Discussion in 'NBA Basketball Forum' started by DorianRo, Jan 6, 2018.
believe it or not we had this "debate" back on the CBS boards too. gotta love Celtic fan...
If you're lucky.
huh, like when 2008 rolled around before the clover boys grabbed another one...?
lol guess we'll see...
Take heart Laker fans, at least the Atlanta Hawks are shittier than your team.
lol. my heart's good. but i have 2010 to keep me warm...
yep, your team's better than ours right now. won't mean jack without another O'Brien, though...
McHale on Cheers was always quality television.
McHale and Cedric Maxwell were always must see TV. Both had keen and twisted senses of humor and I appreciate that shit.
It's actually an interesting question, who will win a title first going forward, Celtics or Lakers? Obviously the Celtics are better today, but if they don't win in the next 2-3 years....
i will say that this season's playoffs in the East would be a helluva lot more interesting if Haywood didn't go down. Imo they woulda had a better shot at taking down LeClown and the Cavs...
So they would be better with Heyward? Wow that's deep analysis right there.
oh yeah, that's DEEP research right there, dawg...
I tried to read this whole thread but too much silliness.
In the 86-87 season Michael Jordan averaged 37 points a game while playing 40 minutes a game and an absolutely ridiculous usage rate of 38 considering he was not the primary distributor on the team.
To suggest that he would somehow score MORE today than he did in 1987 is to completely ignore the differences in the game today and in the 80s.
I remember. It was right after the Lakers beat them to get #16. All of the sudden, titles belonged to the city instead of the team. lol
Not necessarily. The game was more physical in the 80's than it is today and beginning about the mid 80's and extending through the 90's, it became progressively more physical. Almost to the point that it wasn't recognizable as basketball anymore.
Because of the physicality, it was harder to score. So, in that regard, saying MJ couldn't score more today, ignores how much more physical the game was.
What is different with how the game is played today is that, as @tlance pointed out, MJ likely isn't scoring that many points on a contending team in today's game.
You'd have to be a Celtics fan to know how that feels.
It's not about the physicality of the game.
Michael Jordan played 40 minutes a game and shot 27 shots a game. Would he shoot more today than he did back then? Would his 4th highest usage rate in the last 50 years somehow have been higher?
People tend to talk about how physical the game was back then compared to today. But the bigger impact to today's game and why teams went away from straight isolation was the league allowing zone defenses. This fundamentally changed the game. This change alone would have forced Jordan to change his game. I'm sure he would have because he was an incredible player.
But the notion that he would just tear apart today's game is simply naive and requires Dorian's assumption that the players 30 years were all just better players which is laughable.
Separate names with a comma.