to watch, but others might argue that it ground down all but the best teams such as the Bulls and that it would likely grind down most or all of the elite offenses today, were it allowed to be executed. Some might claim the emphasis on player and team efficiency makes for a more pure, team-oriented game, others claim it diminishes the ability/need for transcendent players, who traditionally most great championship teams require. It all boils down to preferences and assumptions that none of us can ever know about how different eras would have performed against each other.

Lastly, in reference 3ball's point about players like KD and Wade having individual playoff series in which they scored "better" or more efficiently than Jordan's and that being a referendum on poor modern day defenses: I'm not sure such small sample sizes indicate anything other than that we are talking about three all time greats. I certainly would argue that Jordan had greater and more dominant scoring series than either Wade in 2010 against Boston or KD against the Spurs, even if these players scored with more efficiency.

You can put all three players in either 80's and 90's or today and all three will have overall great playoff careers. But in my opinion, Jordan's body of work as far as scoring will be collectively better than someone like Wade, Kobe, KD, or Lebron no matter what era they are playing. because as great as they are, each of those players has areas of offensive weaknesses, either from a skillset or from a mental aspect, that can be exploited. Jordan was, of course not perfect, but it usually much harder to hold him down over the course of a 7 game series or probe any areas of weakness than it is for these other players.

Just my two cents worth; very good observations here by a number of posters.

Great post

[Euroleague]

http://www.nba.com/2014/news/feature...=iref:nbahpt3a

A great article on the evolution of the "city game" into the world's game and the impact of internationals on the NBA.

I saw this interesting quote that could shed light on some of the debate on rules changes we were having here on ISH a couple months back..

""When Jordan was playing," Chicago coach Tom Thibodeau said, "if he was isolated at 12 feet or at the elbow, you had to keep your 'big' on the weak side. There was no way you could get him across the lane. Now that you can bring your big over to the strong side, elbow isolations become jump-shot plays. And there's usually four shooters on the floor, at a minimum, and some teams have five."

Feel free to disagree with one of the NBA's best defensive minds.

WTF is your point? This has been explained to you over and over and over here, and why this is NOT a true zone defense, and you still can't get it?

And you just now even acknowledge the first part of it when a coach says it?

You are a nut.