I can make a team today to beat the 1992 Dream Team

[trojanfan12]

Really well said, and totally fair

Ive seen both eras' myself, so dont completely dis-agree, its the fans that have the "No Contest" mentality that suffer too much from the "Back in My day" bias

Same. I started following the NBA in 1970. My favorite era was the 80's. I think it had a close to perfect mix of finesse and physicality. The 90's got way too physical to where it almost couldn't be recognized as basketball. I still enjoyed it and even miss it a little. But it just got too crazy. lol

Agree about the "no contest" guys. It just shows a disrespect to whichever era they're claiming wasn't as good. Regardless of era, these are world class athletes we're talking about. They'll figure out a way to be at least be competitive.

 

[tlance]

Because KD is too light in the ass and it's not something he's been required to do. He's not used to guys attacking the basket the way they did in the DT era.

It doesn't matter how long he is. He's not physically strong enough. Were he to come up in that era, he'd have a much better chance because he would be used to it and would have adjusted his game.

But today's KD, brought up in this era of basketball? He's not scaring anyone. Barkley would be looking to break him in half. lol

I agree to a point.

He might look to break KD in half, but it doesn't mean he would be able.

Skill sets are obviously much, much different, but athletically KD is a lot like Marcus Camby was. And Camby was a phenomenal rim protector in the 90s.

 

[trojanfan12]

He might look to break KD in half, but it doesn't mean he would be able.

 

[trojanfan12]

Skill sets are obviously much, much different, but athletically KD is a lot like Marcus Camby was. And Camby was a phenomenal rim protector in the 90s.

And had KD come up in the 90's like Camby, he'd probably play a lot more like Camby. But he came up in this era and that's what the comparison is.

Because of that, I can't see KD being a rim protector vs. the DT.

 

[tlance]

And had KD come up in the 90's like Camby, he'd probably play a lot more like Camby. But he came up in this era and that's what the comparison is.

Because of that, I can't see KD being a rim protector vs. the DT.

Right,

So he is much, much better than Camby was.

Still a very good rim protector.

 

[tlance]

This is what it boils down to. It isn't reasonable to believe that all of the sudden, despite the talent pool expanding significantly, there are simply fewer big men that can play basketball well.

It is far more likely that the league has changed what it is looking for in a big man. More athleticism and less mass. Length more than height.

Traditional centers struggle to defend in space, and are therefor too much of a liability on defense.

Also, NBA strength trainers focus on hips, core and making muscles longer and more flexible. In past eras, players who lifted mostly went for bulk. Science shows the current plans are much more practical for basketball specific movements.

Yet, all these 90s guys cling to is that "they had too bulk and strength". Well, that is why they would get beat by a better conditioned set of athletes.

 

[trojanfan12]

Right,

So he is much, much better than Camby was.

Still a very good rim protector.

No, he's a better all around player than Camby was, but he's nowhere close to the rim protector Camby was. If they switched eras...KD would look a lot more like Camby and Camby would look a lot more like KD.

But again, that's not the comparison. Today's KD isn't stopping any of the DT'ers at the rim.

 

[tlance]

Its just that nobody knows how to play down in the blocks anymore. Embid is the best center i've seen in years and he dominates teams of today. As good as Embid is, he's nowhere near as good as Ewing and Robinson. Barkley was only 6' 4' but he led the league in rebounding one year when that meant something. If I had to choose between players shooting 30 some percent from three point range or players shooting much higher percentages around the basket, i'll take the higher percentages.

You might want to check your math then.

The Warriors are currently shooting 39.3% from 3. There are like 9 teams shooting above 36%.

36% from 3 equates to 54% from 2. No teams shoot that well from the field, so you may want to Rethink your position.

Not only do efficient 3 point shooting teams offer more efficient scoring, but long shots lead to long rebounds that are harder for defenses to corral. Pace and space is fully supported by math, your theories are not.

 

[flyerhawk]

But again, that's not the comparison. Today's KD isn't stopping any of the DT'ers at the rim.

Based on what reasoning could you possibly say that Kevin Durant couldn't stop ANY DT'er at the rim?

Is this an NBA game or a street game with no refs we are talking about?

 

[Mecca]

It's interesting to think that people see to think that the stretch 4 and stretch 5 are inventions of the league only recently. It's not like the Dream Team players didn't face big men who could shoot from outside and stretch the floor. Yes, they didn't shoot as many 3s in 1992 (the league average for attempts for entire teams is less than some players average now), but it isn't like the DT was filled with players who couldn't sink the 3 ball when it was needed.

*See Arvydos Sabonis

Guy was uber-Jokic.

Too bad he didn't come to the NBA when he had knees.

 

[tlance]

*See Arvydos Sabonis

Guy was uber-Jokic.

Too bad he didn't come to the NBA when he had knees.

It would have been fun to watch Sabonis in his prime, but,

There is a big difference between Sabonis and the new centers. Sabonis definitely could not move laterally well enough to defend pick and roll during his Blazer days, and I doubt he would have been great at it during his prime either.

Big, slow defenders get exposed today.

 

[Mecca]

It would have been fun to watch Sabonis in his prime, but,

There is a big difference between Sabonis and the new centers. Sabonis definitely could not move laterally well enough to defend pick and roll during his Blazer days, and I doubt he would have been great at it during his prime either.

Big, slow defenders get exposed today.

Defense, shmefense....

I am a lifelong Clippers fan.

I know not what you speak of.

* Ignores Deandre's existence like everyone else and Fuck Cp3*

 

[trojanfan12]

Based on what reasoning could you possibly say that Kevin Durant couldn't stop ANY DT'er at the rim?

Read my posts. I was pretty clear.

 

[flyerhawk]

Read my posts. I was pretty clear.

I read what you posted. I just think that it is absurd to argue that every single DT would be able to go to the hoop on a 6'10" defender with a 7'5" wingspan. Like laughably absurd. Unless you are assuming that fouls aren't going to be called.

 

[trojanfan12]

I read what you posted. I just think that it is absurd to argue that every single DT would be able to go to the hoop on a 6'10" defender with a 7'5" wingspan. Like laughably absurd. Unless you are assuming that fouls aren't going to be called.

Really? You read my posts and thought I seriously meant every single DT'er?

You need to slap yourself.

 

[flyerhawk]

Really? You read my posts and thought I seriously meant every single DT'er?

You need to slap yourself.

Fine, are you only talking about the Centers and Barkley when you said ever DTer? Are you only referring to post-up rim protection?

Manute Bol was 7'5" and weight 200 pounds and he averaged 3 blocks a game and 4 during his peak years. The notion that 6'10" 245 lb Kevin Durant would just get poterized by the DTers because of his frame is absurd.

Would KD struggle defending the post against Hakeem or Ewing? Certainly. Just as everyone else would. They were Hall of Fame center. But they would certainly struggle dealing with a big guy with the lateral quickness that KD has.

 

[pittpnthrs]

You might want to check your math then.

The Warriors are currently shooting 39.3% from 3. There are like 9 teams shooting above 36%.

36% from 3 equates to 54% from 2. No teams shoot that well from the field, so you may want to Rethink your position.

Not only do efficient 3 point shooting teams offer more efficient scoring, but long shots lead to long rebounds that are harder for defenses to corral. Pace and space is fully supported by math, your theories are not.

Maybe I didnt word it as well as I should have, but the point I was making was that I would much rather take my chances of a guy shooting a layup than a player shooting a 3 pointer.

Also, there seems to be many teams that shoot better than 54% from 2 according to the following list. Hell, the Warriors are shooting 61% from 2.
Teams Shooting Dashboard General

 

[trojanfan12]

Fine, are you only talking about the Centers and Barkley when you said ever DTer?

MJ, Pippen, Barkley, Ewing, Karl Malone and Drexler would take turns dunking on him. That is until Barkley or Malone broke him in half.

Manute Bol was 7'5" and weight 200 pounds and he averaged 3 blocks a game and 4 during his peak years. The notion that 6'10" 245 lb Kevin Durant would just get poterized by the DTers because of his frame is absurd.

If you read my posts like you said you did, you'd know why this is an incorrect statement. I named 2 specific reasons...his frame was only one of them.

Slap yourself twice.

 

[tlance]

Maybe I didnt word it as well as I should have, but the point I was making was that I would much rather take my chances of a guy shooting a layup than a player shooting a 3 pointer.

Also, there seems to be many teams that shoot better than 54% from 2 according to the following list. Hell, the Warriors are shooting 61% from 2.
Teams Shooting Dashboard General

You know why?

Because you have to defend them out to 30 feet and it is so difficult to help.

 

[tlance]

Maybe I didnt word it as well as I should have, but the point I was making was that I would much rather take my chances of a guy shooting a layup than a player shooting a 3 pointer.

Also, there seems to be many teams that shoot better than 54% from 2 according to the following list. Hell, the Warriors are shooting 61% from 2.
Teams Shooting Dashboard General

Anybody would take an open layup over an open 3.

But, a contested shot at the rim is a far worse shot than an open 3, and it isn't close.