PDA

View Full Version : Is the league softer now? Good article on why not



Hawkeye15
03-31-2013, 06:02 PM
So many say the Jordan era was tougher, and some even attempt to claim the defenses were better back then.


Our collective infatuation with Michael Jordan's golden era has spurred some mythology about toughness in those times. Jordan himself has passionately asserted that LeBron could not have thrived as he does now in an era that was not as "soft."

The problem with such assertions is that there isn't much evidence to support them.

One way to define the physicality of the game is the effectiveness of the defense. When people say the game is soft now, they are saying it was much harder to score then. It is often asserted that Jordan could easily score 40 or perhaps 45 or 50 points per game in today's "soft" game.

In 2010, Jordan himself told USA Today that he could have scored 100 (his career high was 69): "It's less physical [today] and the rules have changed, obviously. Based on these rules, if I had to play with my style of play, I'm pretty sure I would have fouled out or I would have been at the free throw line pretty often and I could have scored 100 points."

But overall, in fact, scoring was much easier for most of the 1990s, including Jordan's heyday. (And it was even easier in the 1980s.) Not only was the game played faster, a clear sign that there was relatively little resistance as players went up and down the court and to the basket, but teams also scored a lot more per possession. For instance, in 1992-93, known for a rough-and-tumble series between the Knicks and the Bulls, scoring was at 108.0 points per 100 possessions. This year, it's down to 105.8, which is actually an increase from last season.

Think about that -- when the team had the ball in the 1990s, it scored more than it does now.


But defenses are so fast, physical and prepared that, even with much improved outside shooting in the game these days (the 3-point percentage across the league is 35.9, as opposed to 32.0 percent in Jordan's first championship season), scoring is down.

In the 1990s, teams shot a much higher percentage from the field than they do now, and a higher percentage on 2-point baskets. If players were getting banged on every play, why was it so much easier for the skinnier players of that decade to score? Why was it so much easier then to get to the bucket and score on 2-point shots? And, if they were better shooters then, why is 3-point shooting better now?


Perhaps people mean that more rough play was permitted back then.

It doesn't appear so, at least according to the statistical evidence.

In fact, in some ways players were more protected by the refs then, when we look at the number of fouls called. In those days, basketball had the aural effect of Brazilian Carnival, with whistles constantly going off. Today, the average team earns fewer free throws per field goal attempt than in any season of the '80s or '90s. And overall, this season is on pace to set the new all-time NBA record for fewest free throws attempted.


When it comes to LeBron specifically, one of the complaints about him is that he bullies his way to the basket -- that he is too physical. And he's not the only one: Kobe Bryant, Dwyane Wade, Derrick Rose and Russell Westbrook are among the many perimeter players known for their punishing style. It's hard to square that with the claim that the game is less physical.

Furthermore, one way that the game is more physical now is because of the new rules allowing zone defense, which means more bigs are waiting to stop (or wallop) LeBron and anyone else who wants to go to the basket. In the '80s and '90s, Jordan didn't have to play against zones and zone-style defense, because that kind of defense was illegal. Sure, he absorbed some hard fouls here and there, but he also got to the basket all the time without getting hit -- enough that several highlight videos of his exploits were released before he even made the Finals.

Of course, Jordan's era had legalized handchecking, which was certainly a deterrent for would-be drivers. Handchecking was a significant physical tactic, one that helped a defense. And it's one of the ways that the '90s were more physical than the game today. But handchecking didn't do more to thwart offensive players than legalized zone (which includes the similar tactic of bigs coming out hard to bump and stop ball-handlers). We know that because the aforementioned numbers say so.

What does the film say?


This is where someone suggests that the heightened physical play is obvious if you merely watch those old games. I would respond that you indeed should go back and watch.

What you'll find in those '90s "slugfests" might shock you. Yep, there are some hard fouls (just as there are today). But defensive communication is often weak; screens are dealt with poorly; and double-teams result in wide-open shots.

For an example, witness Penny Hardaway knifing through the Bulls in the 1996 playoffs. Skinny Penny does it with undeniable skill, but he also gets to the rim with ridiculous ease. Keep in mind, these are the 72-win Bulls we're talking about, the greatest team to ever play -- the team with the No. 1 defense in the league that season. Just imagine how easy it was to score on the Celtics that year as they were giving up 107.0 points per game, or the Vancouver Grizzlies, with Big Country Reeves manning the middle. Weakside defense was, indeed, weak.

Those Chicago Bulls teams were fantastic defenders. But they weren't especially physical. And neither was the era -- it was merely an era we say we like better, an era we increasingly mythologize the further we get from it. To extol the rugged virtues of the Jordan epoch often seems like a way to knock today's players, for whatever reasons. But it is analysis, or storytelling?

Athletes get bigger, faster and stronger with each passing year. Defenses would still rather hit an opponent than cede a dunk. LeBron is complaining about getting clobbered because it's actually happening. David Lee bloodied Dwight Howard's mouth Monday with an elbow without getting called for it -- it was so ordinary it barely happened.

This is what exists in the game today. Overall, modern basketball is almost certainly as physical, and probably a lot more physical, than it was in Jordan's day. Perhaps it's our collective memory that has gone a little soft and weak.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/9117632/was-jordan-era-really-more-physical-nba

Thoughts? Keep in mind that many posters on this site are around 17-25 years old, so they have no frame of reference regarding the "old" days, but this article does a good job of putting the claims we hear now into perspective.

Sports, where the old days were always tougher and better...maybe not.

SLY WILLIAMS
03-31-2013, 06:06 PM
I feel like the league is a less physical and that there are more dunkers/slashers vs good shooters today. Guys like Larry Smith, Lonnie Shelton, Derek Harper, etc would have to change their games a bit to defend today. Guys are not allowed to put their hands on other guys to defend now. No hand checking. Elbow instead of hand in the post.

Hawkeye15
03-31-2013, 06:07 PM
I feel like the league is a less physical and that there are more dunkers/slashers vs good shooters today. Guys like Larry Smith, Lonnie Shelton, Derek Harper, etc would have to change their games a bit to defend today.

did you read the article? It's saying otherwise..

SLY WILLIAMS
03-31-2013, 06:08 PM
did you read the article? It's saying otherwise..


I read it. I just do not agree with the conclusions. Derek Harper used to hand check like crazy. Guys like Larry Smith and Lonnie Shelton would have had a hard time staying in games today.

Chronz
03-31-2013, 06:14 PM
BBBBUT Charles Oakley would smash people.....


LOL

Good to see youve jumped on board Hawk

Hawkeye15
03-31-2013, 06:16 PM
I read it. I just do not agree with the conclusions. Derek Harper used to hand check like crazy. Guys like Larry Smith and Lonnie Shelton would have had a hard time staying in games today.

I do agree with many of the conclusions. If it was so tough to score back then, why was the offensive efficiency much better? It's because the physical defenses claim isn't really true. Sure there were harder fouls here and there, and throwing a punch was allowed, but defenses are simply better now, more advanced, and you are right, many players from back in the day would struggle to play in today's game imo. Where as I don't think as many today would struggle to adapt to that style of game.

Kind of goes back to the mentality I pointed out. So many think the old days were the best days in sports, while ignoring that sports evolve. They always have, and they always will.

Hawkeye15
03-31-2013, 06:16 PM
BBBBUT Charles Oakley would smash people.....


LOL

Good to see youve jumped on board Hawk

I was talking more about the big hits, and the big fouls, but yeah, I have started to come around to the idea that today's game is actually tougher than yesterday's.

SLY WILLIAMS
03-31-2013, 06:17 PM
Just to clarify I'm not saying the players are softer themselves. I'm saying the rules made the players play softer. The NBA wanted to speed the game up for entertainment reasons. They hated the clutching and grabbing (not to mention forearms on layups) that teams like Detroit and the Knicks did.

Chronz
03-31-2013, 06:18 PM
That said, its one thing when people say the league was tougher, quite another to say better equipped defensively.

All I ask is for consistency. The same people who say the 80/90's were tougher defensively are the same people who trash the 60's/70's despite the fact that it was even more physical. Being more physical doesn't mean its better defense. Strategies and athletes continue to improve, rules are changed to help offset that and keep a natural balance between offensive/defensive efficiency. I think they have done a fine job overall, at least to the point where people should just stop *****ing.

If the rules never changed, the NBA would be operating in the red right now.

Hawkeye15
03-31-2013, 06:19 PM
Just to clarify I'm not saying the players are softer themselves. I'm saying the rules made the players play softer. The NBA wanted to speed the game up for entertainment reasons. They hated the clutching and grabbing (not to mention forearms on layups) that teams like Detroit and the Knicks did.

The game is slower now though, and its tougher to score. Guys aren't allowed to karate chop a player anymore, but do you see players now waltzing down the lane untouched like back in the 80's and 90's? Sure now and then they would send a message, and there were a couple of teams that would punish you, but league wide, it was easier to score in the paint back in the 80's and 90's than it is now, and they rewarded more FT's. How is it softer now then?

Hawkeye15
03-31-2013, 06:20 PM
That said, its one thing when people say the league was tougher, quite another to say better equipped defensively.

All I ask is for consistency. The same people who say the 80/90's were tougher defensively are the same people who trash the 60's/70's despite the fact that it was even more physical. Being more physical doesn't mean its better defense. Strategies and athletes continue to improve, rules are changed to help offset that and keep a natural balance between offensive/defensive efficiency. I think they have done a fine job overall, at least to the point where people should just stop *****ing.

If the rules never changed, the NBA would be operating in the red right now.

Extremely important for people to understand. The NBA has done a good job of keeping the balance, as you said, and that needs to be done for the sport to continue to grow.

SLY WILLIAMS
03-31-2013, 06:27 PM
The game is slower now though, and its tougher to score. Guys aren't allowed to karate chop a player anymore, but do you see players now waltzing down the lane untouched like back in the 80's and 90's? Sure now and then they would send a message, and there were a couple of teams that would punish you, but league wide, it was easier to score in the paint back in the 80's and 90's than it is now, and they rewarded more FT's. How is it softer now then?


I think we are combining many factors here. I do not view today's players as tougher or softer than the players in the 90's. I view the rules as making the game a more finesse game. Inside post play on offense has almost disappeared in part because of the rule changes. Along with that is a lack of a need for defensive post play. The rules have made it illegal to beat guys up on the perimeter or inside the post.

LOOTERX9
03-31-2013, 06:36 PM
yes the game is obviously softer but it's not the fault of the players. It's the commissioner's fault adding all these rules that makes any kind of contact a foul. This league along with the NFL has gotten soft cause of the guys in the league offices have gotten soft and are scared to see any physicality or see any hard fouls. So yes the nba is softer but only because of Stern basically

Chronz
03-31-2013, 06:42 PM
Just finished reading the article, its meh. I dont agree with the line "defenses cant be more physical and less effective" when thats entirely what Ive been arguing. If defenses were tougher, it doesn't mean they are superior.

Chronz
03-31-2013, 06:46 PM
yes the game is obviously softer but it's not the fault of the players. It's the commissioner's fault adding all these rules that makes any kind of contact a foul. This league along with the NFL has gotten soft cause of the guys in the league offices have gotten soft and are scared to see any physicality or see any hard fouls. So yes the nba is softer but only because of Stern basically
The commish doesn't make these changes on his own, there is a rules committee in place, they look at all the evidence before coming to a conclusion. They have opposed Stern in the past IIRC.

If they never augmented rules, we may not even be having this discussion because there would be no NBA. Hardcore fans like you and I might have loved the battles between the Knicks and Heat, but the rest of the world was turned off by the increasing defensive abilities. The league just wants balance. It may not be perfect but its saved the game and its ratings.

Vinylman
03-31-2013, 06:50 PM
yes.... lets use statistical analysis to determine softness...

LMFAO... a guy who was in diapers when jordan joined the league is an authority on an era...

Just another blogger with a keyboard trying to discredit the GOAT's era to the benefit of the hyper-marketed self centered players of today

pardon me while i :puke:

Chronz
03-31-2013, 07:13 PM
yes.... lets use statistical analysis to determine softness...

LMFAO... a guy who was in diapers when jordan joined the league is an authority on an era...

Just another blogger with a keyboard trying to discredit the GOAT's era to the benefit of the hyper-marketed self centered players of today

pardon me while i :puke:
Seems pretty extreme brah.

Hawkeye15
03-31-2013, 08:46 PM
I think we are combining many factors here. I do not view today's players as tougher or softer than the players in the 90's. I view the rules as making the game a more finesse game. Inside post play on offense has almost disappeared in part because of the rule changes. Along with that is a lack of a need for defensive post play. The rules have made it illegal to beat guys up on the perimeter or inside the post.

But the rules have made it tougher, with the zone defense. We now have a big man waiting for you in the paint. There is a reason more players avoid driving into the paint nowadays, and that is because you now will run into bodies, versus back in the day when you didn't see contact nearly as much.

The point of the article, is to refute that today's game is any less physical, in fact, may very well be MORE physical.

Hawkeye15
03-31-2013, 08:48 PM
Just finished reading the article, its meh. I dont agree with the line "defenses cant be more physical and less effective" when thats entirely what Ive been arguing. If defenses were tougher, it doesn't mean they are superior.

defenses can be less physical and more effective, for sure. The speed of defenders is better, the schemes, the strategies, the individual breakdowns in scouting, advanced metrics identifying what scenarios are best outcomes for defenses, and finally, the zone defense allowed to protect the rim. I assume you agree, along with whatever other theories you have regarding the better defense in modern basketball.

SLY WILLIAMS
03-31-2013, 08:50 PM
But the rules have made it tougher, with the zone defense. We now have a big man waiting for you in the paint. There is a reason more players avoid driving into the paint nowadays, and that is because you now will run into bodies, versus back in the day when you didn't see contact nearly as much.

The point of the article, is to refute that today's game is any less physical, in fact, may very well be MORE physical.


Can a big man just wait in the paint if there is nobody already in the paint or is that against the rules?

I think you have it the opposite. Teams like the Nuggets are scoring 40-70 points in the paint without any real post up offense because there are few players clogging the paint. It makes it much easier to slash to the rim.

Hawkeye15
03-31-2013, 08:50 PM
yes.... lets use statistical analysis to determine softness...

LMFAO... a guy who was in diapers when jordan joined the league is an authority on an era...

Just another blogger with a keyboard trying to discredit the GOAT's era to the benefit of the hyper-marketed self centered players of today

pardon me while i :puke:

How was he discrediting MJ? If anything, he is simply saying fans now don't give enough credit to how physical today's game is, because its a well known fact that the opinion of most is today's game is soft, when that simply might not be true, and at the very least, doesn't change how effective defenses are today versus the "old" days.

Hawkeye15
03-31-2013, 08:51 PM
Can a big man just wait in the paint if there is nobody already in the paint or is that against the rules?

I think you have it the opposite. Teams like the Nuggets are scoring 40-70 points in the paint without any real post up offense because there are few players clogging the paint. It makes it much easier to slash to the rim.

A big man can basically wait, yes, just get out of the lane every few seconds.

You are pointing to one team, instead of league average, which is how a league needs to be measured. Thats like saying great shooting teams are better now, cause look at the Thunder....

IndyRealist
03-31-2013, 08:56 PM
The article used points allowed as a measure of "toughness". That in and of itself discredits the premise, because as it pointed out, more fouls were called in the 90's. It also used fouls called to prove that the NBA was protecting players more in the 90's. That's a ridiculous statement. More fouls were called BECAUSE more contact was allowed, thus tempers boiled over and the handchecking became pushing and shoving which became punches. More contact was allowed. Imagine how hard you had to get hit to get a foul call? And there were a lot of foul calls. It's such an obvious statement that gets lost when people are trying to prove a point.

When the league legislated against handchecking, the goal was to prevent players from escalating contact and preventing injuries. What it did was make it easier for ball dominant perimeter players to beat their man off the dribble. Just like the 3 second illegal defense rule, and the "restricted area". All designed to let "the next Jordan" get to the rim at will.

There's a reason Lebron, Melo, Kobe, etc. all get the ball on the right elbow 20ft out. Because above the FT line, if anyone touches you it's an automatic foul. By the time your opponent can body you up, you've already blown by him. All of the help defense is to your left, where you can use your body to shield the ball, and force them to have to reach over you to try to block the shot. And if you time it right, the post defense had to step left out of the lane to avoid an illegal defense call, so by the time he recovers to you, he's in the restricted area. Tell me again how the NBA hasn't legislated to let Lebron get to the rim?

1) Handchecking perimeter players.
2) You got hit in the 90's. A lot. Hence the number of fouls.
3) 3 second illegal defense.
4) Restricted area.
5) And finally, a "good, hard playoff foul" in the 90's is a flagrant 2 today. Grab a guy around the neck and throwing him to the ground so he can't get a dunk. Case closed.

SLY WILLIAMS
03-31-2013, 09:00 PM
A big man can basically wait, yes, just get out of the lane every few seconds.

You are pointing to one team, instead of league average, which is how a league needs to be measured. Thats like saying great shooting teams are better now, cause look at the Thunder....


Hawk with all due respect I get the feeling the writer had a predetermined conclusion in mind and then just looked for stats to fill that conclusion. Mentioning the David Lee elbow made me laugh. That was nothing. Guys used to put other guys in the hospital unconscious from elbows. He mentioned that bigs can now step out on guards. I do not know when he started watching hoops but Ewing was stepping out near the 3 line on pick and rolls back in the 80's and 90's. I can only give my own impression but it used to be a major struggle to score against some Pistons, Heat, Bulls, Knicks, and Spurs teams. I do not view it the same anymore. The league wanted a faster cleaner game and they adjusted the rules to make it that way. I'm not saying every defense was tougher then or every defense is softer now. I'm just going by my overall perceptions. Guys might have hand prints from all the hand checking a guy like Derek Harper might do in the past.

SLY WILLIAMS
03-31-2013, 09:04 PM
David Lee Elbow 2013

http://www.csnbayarea.com/sportsnetBayArea/search/v/72464254/david-lee-s-elbow-ends-up-in-dwight-howard-s-face.htm

Karl Malone elbow 1998
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BgSB2aFRP4

Vinylman
03-31-2013, 09:07 PM
Seems pretty extreme brah.

not really.... opinions sprinkled with uncorrelated statistics to prove a predetermined viepoint is what passes for analysis these days...

Sorry i can't be one of Stern's useful idiots

DoMeFavors
03-31-2013, 09:14 PM
No the 90s were way softer than this

LAKERMANIA
03-31-2013, 09:17 PM
I've always thought this especially when Kobe was scoring 81 ;)

Vinylman
03-31-2013, 09:20 PM
The article used points allowed as a measure of "toughness". That in and of itself discredits the premise, because as it pointed out, more fouls were called in the 90's. It also used fouls called to prove that the NBA was protecting players more in the 90's. That's a ridiculous statement. More fouls were called BECAUSE more contact was allowed, thus tempers boiled over and the handchecking became pushing and shoving which became punches. More contact was allowed. Imagine how hard you had to get hit to get a foul call? And there were a lot of foul calls. It's such an obvious statement that gets lost when people are trying to prove a point.

When the league legislated against handchecking, the goal was to prevent players from escalating contact and preventing injuries. What it did was make it easier for ball dominant perimeter players to beat their man off the dribble. Just like the 3 second illegal defense rule, and the "restricted area". All designed to let "the next Jordan" get to the rim at will.

There's a reason Lebron, Melo, Kobe, etc. all get the ball on the right elbow 20ft out. Because above the FT line, if anyone touches you it's an automatic foul. By the time your opponent can body you up, you've already blown by him. All of the help defense is to your left, where you can use your body to shield the ball, and force them to have to reach over you to try to block the shot. And if you time it right, the post defense had to step left out of the lane to avoid an illegal defense call, so by the time he recovers to you, he's in the restricted area. Tell me again how the NBA hasn't legislated to let Lebron get to the rim?

1) Handchecking perimeter players.
2) You got hit in the 90's. A lot. Hence the number of fouls.
3) 3 second illegal defense.
4) Restricted area.
5) And finally, a "good, hard playoff foul" in the 90's is a flagrant 2 today. Grab a guy around the neck and throwing him to the ground so he can't get a dunk. Case closed.

someone who gets it...

/thread

barreleffact
03-31-2013, 09:34 PM
It was a much more physical era back then. In fact, the article disproves its own conclusion by referencing the illegal defenses, lack of def communication, poor weak side defense, and overall the more primitive coaching. The fact is scouts are better these days and defenses have evolved, BUT they are not more physical at all. If the Jordan era had the same loose defensive rules, scouting, and coaching with hand checking and overall grit from those days the ppp would be far lower than today. The mentality back then was much more punishing as well. Overall, the article is solid and the quality of defense is better considering limitations placed on the past era, but this article lacks perspective and context IMO.

ILLUSIONIST^248
03-31-2013, 09:46 PM
So many say the Jordan era was tougher, and some even attempt to claim the defenses were better back then.










http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/9117632/was-jordan-era-really-more-physical-nba

Thoughts? Keep in mind that many posters on this site are around 17-25 years old, so they have no frame of reference regarding the "old" days, but this article does a good job of putting the claims we hear now into perspective.

Sports, where the old days were always tougher and better...maybe not.

Who wrote this garbage?

ILLUSIONIST^248
03-31-2013, 09:51 PM
But the rules have made it tougher, with the zone defense. We now have a big man waiting for you in the paint. There is a reason more players avoid driving into the paint nowadays, and that is because you now will run into bodies, versus back in the day when you didn't see contact nearly as much.

The point of the article, is to refute that today's game is any less physical, in fact, may very well be MORE physical.

Omg Hawk. You have completely lost your head. Todays defense is more physical? :laugh2: You will go to worlds end to justify Lebron playing against great teams and defences.

The rules today are a wing players dream.

Jahari Kavi
03-31-2013, 09:55 PM
I've said repeatedly that the whole "things were tougher then" is nothing but pure media hype.....Some of the Spurs, Pistons, and Celtics teams I've watched in recent years were just as good (if not actually better) defensively than those Knicks and Pistons teams.....not to mention that Lebron plays against MUCH better competition on the wing than MJ did in his prime.....

bucketss
03-31-2013, 09:55 PM
Omg Hawk. You have completely lost your head. Todays defense is more physical? :laugh2: You will go to worlds end to justify Lebron playing against great teams and defences.

The rules today are a wing players dream.

kobe plays in the same same era, how you feel? how you feel? how you feel? how you feel?

agreed, this era is tailored for chucking guards.

Jahari Kavi
03-31-2013, 10:09 PM
Seriously.....Bowen, Artest, Battier, Ben Wallace, Noah, Deng, Duncan, etc. from this era that are just as tough defensively.....

Jahari Kavi
03-31-2013, 10:19 PM
Hawk with all due respect I get the feeling the writer had a predetermined conclusion in mind and then just looked for stats to fill that conclusion. Mentioning the David Lee elbow made me laugh. That was nothing. Guys used to put other guys in the hospital unconscious from elbows. He mentioned that bigs can now step out on guards. I do not know when he started watching hoops but Ewing was stepping out near the 3 line on pick and rolls back in the 80's and 90's. I can only give my own impression but it used to be a major struggle to score against some Pistons, Heat, Bulls, Knicks, and Spurs teams. I do not view it the same anymore. The league wanted a faster cleaner game and they adjusted the rules to make it that way. I'm not saying every defense was tougher then or every defense is softer now. I'm just going by my overall perceptions. Guys might have hand prints from all the hand checking a guy like Derek Harper might do in the past.

And in recent memory it can be tough to score against them as well, lol....Seriously let's break down those Knick teams (one of the only two teams ever brought up by the way...2 teams only)......Harper was a great defender, Starks average, Charles Smith probably below average, Oakley solid defender but not a shot blocker with great length, Ewing a good post presence defensively but I'd say Ben Wallace Duncan and KG are all better defensively.......Is that team better defensively that Wallace, Wallace, Prince, Rip, and Billups...or Perkins, KG, Pierce, Allen, and Rondo (not to mention Posey, Tony Allen, and Powe)???? People hype the era up to make MJ look like some super human when on most nights he played against shorter less athletic wing players......

BigBlueCrew
03-31-2013, 10:28 PM
This is a ridiculous article. The new rules are meant to loosen up defense. Like IndyRealist said handchecking and 3 second illegal defense. These are the two worst rules put in against the defense.

Jahari Kavi
03-31-2013, 10:32 PM
people are underestimating just how hard it is to get in the lane with zone defenses.....and overrating hand checking.....the fact that teams could score so much with hand checking is proof that it wasn't as tough as some like to think it was.....I'd love to see Joe Dumars try to hand check Lebron James one on one, lol

NJBASEBALL22
03-31-2013, 10:48 PM
I do agree with many of the conclusions. If it was so tough to score back then, why was the offensive efficiency much better? It's because the physical defenses claim isn't really true. Sure there were harder fouls here and there, and throwing a punch was allowed, but defenses are simply better now, more advanced, and you are right, many players from back in the day would struggle to play in today's game imo. Where as I don't think as many today would struggle to adapt to that style of game.

Kind of goes back to the mentality I pointed out. So many think the old days were the best days in sports, while ignoring that sports evolve. They always have, and they always will.

Today, there are a lot of chuckers... in the89/90 season (when Jordan attempted a career high in 3's) the Bulls as a team took 669 3pt shots, or 8 a game and made 250 of them. You have individual players taking almost that many now, Miami as team this year has taken 1530 3pt shots so far (72 games), or 21 and a quarter a game.

There are a few more reasons why the offense was more efficient in a tougher defensive era.

Also, in the 80's thru the mid 90's (and earlier then that too), teams relied on actual centers and real power forwards. They banged down low and had post games, you know, back-to-the-basket type games. And they fed these guys the rock. They took higher percentage shots in the 80's and mid 90's. Bigs these days, like to show off their range and take 15 and 20 footers... that wasn't common in the past, rarely were there bigs that had a good mid-range game and the ones that did were stars. Now, the likes of Andray Blatche and nearly all others (except Reggie Evans- though I am rooting for him to jack up a open 3) jack up the jumper with no regards.

Consider this... we can agree that for a 7' footer, LaMarcus Aldridge has a good J for a step inside the 3??? I say its preety good. Anyway, he shoots 41% for 16-23 foot shots. Ok, Carmelo Anthony, same thing, 40%. These guys have legit PF bodies. Consider LMA shoots 54% from 9 feet and in and Melo about the same at 50% from 9 and in. The game is just different these days... LMA takes more shots from 16-23 than at the rim (6 to 5) and Melo takes the same from both (but more J's when you add the 3's).

I think that right there shows how the mindset these days are just softer. And that shows in the style of play. The stars that are Bigs, turn into jump shooters (LMA, Dirk, Melo, Love, Bosh, Brook Lopez though Lopez has a good post game too, and Bargnani is just a joke). The league avg for PF's this season is 3 shots a game from 9 and in to 2.6 shots a game from 16 and out. They shoot about 60% from 9 and in, compare that to about 36% from 16 and out.

But regardless, a low post move is much more effective than a 20 footer in any generation... and this generation has too many jump shooting bigs and not enough bangers, that is what makes he difference. Even if the bangers are getting hammered down low, they still shoot it more effectively than a 20 footer.

The low post pre-2000's was like playing OL against the DL in the NFL, today's game is like if playing touch with no line or pass rushers.

This is all without talking about the hand-check rule which lets guards run amok and get into the lanes these days and illegal zone defenses that punish you in the middle.

All of this data is from Hoopdata.com
I wish they had these advanced stats from the 80's and 90's.

ILLUSIONIST^248
04-01-2013, 01:18 AM
kobe plays in the same same era, how you feel? how you feel? how you feel? how you feel?

agreed, this era is tailored for chucking guards.
Kobe is an old man, this is lebron era now. Kobe played in the early 2000's when **** was rough for a SG. Try again jr.

OceanSpray
04-03-2013, 08:15 PM
So LeBron wouldn't survive in Jordan's era but Muggsy could? Let's be honest, the league today is much tougher. Athletes are far superior and it's not even close. Faster, stronger, and quicker.. I don't even see a debate. As I said countless times, people just want to relive the past because they feel homesick of their old days. They scored more but yet defense was tougher? Yeah, okay. The argument with LeBron having less competition than Jordan? LeBron is arguably the greatest athlete and certainly the most versatile. Strong as a center, quick as a SG, and fast as a PG. If we're in awe of how amazing his athletic ability is today with the likes of Michael Phelps/Usain Bolt(Both destroyed past records), what makes you think he wouldn't be just as good - if not better? I don't expect much but lots of disagreements. Would James average 27-8-8 in that era? If not, that's like saying Clyde Drexler is better than James.

Blitzbolt
04-03-2013, 08:39 PM
I don't get it as a Grizzlies fan we just won 50 games with just our tough Defense we have nothing else the offense sucks no one dunks or shots 3s our bigs just PWN the paint.

If that's not physical I don't know what is.

Hawkeye15
04-03-2013, 08:45 PM
Omg Hawk. You have completely lost your head. Todays defense is more physical? :laugh2: You will go to worlds end to justify Lebron playing against great teams and defences.

The rules today are a wing players dream.

Present your evidence dude. Fact is, the game is just as physical now, if not more so, but we don't have the malicious fouls from yesterday.

OceanSpray
04-03-2013, 08:46 PM
I don't get it as a Grizzlies fan we just won 50 games with just our tough Defense we have nothing else the offense sucks no one dunks or shots 3s our bigs just PWN the paint.

If that's not physical I don't know what is.

Completely makes sense. Grizzlies have won games despite terrible offensive performances because of how tough they play. There's nothing that implies that the sport isn't "tough" or as physical. I think people nitpick certain plays from the old days and think they actually played like that for an entire era.

Hawkeye15
04-03-2013, 09:01 PM
Today, there are a lot of chuckers... in the89/90 season (when Jordan attempted a career high in 3's) the Bulls as a team took 669 3pt shots, or 8 a game and made 250 of them. You have individual players taking almost that many now, Miami as team this year has taken 1530 3pt shots so far (72 games), or 21 and a quarter a game.

There are a few more reasons why the offense was more efficient in a tougher defensive era.

Also, in the 80's thru the mid 90's (and earlier then that too), teams relied on actual centers and real power forwards. They banged down low and had post games, you know, back-to-the-basket type games. And they fed these guys the rock. They took higher percentage shots in the 80's and mid 90's. Bigs these days, like to show off their range and take 15 and 20 footers... that wasn't common in the past, rarely were there bigs that had a good mid-range game and the ones that did were stars. Now, the likes of Andray Blatche and nearly all others (except Reggie Evans- though I am rooting for him to jack up a open 3) jack up the jumper with no regards.

Consider this... we can agree that for a 7' footer, LaMarcus Aldridge has a good J for a step inside the 3??? I say its preety good. Anyway, he shoots 41% for 16-23 foot shots. Ok, Carmelo Anthony, same thing, 40%. These guys have legit PF bodies. Consider LMA shoots 54% from 9 feet and in and Melo about the same at 50% from 9 and in. The game is just different these days... LMA takes more shots from 16-23 than at the rim (6 to 5) and Melo takes the same from both (but more J's when you add the 3's).

I think that right there shows how the mindset these days are just softer. And that shows in the style of play. The stars that are Bigs, turn into jump shooters (LMA, Dirk, Melo, Love, Bosh, Brook Lopez though Lopez has a good post game too, and Bargnani is just a joke). The league avg for PF's this season is 3 shots a game from 9 and in to 2.6 shots a game from 16 and out. They shoot about 60% from 9 and in, compare that to about 36% from 16 and out.

But regardless, a low post move is much more effective than a 20 footer in any generation... and this generation has too many jump shooting bigs and not enough bangers, that is what makes he difference. Even if the bangers are getting hammered down low, they still shoot it more effectively than a 20 footer.

The low post pre-2000's was like playing OL against the DL in the NFL, today's game is like if playing touch with no line or pass rushers.

This is all without talking about the hand-check rule which lets guards run amok and get into the lanes these days and illegal zone defenses that punish you in the middle.

All of this data is from Hoopdata.com
I wish they had these advanced stats from the 80's and 90's.

There is a reason players/teams have stopped attacking the paint though. That is the point.

NJBASEBALL22
04-03-2013, 09:04 PM
Present your evidence dude. Fact is, the game is just as physical now, if not more so, but we don't have the malicious fouls from yesterday.

Stronger athletes does not mean more a more physical game... physical and toughness is a style, you have to mentally do it... like Kenyon Martin and Reggie Evans. The hand-checking on D was a huge disadvantage on the perimeter. Also, the zone D and no defensive 3 seconds made it more difficult on the offense. Zone D's made it easy to double and triple in any area with out being left too vulnerable in any one area, especially the paint.

Some teams today don't even have a true center on their team. Only a few players have the ld centers' mentality. No easy buckets. And part of that is the defensive 3 seconds rule. No more camping in the paint.

NJBASEBALL22
04-03-2013, 09:05 PM
There is a reason players/teams have stopped attacking the paint though. That is the point.

Because they are mentally soft. A 6'11 Chris Bosh should not be taking 20 footers over post shots... Same with LaMarcus Aldridge.

Hawkeye15
04-03-2013, 09:11 PM
The problem is, you don't have any evidence of your opinions. As defenses have become more advanced, the game has gone away from letting players waltz down the lane. Rules have changed to keep up because of it.

sp1derm00
04-04-2013, 02:55 AM
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_stats.html

It's just a different era. Defenses aren't better or worse, they're just different because of hand-checking and zone defenses.

If you look at the league wide averages, games had far more FGA and FTA per game due to a much higher pace. Defenses have less time to get set with a higher pace, meaning more points per possession allowed.

Supreme LA
04-04-2013, 04:07 AM
Who cares what the article says? It's one guys opinion really.

I've been watching and playing basketball since the 80's and my opinion is that the game is softer today than it was back then. 80's were the toughest, 90's were tough, and the present is just soft.

If you listen to any of the old vets, coaches, and gm's they will all tell you the same thing. Hell, even players like Kobe, KG, and older vets will admit it as well. Modern day NBA is all about allowing less contact to free up the speedy players. Just because the most frequent posters here don't agree doesn't make what they think a fact just as the article. Everyone has their own opinion on every subject.

Supreme LA
04-04-2013, 04:09 AM
The problem is, you don't have any evidence of your opinions. As defenses have become more advanced, the game has gone away from letting players waltz down the lane. Rules have changed to keep up because of it.

The problem is you don't have any evidence to back up your claims either and haven't you idiots learned by now you'll get no where by trying to compare different era's of basketball. Silly kids with this nonsense. Just accept the game for what it is today and respect the game for what it was before.

Auseranami
04-04-2013, 08:49 AM
Players from the 80's and 90's had more skill and were on average less athletic. Now players are so athletic that they don't really put in the same amount of effort to hone their skills, instead they mainly rely on their athleticism. Back then players had to practice all day every day and by the time their bodies grew and they became more athletic, they already had an amazing skill set (Jordan, Barkley, rodman, and bird to name a few) now players start off more athletic and don't hone their skills until after they've made it to the nba (lebron, Westbrook, rose, and griffin to name a few) I'm not saying players don't work hard at their craft, because they have to to become a pro, I'm just saying they don't work as hard as they used to. Also, the quantity of superior athletes these days accounts for "tougher defenses". Having great athleticism can help cover lacking skill. In the 80's and 90's, there weren't that many players with far superior athleticism, so you have one player being able to blow past the defense and get to the hoop untouched, whereas now, not only do you have athletic bigs who can quickly move to challenge a bucket, but defenders can keep up so you get less blow bys than you used to. And if the players themselves say that it's easier to play now than it was back then, I'm going to believe them over anyone else.

BULLSFAN0810
04-04-2013, 09:20 AM
The miami chicago game said it all. The bulls was playing playoff basketball that resembled the 90s style.james was complaining about fouls.that's the diffrence. The hand check.the hand check equalized the game. James wouldn't/couldn't run over ppl if you could hand check him at the 3 pt line. The hard foul is an equalizer also and just as important. So imho jordan would score 100 because if he was getting fouled alot then, he'd feast now.its not a jordan is god thing, its the aspect of his ft shooting per game pro rated.and if they were dropping in the high 100s, the offenses executed better.high post had to be able to hit a 15 footer.low post had to be able to post, now its all iso, and bad team work

Kenny
04-04-2013, 09:33 AM
I love when people complain about how the game is soft. Did you ever try watching a college basketball game this season where they let everything go? That is awful basketball to watch, Give me the nice flow the NBA game has and spacing anyday on my eyes. You know the game is still very physcial and you have strong defensive teams anyways because coaches have better schemes now because of the data available to them.

D-Leethal
04-04-2013, 09:34 AM
I don't think you can see that teams are driving to the lane less and just assume its because they are deterred due to increased physicality. There are plenty of reasons, one being that this is a jump shooting league nowadays, and the 3 ball is a major staple for pretty much every team.

Heatcheck
04-04-2013, 09:38 AM
Omg Hawk. You have completely lost your head. Todays defense is more physical? :laugh2: You will go to worlds end to justify Lebron playing against great teams and defences.

The rules today are a wing players dream.

The guy who wrote this garbage is simply stating facts, and drwing conlusions, your just making statements and omging.

D-Leethal
04-04-2013, 09:40 AM
Nowadays your not even allowed to foul hard, you get flagrants for plays that might not even get freakin' fouls called back then. Guys get T'ed up before they even start jawing. Guys get suspended for ****ing pushing. Let me guess I need efficiency stats to back that up?

Theres plenty of reasons the league is softer nowadays, opponents PPP at the rim isn't going to go too far discredit that. Some things aren't meant to be weighed statistically - I think its safe to say 'toughness' and physicality are examples of them. I think the 'need' to have proof of everything statistically on this site is borderline ridiculous. The unexplainable human element of this game is very real, you can't just render is obsolete. Stats can't explain everything and when you try to force them to your taking away from the game and drawing poor conclusions like this one.

JordansBulls
04-04-2013, 09:56 AM
Of course defenses and the league is softer now than in the past. Wings get significantly more free throws now and also the lack of bigs in the paint today make it much easier to score down there for anyone. A few years back Tony Parker led the league in points in the paint.
Not to mention any type of hard foul now results in a flagrant while back in the day that was just a regular foul. If you know mentally speaking that when you get whacked all you get is two free throws it will throw your entire plan off for driving to the cup.

BULLSFAN0810
04-04-2013, 09:58 AM
I love when people complain about how the game is soft. Did you ever try watching a college basketball game this season where they let everything go? That is awful basketball to watch, Give me the nice flow the NBA game has and spacing anyday on my eyes. You know the game is still very physcial and you have strong defensive teams anyways because coaches have better schemes now because of the data available to them.

I understand your view, but basketball is basketball. Ugly basketball is just as entertaining as free flowing. When you try to dictate teams style and make them all the same"free flowing"you mess over less athletic teams. As a "fan", its great, as a student of the game styles makes game, and games styles that differ can be the best because its a struggle to see who's style is dominate. That's the issue with ball. The game has gotten to the point where its more about entertaining rather than the sport being played and the entertainment is seen in competitiveness. That's why nba ball is weak. Too many pampered stars, not enough physical play unless its on the offensive side.

D-Leethal
04-04-2013, 09:59 AM
Wouldn't a higher percentage at the rim also have to do with the amount of quality post up big men in the past compared to the lackthereof now? I would expect it to be tougher to score when your a 6 foot guard trying to score at the rim with the trees than a skilled back to the basket big man drop stepping into a baby hook.

Points in the rim come mostly from perimeter guys nowadays. Nuggets lead the league in paint scoring without a big man who scores a ton in the paint. Its a different league. There are a multitude of reasons to explain why this stat is what it is and the league being tougher nowadays is not one of them.

Rentzias
04-04-2013, 10:25 AM
I have a lot of issues with that article and how selective it was, but I'll get to that later.

Today's NBA has athletes from a generation that grew up with shot doctor camps, easily accessible film reference, more advanced training techniques and sports specialization. A 6'10" guy with 20 to 25 foot range is no rare feat in this game now; players are better equipped with jumpers for perimeter games. You have the league trying to crack down on things like Durant's rip move, which is jumper-predicated.

You now also have a heavier reliance on advanced metrics and technology and therefore much better scouting, as evidenced by the type of data Shane Battier used to get in Houston (http://nyti.ms/Q8sYaE).


The data essentially broke down the floor into many discrete zones and calculated the odds of Bryant making shots from different places on the court, under different degrees of defensive pressure, in different relationships to other players — how well he scored off screens, off pick-and-rolls, off catch-and-shoots and so on. Battier learns a lot from studying the data on the superstars he is usually assigned to guard. For instance, the numbers show him that Allen Iverson is one of the most efficient scorers in the N.B.A. when he goes to his right; when he goes to his left he kills his team. The Golden State Warriors forward Stephen Jackson is an even stranger case. “Steve Jackson,” Battier says, “is statistically better going to his right, but he loves to go to his left — and goes to his left almost twice as often.” The San Antonio Spurs’ Manu Ginóbili is a statistical freak: he has no imbalance whatsoever in his game — there is no one way to play him that is better than another. He is equally efficient both off the dribble and off the pass, going left and right and from any spot on the floor.

Combine these with the now decade-plus of zone defense, and of course you're going to get fewer "in the paint" baskets. A lot of the Nugget "in the paint" baskets are off of their fastbreaks, so that's slightly misleading, plus that particular team's inability to hit threes. In the "Jordan Era," the top teams were making 300 to 400 threes for an entire season. Teams now are in the 700 to 800 mark in threes made per season, and about midway through the 2000s, almost 70% of shots taken in the league were jumpers.

Does this mean that today's defenses are "more physical"? Not necessarily. It's a combination of skill development and strategy that the game has moved away from the basket (****, the zone invites jumpers), so, yes, you will have fewer points in that "tough" area. I think it's tougher to score inside, but by no means do I believe today's NBA is more physical. Apples to oranges time: think Steel Curtain Steelers, when pass interference was virtually non-existent, since CBs were allowed to physically manhandle receivers all the way down the field (no 5-yard contact rule). The same can apply to the 90s, with the handcheck, which is NOT overrated; it's the difference between being allowed into the offensive player's personal space and not, and being allowed to manipulate that player physically. And as mentioned by someone earlier, there's now video review and levels of flagrant fouls and associated penalties and fines, so how does that not play into current defenders' minds? The 90s was a one size fits all hard foul with no punish-by-hindsight.

As for the article: Penny slicing through the 96 Bulls easily to get to the lane? I'm sure having the surest double/triple team player in Shaq on your team didn't affect that at all. Then the guy cites another TrueHoop writer about "tackle basketball"... where has this complaint been all season, all year, all decade? LeBron complains once after the streak-ender, and this is now miraculously a complaint? Strauss also tries to simplify it to "Think about that -- when the team had the ball in the 1990s, it scored more than it does now." That's a measure of physical toughness? If the preferred method of scoring in the 1990s was in the paint, then the absolute counter to that is more physical play. You get a clusterfuk of players down there, and that's a bit more difficult for officials to regulate. Now with the zone, you get easier to observe isolated wing play, and clearly a 15 to 20 foot jumper is a more difficult play than a layup or dunk, but since the zone is designed to eliminate that, then how could scoring not go down?

Last part of rant: Jordan's case for scoring 100 today (and he clearly also noted that today would cause him to foul out sooner and get a majority of his points from the stripe) isn't going to be coming from penetrating and drawing fouls, but from touch fouls and rip move fouls on the perimeter. This author assumes the other way.

WormBurner5
04-04-2013, 10:43 AM
I dont give a **** what that article says, the nba should have a vagina in their logo

D-Leethal
04-04-2013, 10:56 AM
I have a lot of issues with that article and how selective it was, but I'll get to that later.

Today's NBA has athletes from a generation that grew up with shot doctor camps, easily accessible film reference, more advanced training techniques and sports specialization. A 6'10" guy with 20 to 25 foot range is no rare feat in this game now; players are better equipped with jumpers for perimeter games. You have the league trying to crack down on things like Durant's rip move, which is jumper-predicated.

You now also have a heavier reliance on advanced metrics and technology and therefore much better scouting, as evidenced by the type of data Shane Battier used to get in Houston (http://nyti.ms/Q8sYaE).



Combine these with the now decade-plus of zone defense, and of course you're going to get fewer "in the paint" baskets. A lot of the Nugget "in the paint" baskets are off of their fastbreaks, so that's slightly misleading, plus that particular team's inability to hit threes. In the "Jordan Era," the top teams were making 300 to 400 threes for an entire season. Teams now are in the 700 to 800 mark in threes made per season, and about midway through the 2000s, almost 70% of shots taken in the league were jumpers.

Does this mean that today's defenses are "more physical"? Not necessarily. It's a combination of skill development and strategy that the game has moved away from the basket (****, the zone invites jumpers), so, yes, you will have fewer points in that "tough" area. I think it's tougher to score inside, but by no means do I believe today's NBA is more physical. Apples to oranges time: think Steel Curtain Steelers, when pass interference was virtually non-existent, since CBs were allowed to physically manhandle receivers all the way down the field (no 5-yard contact rule). The same can apply to the 90s, with the handcheck, which is NOT overrated; it's the difference between being allowed into the offensive player's personal space and not, and being allowed to manipulate that player physically. And as mentioned by someone earlier, there's now video review and levels of flagrant fouls and associated penalties and fines, so how does that not play into current defenders' minds? The 90s was a one size fits all hard foul with no punish-by-hindsight.

As for the article: Penny slicing through the 96 Bulls easily to get to the lane? I'm sure having the surest double/triple team player in Shaq on your team didn't affect that at all. Then the guy cites another TrueHoop writer about "tackle basketball"... where has this complaint been all season, all year, all decade? LeBron complains once after the streak-ender, and this is now miraculously a complaint? Strauss also tries to simplify it to "Think about that -- when the team had the ball in the 1990s, it scored more than it does now." That's a measure of physical toughness? If the preferred method of scoring in the 1990s was in the paint, then the absolute counter to that is more physical play. You get a clusterfuk of players down there, and that's a bit more difficult for officials to regulate. Now with the zone, you get easier to observe isolated wing play, and clearly a 15 to 20 foot jumper is a more difficult play than a layup or dunk, but since the zone is designed to eliminate that, then how could scoring not go down?

Last part of rant: Jordan's case for scoring 100 today (and he clearly also noted that today would cause him to foul out sooner and get a majority of his points from the stripe) isn't going to be coming from penetrating and drawing fouls, but from touch fouls and rip move fouls on the perimeter. This author assumes the other way.

The whole post is right on point, said it much better than I could have, but the bold is my biggest problem with the article.

I mean really? PPP at the rim to measure physical toughness?

Some things just aren't meant to be weighed statistically. Toughness is one of them.

MaloDaw9
04-04-2013, 11:01 AM
I dont give a **** what that article says, the nba should have a vagina in their logo

This made me smile.

effen5
04-04-2013, 11:17 AM
I dont give a **** what that article says, the nba should have a vagina in their logo

x10000000000000000000000000

ChitownBears22
04-04-2013, 11:21 AM
Please let me know how many 6'9 and above freaks were in the NBA back in the day, that could play 3-4 positions. Game is different, why even compare.

effen5
04-04-2013, 11:36 AM
Please let me know how many 6'9 and above freaks were in the NBA back in the day, that could play 3-4 positions. Game is different, why even compare.

There are only a handful of 6’9 players that can play 3-4 different positions well now. While majority of the 6’9 players back in the day played their positions extremely well…

SLY WILLIAMS
04-04-2013, 11:53 AM
Tim Thomas was 6-10 and could play 3 positions but that did not make him tough to play against or physical. In fact during his career people wanted him to be more physically tough. Flexibility should not be confused with a player playing in a physical manner.

D-Leethal
04-04-2013, 12:07 PM
Tim Thomas was 6-10 and could play 3 positions but that did not make him tough to play against or physical. In fact during his career people wanted him to be more physically tough. Flexibility should not be confused with a player playing in a physical manner.

Yea that one sure came out of left field. If anything the 6'9 guys playing on the perimeter like guards is a reflection of the sissyness in the league today - big guys play finesse, face-up ball allowing them to play 3 positions instead of banging down low with the big boys.

D-Leethal
04-04-2013, 12:10 PM
But there were also guys like that playing in that era. I mean what would you call Scottie Pippen? He's 6'8 and can play the 1, 2, or 3. Probably play a lot of 4 in today's league. How about a guy like Penny Hardaway? You had bigger 6'10 guys like Detlef Schrempf doing the same thing back then.

Rentzias
04-04-2013, 12:14 PM
So... the tall, skilled, multi-position players existed in both eras. Moving on.

D-Leethal
04-04-2013, 12:17 PM
So... the tall, skilled, multi-position players existed in both eras. Moving on.

I'd say all eras. Something tells me Bill Russell would do just fine switching onto perimeter guys and guarding 4-5 positions.

mngopher35
04-04-2013, 12:58 PM
Of course defenses and the league is softer now than in the past. Wings get significantly more free throws now and also the lack of bigs in the paint today make it much easier to score down there for anyone. A few years back Tony Parker led the league in points in the paint.
Not to mention any type of hard foul now results in a flagrant while back in the day that was just a regular foul. If you know mentally speaking that when you get whacked all you get is two free throws it will throw your entire plan off for driving to the cup.

Based on? Not only are there less free throws per game, there are less free throws per fga. Now maybe there are some wings getting a few more calls, but as you said smaller players drive to the hoop more so that could be somewhat expected.

I think that the league was "tougher" back then, but it is because of all of the rule changes that happened. The league is at least as good defensively, they just aren't allowed to do some things like hand check, more flagrants/what is considered a flagrant etc.

JiffyMix88
04-04-2013, 01:06 PM
The article used points allowed as a measure of "toughness". That in and of itself discredits the premise, because as it pointed out, more fouls were called in the 90's. It also used fouls called to prove that the NBA was protecting players more in the 90's. That's a ridiculous statement. More fouls were called BECAUSE more contact was allowed, thus tempers boiled over and the handchecking became pushing and shoving which became punches. More contact was allowed. Imagine how hard you had to get hit to get a foul call? And there were a lot of foul calls. It's such an obvious statement that gets lost when people are trying to prove a point.

When the league legislated against handchecking, the goal was to prevent players from escalating contact and preventing injuries. What it did was make it easier for ball dominant perimeter players to beat their man off the dribble. Just like the 3 second illegal defense rule, and the "restricted area". All designed to let "the next Jordan" get to the rim at will.

There's a reason Lebron, Melo, Kobe, etc. all get the ball on the right elbow 20ft out. Because above the FT line, if anyone touches you it's an automatic foul. By the time your opponent can body you up, you've already blown by him. All of the help defense is to your left, where you can use your body to shield the ball, and force them to have to reach over you to try to block the shot. And if you time it right, the post defense had to step left out of the lane to avoid an illegal defense call, so by the time he recovers to you, he's in the restricted area. Tell me again how the NBA hasn't legislated to let Lebron get to the rim?

1) Handchecking perimeter players.
2) You got hit in the 90's. A lot. Hence the number of fouls.
3) 3 second illegal defense.
4) Restricted area.
5) And finally, a "good, hard playoff foul" in the 90's is a flagrant 2 today. Grab a guy around the neck and throwing him to the ground so he can't get a dunk. Case closed.

Today's game Athleticism > Basketball Fundamentals

D-Leethal
04-04-2013, 02:07 PM
Today's game Athleticism > Basketball Fundamentals

Today's game = play the quick whistle. **** a basketball play, just look for contact.

OceanSpray
04-04-2013, 04:01 PM
If http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/boguemu01.html could average 11 PPG, it's not that tough as people say it is. Give me a break and stop assuming the league is softer because players aren't running around pushing each other. There were more foul attempts and more points scored back then. How do you explain that? Simple; you never actually watched those games and follow the hype that the league back then was tougher.

KnickaBocka.44
04-04-2013, 05:38 PM
I don't really like this article because it makes points without taking rule changes into consideration. For instance, it mentions there being more free throws now, but doesn't take into account the restricted area, which definitely contributes to there being more free throws.

Back in the day a player could drive, make a layup and plow into someone under the basket and it could either be waved off for a charge or a no call. Now because of the "restricted area" refs feel the need to make a call instead of just allowing play to continue.

Supreme LA
04-04-2013, 05:54 PM
If http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/boguemu01.html could average 11 PPG, it's not that tough as people say it is. Give me a break and stop assuming the league is softer because players aren't running around pushing each other. There were more foul attempts and more points scored back then. How do you explain that? Simple; you never actually watched those games and follow the hype that the league back then was tougher.

You're ********. The league was tougher back then and I'm old enough to have witnessed basketball since the 80's.
There were more foul attempts because there were more fouls back then. There were more points because players were more fundamentally skilled back then as well. In today's game, it's not common at all to find a guy who can hit a midrange shot. There are so many reasons why the game is softer today and just because you want to find any reason to prove your boy Lebron is a badass you shouldn't discredit the 80's and 90's for what they were.

Go away.

Rentzias
04-04-2013, 08:33 PM
If http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/boguemu01.html could average 11 PPG, it's not that tough as people say it is. Give me a break and stop assuming the league is softer because players aren't running around pushing each other. There were more foul attempts and more points scored back then. How do you explain that? Simple; you never actually watched those games and follow the hype that the league back then was tougher.
The zone is designed to encourage jumpers and eliminate points in the paint. One is an easier basket, therefore more points. The way to stop these easy baskets is to foul hard. Thus, more foul attempts. This is from my basic basketball knowledge and from watching these games, many of them in person.

OceanSpray
04-04-2013, 10:20 PM
You're ********. The league was tougher back then and I'm old enough to have witnessed basketball since the 80's.
There were more foul attempts because there were more fouls back then. There were more points because players were more fundamentally skilled back then as well. In today's game, it's not common at all to find a guy who can hit a midrange shot. There are so many reasons why the game is softer today and just because you want to find any reason to prove your boy Lebron is a badass you shouldn't discredit the 80's and 90's for what they were.

Go away.

How did I know this was going to be one of the answers? So to justify the toughness, it's because players are more "skilled"? Yeah, that must be it. In twenty years, someone will break Usain Bolt's track record. Why and how? Because athletes are better over time.