The Evolution of the NBA

[MHSL82]

I've seen people say that the NBA is going this way or that way offensively (i.e., faster, stretch 4 being an imperative, etc.). But I don't see why an offense has to evolve into the way the league is going offensively. The only reason to change offensively is if the defenses of the league is figuring out how to defend your style of offense or the players you are drafting to defend the evolved offenses of the NBA fit a different system. Why do people say we need to draft players for an evolving offense? Is it that old systems are defended better already? Or is it just people trying to modernize?

 

[nuraman00]

I'm glad your thread was an open-ended question.

I was a little afraid that I'd read how you don't like today's game as much, how it's not as good or as tough as the way it used to be, etc.

I'm tired of reading people complain about today's game, rather than find things to appreciate about it. One doesn't necessarily have to like it as much as previous eras, but I'd rather read something positive about this era, that didn't exist before.

Back to the OP, I agree, you don't have to get players for an evolving offense. It's even questionable as to whether things are evolving, or whether they had just been there before, just on slightly less high profile teams.

Memphis, for example, doesn't play a style that is allegedly modern, but they're still good.

And as for what the Jazz need, they need skilled players right now. They're not good enough to have a style. Once they get enough players, one can see if it plays to a certain style, than get players that fit in then.

 

[MHSL82]

I'm glad your thread was an open-ended question.

I was a little afraid that I'd read how you don't like today's game as much, how it's not as good or as tough as the way it used to be, etc.

I'm tired of reading people complain about today's game, rather than find things to appreciate about it. One doesn't necessarily have to like it as much as previous eras, but I'd rather read something positive about this era, that didn't exist before.

Back to the OP, I agree, you don't have to get players for an evolving offense. It's even questionable as to whether things are evolving, or whether they had just been there before, just on slightly less high profile teams.

Memphis, for example, doesn't play a style that is allegedly modern, but they're still good.

And as for what the Jazz need, they need skilled players right now. They're not good enough to have a style. Once they get enough players, one can see if it plays to a certain style, than get players that fit in then.

Yeah, I rarely take a position on anything like this. I just want my team to win, my PG to get assists (don't care how artificial or whatnot it is), and for it to be entertaining (I don't mean dunks, I mean to always be competitive against the good teams, come down to a few possessions or flat out win). Oh, and Tim Duncan to be called a Center. Don't care why or whether it's correct or not, I just want him to be a Center.

 

[MHSL82]

Read this theory somewhere...

I ran across this article, which is already online, but will be published next month by ESPN. http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/12318808/the-philadelphia-76ers-radical-guide-winning

It is a very interesting read, and I could see at least some overlap in the way that the Jazz appear to be approaching things with DL. Perhaps a Spurs/76ers melding of ideas. For instance, I was under the impression that the acquisition of all of those 2nd round picks was to use in future trade deals, but I am now starting to believe that they are for selecting overseas players or even NBDL level players that could either be future trade assets or diamond in the rough players that were overlooked or undervalued.

It will be interesting to see how it unfolds the next few years, but in any event, it can't go much worse than the LAL, KYK and Nets way of going about things of overspending for over the hill players.