Lebrons Cavs vs Jordan’s Bulls

trojanfan12 · May 24, 2020

flyerhawk said:
I'm sure Lambier would have trembled in fear once he saw big bad David West step on the court.

When I think of physically intimidating basketball teams, the Warriors are always the first that comes to mind.

flyerhawk · May 24, 2020

trojanfan12 said:
When I think of physically intimidating basketball teams, the Warriors are always the first that comes to mind.

Gotta tell ya. I didn't see the "Warriors would match up well with the physicality of 90s" argument coming from the Warriors stans.

trojanfan12 · May 24, 2020

flyerhawk said:
Gotta tell ya. I didn't see the "Warriors would match up well with the physicality of 90s" argument coming from the Warriors stans.

Agree. They're the team that has been best built for this era.

flyerhawk · May 24, 2020

trojanfan12 said:
Agree. They're the team that has been best built for this era.

I often do think about what would happen to the Warriors if they were transplanted to 1992. They would struggle in the paint certainly but teams would be absolutely dumbfounded by their offensive philosophy. Can you picture guys like Riley or Jackson basically throwing out their entire defensive gameplan because they were getting murdered on the pick and roll? The 90s teams would pretty much all give up the 3 point shot on the pick to make sure that the shooter didn't drive to the hole. Watching someone like Curry hitting 50% of those 3 pointers would drive them crazy.

OTOH, the Warriors would likely have a pretty tough time on the defensive side. Teams are built for length and athleticism and, IMO, they would really struggle with the post up play of the 90s because they wouldn't be able to cheat defensively on the weak side because they would get called for illegal defense.

msgkings322 · May 24, 2020

flyerhawk said:
Gotta tell ya. I didn't see the "Warriors would match up well with the physicality of 90s" argument coming from the Warriors stans.

Don't lob me in there with Robotech, he's on his own with that LOL

But I do agree with him that Curry would be a star back then (although as trojan points out, he would have to adjust to the higher physicality)

msgkings322 · May 24, 2020

trojanfan12 said:
Agree. They're the team that has been best built for this era.

They sort of created it.

msgkings322 · May 24, 2020

flyerhawk said:
I often do think about what would happen to the Warriors if they were transplanted to 1992. They would struggle in the paint certainly but teams would be absolutely dumbfounded by their offensive philosophy. Can you picture guys like Riley or Jackson basically throwing out their entire defensive gameplan because they were getting murdered on the pick and roll? The 90s teams would pretty much all give up the 3 point shot on the pick to make sure that the shooter didn't drive to the hole. Watching someone like Curry hitting 50% of those 3 pointers would drive them crazy.

OTOH, the Warriors would likely have a pretty tough time on the defensive side. Teams are built for length and athleticism and, IMO, they would really struggle with the post up play of the 90s because they wouldn't be able to cheat defensively on the weak side because they would get called for illegal defense.

Yeah most arguments about 'best teams' come down to this kind of thing, under what rules/regime are they playing? Basically the 96 Bulls probably lose to the 17 Warriors if they arrived in a time machine, and the reverse is true as well. But if either team had time and training in the other era, then who knows?

Robotech · May 24, 2020

msgkings322 said:
Don't lob me in there with Robotech, he's on his own with that LOL

But I do agree with him that Curry would be a star back then (although as trojan points out, he would have to adjust to the higher physicality)

There is nothing untrue about Pachulia, David West, and Draymond being very tough. No disrespect to Bill Cartwright, Horace Grant, and Will Perdue, but is it really proven fact that the 1992 Bulls would have the advantage in physicality over the 2017 Warriors? Is John Paxson beating up Curry? Klay just going to break down and cry? Okay, Durant cries, but he doesn't do it on the court.

flyerhawk said:
I often do think about what would happen to the Warriors if they were transplanted to 1992. They would struggle in the paint certainly but teams would be absolutely dumbfounded by their offensive philosophy. Can you picture guys like Riley or Jackson basically throwing out their entire defensive gameplan because they were getting murdered on the pick and roll? The 90s teams would pretty much all give up the 3 point shot on the pick to make sure that the shooter didn't drive to the hole. Watching someone like Curry hitting 50% of those 3 pointers would drive them crazy.

OTOH, the Warriors would likely have a pretty tough time on the defensive side. Teams are built for length and athleticism and, IMO, they would really struggle with the post up play of the 90s because they wouldn't be able to cheat defensively on the weak side because they would get called for illegal defense.

Pachulia and West are tough and strong enough to handle interior defense. I think the Warriors would be happy for their opponent to focus their offense on post up play because it is less efficient.

flyerhawk · May 24, 2020

msgkings322 said:
Don't lob me in there with Robotech, he's on his own with that LOL

But I do agree with him that Curry would be a star back then (although as trojan points out, he would have to adjust to the higher physicality)

To be clear, my original hypothetical was based on the Warriors going back to 1992 for one year only and the Bulls coming up to today. Great players would of course adjust. Curry would learn how to defend the point post and Jordan would take about 10,000 3 point shots in the offseason after their 1st season.

But in that first year, there would be a huge learning curve. Even for the greats.

flyerhawk · May 24, 2020

Robotech said:
There is nothing untrue about Pachulia, David West, and Draymond being very tough. No disrespect to Bill Cartwright, Horace Grant, and Will Perdue, but is it really proven fact that the 1992 Bulls would have the advantage in physicality over the 2017 Warriors? Is John Paxson beating up Curry? Klay just going to break down and cry? Okay, Durant cries, but he doesn't do it on the court..

It's a matter of what they were accustomed to doing on the court and the sum total of the guys on the court. It's also about how the modern game lets someone like Green excel where in 1992, he would have had a tough time even finding a position to play on the court because he wouldn't be able to play center field like he does a lot today.

trojanfan12 · May 24, 2020

flyerhawk said:
I often do think about what would happen to the Warriors if they were transplanted to 1992. They would struggle in the paint certainly but teams would be absolutely dumbfounded by their offensive philosophy. Can you picture guys like Riley or Jackson basically throwing out their entire defensive gameplan because they were getting murdered on the pick and roll? The 90s teams would pretty much all give up the 3 point shot on the pick to make sure that the shooter didn't drive to the hole. Watching someone like Curry hitting 50% of those 3 pointers would drive them crazy.

OTOH, the Warriors would likely have a pretty tough time on the defensive side. Teams are built for length and athleticism and, IMO, they would really struggle with the post up play of the 90s because they wouldn't be able to cheat defensively on the weak side because they would get called for illegal defense.

Agree. One thing I think that would help the 90's teams, especially those with coaches of Riley and Phil's caliber is that those teams were long and athletic which has given the Warriors trouble.

It wouldn't take coaches like Riley and Jackson long to figure out how to defend it. But I do think it would take the players a bit to get to the point where they could execute the defense well. Defending in space takes time to learn.

trojanfan12 · May 24, 2020

msgkings322 said:
They sort of created it.

True.

flyerhawk · May 24, 2020

trojanfan12 said:
Agree. One thing I think that would help the 90's teams, especially those with coaches of Riley and Phil's caliber is that those teams were long and athletic which has given the Warriors trouble.

It wouldn't take coaches like Riley and Jackson long to figure out how to defend it. But I do think it would take the players a bit to get to the point where they could execute the defense well. Defending in space takes time to learn.

Yeah I think the challenge would be getting the players to understand what needs to be done. Especially the switches.

Robotech · May 24, 2020

flyerhawk said:
It's a matter of what they were accustomed to doing on the court and the sum total of the guys on the court. It's also about how the modern game lets someone like Green excel where in 1992, he would have had a tough time even finding a position to play on the court because he wouldn't be able to play center field like he does a lot today.

True, defenses can do more today. That's why I think it's ridiculous when people say Jordan would average 50-60 points per game today. There's also more athletes than in Jordan's day.

Draymond's not a tall guy, but he's pretty strong and has a 7'1" wingspan. He'd probably still be a PF in earlier eras. And he's got good ball handling and passing skills for a PF. I just wish he could shoot again.

Robotech · May 25, 2020

flyerhawk said:
I'm sure Lambier would have trembled in fear once he saw big bad David West step on the court.

Laimbeer should have fear. David West would knock him out. West has trained in martial arts and James Johnson, who has fought in MMA and kickboxing, says that West could hang with him.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cincinnati.com/amp/97948330

msgkings322 · May 25, 2020

Robotech said:
Laimbeer should have fear. David West would knock him out. West has trained in martial arts and James Johnson, who has fought in MMA and kickboxing, says that West could hang with him.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cincinnati.com/amp/97948330

Yeah Laimbeer was just an ornery goon. West would kick his ass.

Robotech · May 25, 2020

msgkings322 said:
Yeah Laimbeer was just an ornery goon. West would kick his ass.

Here are some hilarious comments from Chuck:

"Only two guys on that team could fight," Barkley said. "Isiah and Joe Dumars. Rodman couldn't fight. [John] Salley couldn't fight. [Rick] Mahorn couldn't fight. [Bill] Laimbeer couldn't fight. Vinnie Johnson and James Edwards, they'd fight. But those main four guys, none of them could fight a lick.

"Go back and look at the tape, Laimbeer was always getting punched in the head. Just because you got punched in the face, doesn't mean you can fight."

Charles Barkley jabs at Bill Laimbeer decades later about 'The Last Dance'

Not really sure why Barkley thinks that Isiah could fight, though. LOL. Open shots at a guy, but he either misses him or just grazes him.

dtgold88 · May 25, 2020

flyerhawk said:
I get annoyed when people grab a specific sentence and try to argue about the semantics of it rather than the general point that was being made.

I wasn't saying he would be a bench player. I was saying that he would be constantly injured because he would get beaten up.

But I would also say that there is a legitimate possibility that he would be treated the same as someone like Steve Kerr was. A role player who would be a defensive liability.

Different rules and different refs would enable some players to excel in some eras and not in others.

Steph Curry is one of my favorite players. But I can also see that he is a product of the era.

I mean, we are all entitled to our opinion but in a forum like this if someone thinks an opinion is absurd you'll get called out.

I just cannot fathom why a guy like Mark Price could be an all star, but steve Kerr a role player in the 90s.

steph is a product of this era, IMO, because teams learned how to use spacing and shooting to their advantage. Not because it isn't as physical. as mentioned, wish we could have seen Price in this era (one of my favorite players) for that very reason.

dtgold88 · May 25, 2020

tlance said:
I agree with your premise for the most part. In general, there aren’t many stars from the modern era who would have difficulty in the past eras, IMO, but Curry, Young, players like that would certainly be examples of guys who could struggle in the 90s.

But I still think with Curry’s skill set there would still be a pathway to stardom if used correctly. Just would have been a lot less likely that pathway would have been the one taken.

And you hit the nail on the head with @dtgold88. He is tedious as hell to deal with because he won’t argue your point, he picks at minute details that make up your point and relentless hammers on those which often ends up changing the argument to something completely different.

I don’t think it is fun at all to argue semantics.

comical you say that after the exchange I saw with you and @msgkings322

But you be you. always the victim.

dtgold88 · May 25, 2020

flyerhawk said:
The big problem for Curry would be to get a coach to actually buy in to using him effectively. The 3 point shot was viewed very differently in the 90s than it is today. And that change in attitude was driven, to a large degree, by a bunch of math nerds determining that the 3 point shot was a statistically better shot to take than a mid-range jumper.

So if Steph Curry were to walk onto the 92 Celtics they would see a guy who would struggle to defend against bigger guards like Mark Jackson, who was a lethal outside shooter and could make his own shot but got pummeled frequently when he drove to the hoop. Furthermore, he would likely struggle with the hand check defense and getting his shot off cleanly.

Now if you took the 2017 Warriors and transplanted the entire team to 1992, that would be an interesting thought experiment. They would really struggle in the paint but teams would be just baffled with their perimeter shooting success especially on pick and rolls. Of course, there is no way to know how that would have really worked out but it is fun to speculate.

As for @dtgold88 I generally don't mind him but I do dislike when he pitbulls some tangential point so he can "win" an argument and then starts spiking the football over and over again about that point.

It only gets spiked over and over when the goal posts keep getting moved and one cannot admit he might have been a little off base. and, no disagreement, I often don't let it go sooner than I should. Funny, @tlance does the same thing and I've never complained about it (even if the target). How it is in a sports forum.

Back to Curry. While he might not be an MVP in the 90s, not sure how he goes all the way down to the level of Steve Kerr as opposed to maybe all star level like Mark Price.

But as you say...no way to know for sure.

Lebrons Cavs vs Jordan’s Bulls

R.I.P. Robotic Dreams. Fight On!

Well-Known Member

R.I.P. Robotic Dreams. Fight On!

Well-Known Member

Throbbing Member

Throbbing Member

Throbbing Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

R.I.P. Robotic Dreams. Fight On!

R.I.P. Robotic Dreams. Fight On!

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Throbbing Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads