PDA

View Full Version : Barkley says the NBA is the worst it's ever been



ThuglifeJ
03-28-2014, 04:15 PM
"Clearly, the NBA sucks right now," Barkley said at a Tuesday event prior to his on-air comments. "The NBA is the worst it's ever been. I feel bad for the fans because they are not getting a quality product. All the players are making a lot of money but these fans are not getting quality basketball."



http://www.sportingnews.com/nba/story/2014-03-24/nba-commissioner-adam-silver-charles-barkley-nba-worst-ncaa-tournament-tbs-east-conference-76ers
^open with caution, close up of Adam Silvers smug face.



Looks like some of us posters aren't the only ones who think it's not a great league right now.
I agree with Barkley, the talent and competitiveness just isn't there. However, I am excited for the West playoffs and to see who gets the final seeds.

sammyvine
03-28-2014, 04:17 PM
"Clearly, the NBA sucks right now," Barkley said at a Tuesday event prior to his on-air comments. "The NBA is the worst it's ever been. I feel bad for the fans because they are not getting a quality product. All the players are making a lot of money but these fans are not getting quality basketball."



http://www.sportingnews.com/nba/story/2014-03-24/nba-commissioner-adam-silver-charles-barkley-nba-worst-ncaa-tournament-tbs-east-conference-76ers

^open with caution, close up of Adam Silvers smug face.



Looks like some of us posters aren't the only ones who think it's not a great league right now.
I agree with Barkley, the talent and competitiveness just isn't there. However, I am excited for the West playoffs and to see who gets the final seeds.

He's right

there is a lack of top tier superstars ( i only consider durant and lebron as top tier), tanking is a huge problem and is one of the reasons the eastern conference has been so awful. Flopping is another issue especially when James Harden and Durant get to the line as much as they do. The NBA has regressed.

The early 2000's when A.I., Dirk, Shaq, Kobe, Nash, Dirk, Pierce etc were in the their primes was great imo

Hawkeye15
03-28-2014, 04:27 PM
I used to have an entire book of garbage Charles spewed. I appreciate his brutal honesty at times, but he also says so many things that are just downright stupid.

The league has a ton of talent, as much as at any time. Its just that there were injuries, and parity sucks right now. The talent level is as high as ever though.

Hawkeye15
03-28-2014, 04:28 PM
He's right

there is a lack of top tier superstars ( i only consider durant and lebron as top tier), tanking is a huge problem and is one of the reasons the eastern conference has been so awful. Flopping is another issue especially when James Harden and Durant get to the line as much as they do. The NBA has regressed.

The early 2000's when A.I., Dirk, Shaq, Kobe, Nash, Dirk, Pierce etc were in the their primes was great imo

Only Shaq in his peak would be on the same tier as LeBron/Durant the last 2 years though. The top tier is so short because it has 2 players that are incredible. Hell, the last time I remember the 2 best players being this dominant were Magic/Bird.

ThuglifeJ
03-28-2014, 04:28 PM
He's right

there is a lack of top tier superstars ( i only consider durant and lebron as top tier), tanking is a huge problem and is one of the reasons the eastern conference has been so awful. Flopping is another issue especially when James Harden and Durant get to the line as much as they do. The NBA has regressed.

The early 2000's when A.I., Dirk, Shaq, Kobe, Nash, Dirk, Pierce etc were in the their primes was great imo

Yup.. Tmac, Vinsanity, Yao, KG, Kidd, Duncan can't forget either. Just so much to watch.

And the 90s era with Jordan
80s era Bird/Magic..

Other eras just had an identity that most people loved.

I agree with the flopping and lack of superstars issue. That just isn't something were used to in the NBA. Not since Oscar Robertson days, was the last time there was this little of talent (if I'm recalling correctly). We've seen tanking like this before but for a guy like Shaq..not question mark Wiggins.

ThuglifeJ
03-28-2014, 04:31 PM
I used to have an entire book of garbage Charles spewed. I appreciate his brutal honesty at times, but he also says so many things that are just downright stupid.

The league has a ton of talent, as much as at any time. Its just that there were injuries, and parity sucks right now. The talent level is as high as ever though.

There are some that have this opinion..I disagree. Lebron and Durant are the only must watch basketball and many don't even like Lebron. Sure the D Rose injury and Kobe set the league back can't control that, but that's about it.

Hawkeye15
03-28-2014, 04:33 PM
There are some that have this opinion..I disagree. Lebron and Durant are the only must watch basketball and many don't even like Lebron. Sure the D Rose injury and Kobe set the league back can't control that, but that's about it.

Many didn't/don't like Magic, Bird, Duncan, Kobe, MJ, Shaq, etc........

so? Trying to use the 2000's is a poor example. There were no players playing at LeBron/Durant level of the last 2 years. Of course the top tier was bigger, because it was at a lesser standard.

Again, this sounds like Chuck, and some of you, trying to downgrade the current era because of loyalty to yesterday. I used to be guilty of it as well when I was younger, and ex-players ego's drive them to put down current players all the time, has forever.

ManRam
03-28-2014, 04:34 PM
While I don't disagree that this hasn't been a wonderful season, his hyperbole and the usage of the word "EVER" is mostly unfounded. The league isn't at it's best, but it's far from it's worst. I'd say it's par for the course since Barkley's era at least. It's just old guys refusing to credit anything after them, as has always been the case.

We have LeBron and KD who compare favorably to just about any combination of players to ever play the game. Ever. It's a top-5 talent all time and potentially the best scorer the game has ever seen. It's Magic and Bird, and then some.

There's plenty of great second tier star power, it's just a lot of it is youthful and people are hesitant to give them a ton of credit. Many of them are stuck on bad teams, which isn't helping. Injuries are also really dragging things (Rose, Westbrook, Lopez, Kobe, etc.). The overall talent is fine, at least compared to recent years. It's more guard-orientated, but that's not a bad thing.


And the "tanking epidemic" isn't an epidemic at all. Hell, it's not even anything unique. Think there are more bad teams than ever before? Well, you're simply wrong.

Winning percentage tiers for the last 20 seasons

2014: 9 teams sub-40%, 3 sub-30%, 1 sub-20%
2013: 10 teams sub-40%, 3 sub-30%, 0 sub-20%
2012: 10 teams sub-40%, 1 sub-30%, 1 sub-20%
2011: 8 teams sub-40%, 6 sub-30%, 0 sub-20%
2010: 10 teams sub-40%, 2 sub-30%, 2 sub-20%
2009: 9 teams sub-40%, 6 sub-30%, 0 sub-20%
2008: 9 teams sub-40%, 6 sub-30%, 1 sub-20%
2007: 10 teams sub-40%, 2 sub-30%, 0 sub-20%
2006: 7 teams sub-40%, 2 sub-30%, 0 sub-20%
2005: 8 teams sub-40%, 3 sub-30%, 1 sub-20%
2004: 8 teams sub-40%, 2 sub-30%, 0 sub-20%
2003: 7 teams sub-40%, 3 sub-30%, 0 sub-20%
2002: 8 teams sub-40%, 3 sub-30%, 0 sub-20%
2001: 9 teams sub-40%, 4 sub-30%, 1 sub-20%
2000: 8 teams sub-40%, 4 sub-30%, 1 sub-20%
1999: 8 teams sub-40%, 4 sub-30%, 2 sub-20%
1998: 8 teams sub-40%, 6 sub-30%, 2 sub-20%
1997: 10 teams sub-40%, 6 sub-30%, 2 sub-20%
1996: 9 teams sub-40%, 3 sub-30%, 1 sub-20%
1995: 8 teams sub-40%, 4 sub-30%, 0 sub-20%

Hawkeye15
03-28-2014, 04:35 PM
the ONLY angle this works from for me, is that the Lakers and Knicks suck, and the league is always better commercially when they are good teams.

ThuglifeJ
03-28-2014, 04:38 PM
Only Shaq in his peak would be on the same tier as LeBron/Durant the last 2 years though. The top tier is so short because it has 2 players that are incredible. Hell, the last time I remember the 2 best players being this dominant were Magic/Bird.

You're missing the point where Shaq was playing against better talent throughout the league. Who's guarding Lebron/Durant these days? Any big names? Paul George? Any others? Any well-known defensive stoppers around the league anymore? Shaq had to play Wallaces, Ming, Mourning, Robinson, Jermaine O Neil, actual 7 footers who didn't camp the 3 line. High flying wings who he had to help out on like Tmac.. There was always entertaining matchups..

I disagree with your second statement as well. Throw Tmac peak and Kobe in this years season and they run over teams with just as good of scoring totals. Same with the rest of the 2000s talents. The talents all watered down now. The fact that the vets are like 36 and still playing high level is embarassing. The young guys are supposed to come in and make them feel washed up and retire.

You think a prime KG wouldn't tear apart 2014?

ThuglifeJ
03-28-2014, 04:39 PM
the ONLY angle this works from for me, is that the Lakers and Knicks suck, and the league is always better commercially when they are good teams.

Celtics too.

sens#11fan
03-28-2014, 04:42 PM
I disagree with their not being enough talent in the league, you could argue,however, that there is an uneven distribution of them. For instance the top teams in the west are loaded with talent, its a different story for most teams in the east though.

beliges
03-28-2014, 04:44 PM
This is very true. I think we had a discussion about this topic in the past. I dont know if I would call it the worst its ever been, but the game today is simply not what it used to be. The superstars are not what they used to be. Its a lack of intensity and work ethic on the part of players to improve year after year. I just think the players of the past were cut from a different cloth than today's players. At least you still have some old school guys in there like a KG and Kobe, but obviously there years are numbered at this point. For some, this is the only league they know and they think Lebron and Durant are the best of the best, and more power to them. But for the majority of others I know that have watched the game for the last 25+ years, its simply not what it used to be.

Puck017
03-28-2014, 04:45 PM
Not only is he right, but his half-time shows are usually more exciting the the actual games. Does anyone else think the AAU basketball is what is wrong with the NBA today? They basically emphasize athleticism and showcasing the players over teaching them how to actually play the game.

ThuglifeJ
03-28-2014, 04:48 PM
Many didn't/don't like Magic, Bird, Duncan, Kobe, MJ, Shaq, etc........

so? Trying to use the 2000's is a poor example. There were no players playing at LeBron/Durant level of the last 2 years. Of course the top tier was bigger, because it was at a lesser standard.

Again, this sounds like Chuck, and some of you, trying to downgrade the current era because of loyalty to yesterday. I used to be guilty of it as well when I was younger, and ex-players ego's drive them to put down current players all the time, has forever.

This isn't uncommon though. It's not just Chuck who feels this way. How much excitement for the NBA do you see nowadays? Sure there's a little bias to 'yesterday', but Chuck's been around a while now why would he pick today and not let's say 2005. He did say "Worst Ever".

Maybe I'm unintentionally guilty of that, but I try to not be biased about something like this. Why is it so hard for me to like current age? I'm still pretty young (26)..don't see why at age 26 I no longer can move forward with my favorite league. Just doesn't make sense. No one I talk to these days who used to love the NBA has much interest in it. Nearly everyone seems to think 'it sucks right now'. Now that's a bad way to back up my stance (friends) but it still feels like this is a common view amongst many.

I don't think Lebron or Durant have much personality/charisma to carry the leagues popularity. The talent sure, but the NBA has always needed a strong marketer in there (MJ, Kobe, Shaq, Magic).. Lebron seems to have been a little out of the public eye since all the hate from the move to Miami..Durant's always just been a chill quiet type, which is fine, but they need those guys to bring the popularity/excitement up.

I will say the Pacers Heat game got me more optimistic, there was some passion out there, but that's a rare case today.

Sadds The Gr8
03-28-2014, 04:52 PM
I don't think the talent is that bad...the amount of tanking is what's making the league look bad.

I've enjoyed all of the western conference games with teams like gsw, Portland, clippers, Houston, okc, etc. A lot of the east games have been god awful tho.

Maybe the fact that Nyk and the Lakers being on national tv so Damn much and them sucking is forming Barkley's position. If the up and coming west teams were on tv more instead of the garbage Lakers, people would be enjoying the season more.

sunsfan88
03-28-2014, 04:55 PM
The NBA isn't worst it's ever been, the East is the worse it's ever been.

Teeboy1487
03-28-2014, 04:58 PM
It's the East. That conference is horrid outside of the Heat and Pacers. I'm actually excited for the West playoffs.

beliges
03-28-2014, 04:59 PM
The NBA isn't worst it's ever been, the East is the worse it's ever been.

The East has been this bad for almost an entire decade at this point. Probably the worst stretch for an entire conference in league history.

sammyvine
03-28-2014, 05:00 PM
Only Shaq in his peak would be on the same tier as LeBron/Durant the last 2 years though. The top tier is so short because it has 2 players that are incredible. Hell, the last time I remember the 2 best players being this dominant were Magic/Bird.

I'm talking about the array of talent no just them as individuals.....SHAQ, NASH, KOBE, KIDD, GARNETT, are on another level to the likes of Westbrook, Curry, George, CP3, and those players i mentioned last are all considered top 5-10 players in the league

lakerfan85
03-28-2014, 05:00 PM
There's too many teams... If there was only 24 teams the nba would be great right now..

ManRam
03-28-2014, 05:01 PM
Maybe the fact that Nyk and the Lakers being on national tv so Damn much and them sucking is forming Barkley's position. If the up and coming west teams were on tv more instead of the garbage Lakers, people would be enjoying the season more.

That's a big reason. Nationally televised games have been brutal this year. Not nearly enough love for the teams that should be showcased.

sammyvine
03-28-2014, 05:02 PM
It's the East. That conference is horrid outside of the Heat and Pacers. I'm actually excited for the West playoffs.

thats the big problem like you said

when you see the 76ers just trading away players so they can tank, it really makes a mockery of the game.

Teeboy1487
03-28-2014, 05:05 PM
That's a big reason. Nationally televised games have been brutal this year. Not nearly enough love for the teams that should be showcased.

If they were good, it would be a ratings heaven. They suck. No one will watch.

NYMetros
03-28-2014, 05:05 PM
The NBA is great right now. The west is amazing and the east sucks but I don't think that conference imbalance means the league sucks.

Shlumpledink
03-28-2014, 05:09 PM
He's right though, the league is not a good product. That just doesn't mean winning percentages, or talent level.

It means there isn't anything exciting about it. The parity of the league is awful, the best talent is concentrated onto a few teams.

There are some really stacked teams that could compete with the best teams from other eras for sure, and possibly be championship winners in other years. Unfortunately there are a lot of teams that are just dreadfully awful. Too many of them too, and they don't appear to be trying to get any better.

There are certain teams where you scratch your head and go, why are they so bad? When other teams are hit with bad injuries. Certain teams trade away/waive their talent so they can lose more games, while the stacked teams just add onto their talent.

I remember when the Lakers had Kobe and Shaq on their team, and that seemed excessive, even though they had 3 other average players as their starters.

I think the collective bargaining agreement is partially to blame. I don't get how you can make money as an owner when you put out awful talent, the fans rightfully don't show up to the games, but the other owners who are putting out a good product are giving money to the owners who aren't trying. It doesn't seem fair.

I have respect for the teams this year who have had an injury to a star player, and continued to play basketball instead of dropping salary/talent to get a good draft pick. That is how basketball should be played, and how you build a loyal fanbase.

Lakers + Giants
03-28-2014, 05:11 PM
The NBA sucks because of the east, the West is fun as hell. Look at all the potential first round matchups. Now, look at the EC ones . . .pathetic.

MyDRoseLikeDeng
03-28-2014, 05:13 PM
I think the individual talent is present, however the team talent and parity is lacking big time. You have too many teams that are leaps and bounds better than others, and only a handful of teams actually competing for a championship

Mr_Jones
03-28-2014, 05:14 PM
I think he's also referring to the players and how they play the game. If that's something he is speaking about, I agree.

Hawkeye15
03-28-2014, 05:26 PM
This isn't uncommon though. It's not just Chuck who feels this way. How much excitement for the NBA do you see nowadays? Sure there's a little bias to 'yesterday', but Chuck's been around a while now why would he pick today and not let's say 2005. He did say "Worst Ever".

Maybe I'm unintentionally guilty of that, but I try to not be biased about something like this. Why is it so hard for me to like current age? I'm still pretty young (26)..don't see why at age 26 I no longer can move forward with my favorite league. Just doesn't make sense. No one I talk to these days who used to love the NBA has much interest in it. Nearly everyone seems to think 'it sucks right now'. Now that's a bad way to back up my stance (friends) but it still feels like this is a common view amongst many.

I don't think Lebron or Durant have much personality/charisma to carry the leagues popularity. The talent sure, but the NBA has always needed a strong marketer in there (MJ, Kobe, Shaq, Magic).. Lebron seems to have been a little out of the public eye since all the hate from the move to Miami..Durant's always just been a chill quiet type, which is fine, but they need those guys to bring the popularity/excitement up.

I will say the Pacers Heat game got me more optimistic, there was some passion out there, but that's a rare case today.

even with some of the biggest market teams down this year, ratings are high as hell.

Look, Barkley has always said outlandish crap throughout his career. If you want to believe the NBA is at its worst, fine. But we have 2 players who are all timers in the making in their primes, a litter of young stars, the best western conference playoffs ever, win wise total, and various fan bases that have been out of it forever now having a team that is contending.

The NBA has slight ups and downs, but since the Bird/Magic era saved the game basically, every year is littered with talent.

Nearly everyone seems to think it sucks right now? I don't buy that at all dude. This just comes off to me as Chuck being Chuck, an ex-player taking a shot at modern basketball..

Hawkeye15
03-28-2014, 05:29 PM
to the parity gripe, 8 teams have won the last 30 championships. Parity has always been an issue.

jerellh528
03-28-2014, 05:39 PM
Talent is as high or close to on par as ever. But I somewhat agree that the product itself feels lesser.Like the quality of basketball being put on the floor. I don't know how to explain it, but games don't have a must watch feeling to them much anymore. Not even just my own team because I watch all laker games regardless. But I used to watch basketball for basketball. Now outside of my own team, LBJ Vs Durant is the only game that gets me hyped. It seems as if not many teams have their own identity, It's like you could slap any other jerseys on any other team and not even notice much of a difference. No more finesse, power, bad guys, etc...

ILLUSIONIST^248
03-28-2014, 05:43 PM
Right he is. The nba is a joke right now. There are only a handful of great players, The center position is virtually wiped out and real rivalries are a thing of the past. The game has changed for the worse.

L8kers4life
03-28-2014, 06:00 PM
even with some of the biggest market teams down this year, ratings are high as hell.

Look, Barkley has always said outlandish crap throughout his career. If you want to believe the NBA is at its worst, fine. But we have 2 players who are all timers in the making in their primes, a litter of young stars, the best western conference playoffs ever, win wise total, and various fan bases that have been out of it forever now having a team that is contending.

The NBA has slight ups and downs, but since the Bird/Magic era saved the game basically, every year is littered with talent.

Nearly everyone seems to think it sucks right now? I don't buy that at all dude. This just comes off to me as Chuck being Chuck, an ex-player taking a shot at modern basketball..


I disagree, the intrest level in the NBA is declining, the fact that the highest rated game of the year is Lakers/Heat on Christmas should tell you a lot, the players in todays game are not garnering the interest of the everyday NBA fan. And in fact Ratings are way down on ABC.


The same cannot be said for ABC. The network averaged approximately a 2.7 rating and 4.5 million viewers through six telecasts, down 29% and 31%, respectively, from the comparable period last year (3.8, 6.5M).

according to

http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2014/02/nba-midseason-update-espn-tnt-flat-abc-down-double-digits/

Last Sunday, ABC earned a 2.0 final rating and 3.1 million viewers for the Bulls/Lakers game down 51% in ratings and 53% in viewership from Lakers/Heat last year (4.1, 6.5M), and down 23% and 25%, respectively, from Bulls/Celtics in 2012 (2.6, 4.1M). The early Knicks/Thunder game had a 1.9 and 3.1 million, down 10% in ratings and 19% in viewership from Clippers/Knicks last year (2.1, 3.3M).

Declines have been the rule during the first half of the season. Of the 72 regular season games on ESPN, ABC and TNT that can be compared to last year, 42 had declines and 29 had increases.


It seems as though the decline is more prevelant on ABC, but these kind of ratings drop are extremely high.

Also, Lakers ratings are so bad that it is affecting the clippers,

According to
http://articles.latimes.com/2014/jan/29/sports/la-sp-lakers-clippers-tv-20140130

The Clippers' TV ratings also have dipped this season, though not as sharply. The team's average rating of 1.28 on Prime Ticket in L.A. for the first 40 games was down 14.7% from the 1.5 rating at the same point last season.


Just some thoughts.

D-Leethal
03-28-2014, 06:02 PM
Might be the first time I have agreed with Chuck.

KnicksorBust
03-28-2014, 06:04 PM
Barkley is a joke. He just hates it because it's more of an intellectual game, a passing game, a shooting game, and not the rough and rugged game of the ugly 90s. Boo-hoo.

smith&wesson
03-28-2014, 06:13 PM
whenever the celtics and lakers are tanking you know theres a problem lol.. this tanking **** needs to go. how many none competetive teams are there this season ? BUCKS, 76ERS, MAGIC, CELTICS, LAKERS, KINGS, and how many underacheiving teams are there KNICKS, TWOLVES, CAVS etc.

basically when my team plays vs any of these teams i dont even bother watching. maybe with the acception of the knicks because they are actually trying to win games and make their games competetive.

smith&wesson
03-28-2014, 06:18 PM
Barkley is a joke. He just hates it because it's more of an intellectual game, a passing game, a shooting game, and not the rough and rugged game of the ugly 90s. Boo-hoo.

I think he talking about the lack of competetivness in the league right now, which I certainly can not help but agree with. half the league is either tanking, or seriously under achieving and making it very hard to try to watch half the games.

who would watch memphis vs utah ?
who would watch bucks vs 76ers ?
seriously this season who would watch the celtics vs lakers ?
who would watch magic vs kings ?
who would watch twolves vs cavs ?

and its not a question of small market or big market as you can see 3 of the biggest markets are listed above .. and teams like the cavs and twovles were heading in to this season with high hopes.. But still when any of the above listed teams are playing really only their respective die hard fans tune in. that is a problem.

AddiX
03-28-2014, 06:19 PM
to the parity gripe, 8 teams have won the last 30 championships. Parity has always been an issue.

For me its not just the championship parity..

Its the fact that the teams that are considered almost irrelevant don't even try anymore, they basically cut or trade there vets away to the good teams, while using there entire roster for stack up on young/cheap players.

And than the teams that do try to win without A superstar, end up like Detroit, or
Mil, signing completely overrated players.

These teams stay in this constant rebuilding mode until they finally think they hit on a good player. It's a ridiculous system the NBA has put together and allowed.

I mean seriously, who actually wants to watch these teams?

smith&wesson
03-28-2014, 06:32 PM
to the parity gripe, 8 teams have won the last 30 championships. Parity has always been an issue.

Im ok with it, I dont expect every team to have a championship or for all teams to contend. But tanking is growing in to a bigger and bigger problem every year.

whats the point of having 30 teams if 8-10 of them arent trying to win games. why should i as a fan buy tickets to a game and take my family to go see the home team try and lose on purpose. something about that just doesnt sit right. do season ticket holders get apologies from these tanking teams ? or just take their money with a smile and a fu ..

3RDASYSTEM
03-28-2014, 06:40 PM
The NBA sucks because of the east, the West is fun as hell. Look at all the potential first round matchups. Now, look at the EC ones . . .pathetic.

but then look at it on the flipside, the top 2 teams are right there neck and neck, and then from 3-8 those would be exciting matchups since they are so equal(weak in your words), that to me would make for a hell of a series with equal teams dogfighting it out to advance, of course the west is more balanced out but we all know 2-3 teams are coming out with a long shot 4th darkhorse, very longshot

teams to come out east, HEAT/PACERS favorites, BKN darkhorse
teams to come out west, OKC-SPURS and CLIPPS/ROCKETS

that's all and its been like this for many many yrs but I imagine you just start watching ball so i'll give you a pass for missing yrs past

Lakers + Giants
03-28-2014, 06:54 PM
but then look at it on the flipside, the top 2 teams are right there neck and neck, and then from 3-8 those would be exciting matchups since they are so equal(weak in your words), that to me would make for a hell of a series with equal teams dogfighting it out to advance, of course the west is more balanced out but we all know 2-3 teams are coming out with a long shot 4th darkhorse, very longshot

teams to come out east, HEAT/PACERS favorites, BKN darkhorse
teams to come out west, OKC-SPURS and CLIPPS/ROCKETS

that's all and its been like this for many many yrs but I imagine you just start watching ball so i'll give you a pass for missing yrs past

Please, so watching teams that are equal will be fun? So watching two teams that suck would be fun just because they are equal? No thanks. . .

From the west It could be SAS, LAC, OKC, HOU, MEM, GSW. . from the east there are only 2 teams.

I'll give you a pass tho, you probably just started watching ball within the past year.

CubsBullsBucs
03-28-2014, 07:02 PM
I don't think there is a lack of stars, there's a lack of dynamic/unique stars. These days all of these 'stars' are basically the same player. D Wade, Harden, Westbrook, Durant, LeBron, P George, and the list goes on and on. It doesn't have much to do with the color of their skin, but they all have the same game play. Athletic players that get to the rim with ease, and can shoot the 3, but not dominant at anything else. We used to have Bird, Stockton, Barkley, Shaq, Kobe, Yao etc where the stars were all unique talents that wowed us every day and we saw something new. Now regardless of the team we basically see the same thing over and over. It gets kinda boring. The athleticism is exciting, but not if that's all we see. An aging Dirk is the only exception.

Corey
03-28-2014, 07:37 PM
I don't think there is a lack of stars, there's a lack of dynamic/unique stars. These days all of these 'stars' are basically the same player. D Wade, Harden, Westbrook, Durant, LeBron, P George, and the list goes on and on. It doesn't have much to do with the color of their skin, but they all have the same game play. Athletic players that get to the rim with ease, and can shoot the 3, but not dominant at anything else. We used to have Bird, Stockton, Barkley, Shaq, Kobe, Yao etc where the stars were all unique talents that wowed us every day and we saw something new. Now regardless of the team we basically see the same thing over and over. It gets kinda boring. The athleticism is exciting, but not if that's all we see. An aging Dirk is the only exception.

I dont consider guys like Curry, Lebron, Durant, Paul, Westbrook to be the same type of talent at all.

Shammyguy3
03-28-2014, 07:48 PM
1) Take two of the western conference teams, say HOU and POR, and put them in the East and nobody thinks there's this "horrible" NBA anymore with there being IND/HOU/POR/MIA in one conference and OKC/SAS/LAC/GSW in the other.
2) there's been some fantastic, historical performances so far this year (i.e. Durant e.g. Pacers' start to the season, Lebron's 61 point performance, hell even Noah's triple double performances)
3) Lebron/Durant when it's all said and done could both be argued as top-5 players, and their respective teams could win the majority of titles over this time current period in time

ThuglifeJ
03-28-2014, 08:08 PM
I don't think there is a lack of stars, there's a lack of dynamic/unique stars. These days all of these 'stars' are basically the same player. D Wade, Harden, Westbrook, Durant, LeBron, P George, and the list goes on and on. It doesn't have much to do with the color of their skin, but they all have the same game play. Athletic players that get to the rim with ease, and can shoot the 3, but not dominant at anything else. We used to have Bird, Stockton, Barkley, Shaq, Kobe, Yao etc where the stars were all unique talents that wowed us every day and we saw something new. Now regardless of the team we basically see the same thing over and over. It gets kinda boring. The athleticism is exciting, but not if that's all we see. An aging Dirk is the only exception.

I don't see them all the same but I agree there's no NEW/Unique stars. Paul George? Poor mans mcgrady. Harden? A Ginobili who flops even more. Dwight? Poor mans Shaq. Griffin, lebron, Durant are the only unique ones i can think of..not enough.

10 years ago - nearly everything was fresh and new. We had the giant Shaq, a 7'6 Asian Yao, ultimate leader pg Kidd, passing guru Nash, popular cousins VC Tmac doing things we've never seen/greatest dunker, baby Jordan in Kobe, scoring 6 footer Iverson, fundamentals Duncan, 7 ft shooting Dirk, french Parker, Gasol, Ray Allen greatest 3 pt shooter, athletic dominant pf KG, street ball JWill, bunch a great fun talents like Webber, Stoudemire, Wallace's, Jermaine o Neal, Francis, Marbury, defensive stoppers Artest Marion Bowen.need this again.
Fresh new talents with identities. Maybe we were spoiled.

I agree there's just little intensity/excitement in the league right now.
Everyone's about themselves and their twitter too...vs relationship with the league/players.

Also BRING BACK NBA ON NBC

hugepatsfan
03-28-2014, 08:10 PM
The 2nd round of the playoffs on is just as good as always. But up to that point it's a boring sport except for an exciting 1st round series here and there. Teams have caught on that it makes more sense to build for the future than to actually attempt to put the best product on the court in the short term. It makes for a downright awful regular season.

Hawkeye15
03-28-2014, 08:28 PM
Talent is as high or close to on par as ever. But I somewhat agree that the product itself feels lesser.Like the quality of basketball being put on the floor. I don't know how to explain it, but games don't have a must watch feeling to them much anymore. Not even just my own team because I watch all laker games regardless. But I used to watch basketball for basketball. Now outside of my own team, LBJ Vs Durant is the only game that gets me hyped. It seems as if not many teams have their own identity, It's like you could slap any other jerseys on any other team and not even notice much of a difference. No more finesse, power, bad guys, etc...

I think it has to do more with the usual suspects having terrible seasons (Lakers, Knicks, Celtics).

Hawkeye15
03-28-2014, 08:30 PM
For me its not just the championship parity..

Its the fact that the teams that are considered almost irrelevant don't even try anymore, they basically cut or trade there vets away to the good teams, while using there entire roster for stack up on young/cheap players.

And than the teams that do try to win without A superstar, end up like Detroit, or
Mil, signing completely overrated players.

These teams stay in this constant rebuilding mode until they finally think they hit on a good player. It's a ridiculous system the NBA has put together and allowed.

I mean seriously, who actually wants to watch these teams?

the game has become more intellectual is why. Being average is the kiss of death in the NBA, and front offices started to realize that over the past decade.

As front offices have moved away from employing ex-players, and instead hiring stats guys to build rosters, this is what we get guys. Either get onboard, or watch something else.

FOBolous
03-28-2014, 08:45 PM
Yup.. Tmac, Vinsanity, Yao, KG, Kidd, Duncan can't forget either. Just so much to watch.

And the 90s era with Jordan
80s era Bird/Magic..

Other eras just had an identity that most people loved.

I agree with the flopping and lack of superstars issue. That just isn't something were used to in the NBA. Not since Oscar Robertson days, was the last time there was this little of talent (if I'm recalling correctly). We've seen tanking like this before but for a guy like Shaq..not question mark Wiggins.

there isn't a "lack of superstars." The league's as talented as it always have been and Durant/LeBron is Bird/Magic 2.0 minus the competitiveness (talent's there tho). It's just that all the superstars are concentrated on a select few teams...they don't all have their own teams like before. Imo, that's why the parity in the NBA is so bad right now.

Vinylman
03-28-2014, 08:48 PM
the game has become more intellectual is why. Being average is the kiss of death in the NBA, and front offices started to realize that over the past decade.

As front offices have moved away from employing ex-players, and instead hiring stats guys to build rosters, this is what we get guys. Either get onboard, or watch something else.

who are the quality teams built with stat guys? What i mean is what teams have completely abandoned middling, rebuilt, and become contenders?

Hawkeye15
03-28-2014, 08:54 PM
who are the quality teams built with stat guys? What i mean is what teams have completely abandoned middling, rebuilt, and become contenders?

I am saying that is the way FO's have started to move. We will see how it works out, if the NBA can see a moneyball type impact.

Vinylman
03-28-2014, 09:02 PM
I am saying that is the way FO's have started to move. We will see how it works out, if the NBA can see a moneyball type impact.

the theory is clear... do you think anyone is close? personally i don't ... i think it will lead to the exact same situation without a star... (ie middling) and thats because there is basically no other sport where a single individual can impact team success like they can in the NBA

NBA_Starter
03-28-2014, 09:04 PM
I love people who speak their mind and don't give a damn.

Hawkeye15
03-28-2014, 09:08 PM
the theory is clear... do you think anyone is close? personally i don't ... i think it will lead to the exact same situation without a star... (ie middling) and thats because there is basically no other sport where a single individual can impact team success like they can in the NBA

The Rockets and Thunder seem to be close.

But for sure, you need a star. Identifying them in the draft is step #1, of which Morey and Presti continue to do. Morey was so good at it, he turned multiple #14 picks into James Harden.

Vinylman
03-28-2014, 09:21 PM
The Rockets and Thunder seem to be close.

But for sure, you need a star. Identifying them in the draft is step #1, of which Morey and Presti continue to do. Morey was so good at it, he turned multiple #14 picks into James Harden.

ok ... but those teams moves aren't rocket science...

Durant was the clear second pick in that draft ... i had him 1

Westbrook / Harden weren't real reaches...

the only real surprise on them was ibaka

So i don't really see how the evolution of OKC has anything to do with a different approach.

As for Morey... his ability to hype and churn players is his real skill... at the end of the day his only real home run is Parsons...

They only got Harden because of the LT (OKC never trades Harden otherwise). ... now you could say he got the best of Presti... but which GM has ever really lost a trade when he gets the best player in the deal?

At the end of the day you aren't gonna win chips without a superstar... doesn't take an analytics guy to identify superstars

Big Zo
03-28-2014, 09:29 PM
Chuck still wouldn't win a ring in this era.

Crackadalic
03-28-2014, 09:31 PM
Is isn't a talent issue. Injuries killed a lot of teams.

To me it's not enough talent spread out.

Hawkeye15
03-28-2014, 09:34 PM
ok ... but those teams moves aren't rocket science...

Durant was the clear second pick in that draft ... i had him 1

Westbrook / Harden weren't real reaches...

the only real surprise on them was ibaka

So i don't really see how the evolution of OKC has anything to do with a different approach.

As for Morey... his ability to hype and churn players is his real skill... at the end of the day his only real home run is Parsons...

They only got Harden because of the LT (OKC never trades Harden otherwise). ... now you could say he got the best of Presti... but which GM has ever really lost a trade when he gets the best player in the deal?

At the end of the day you aren't gonna win chips without a superstar... doesn't take an analytics guy to identify superstars

Harden was a reach. And Morey built roster flexibility with like 19 straight #14 picks.

My only point is, stats guys are starting to flood FO's. We will see how that ends up.

I don't disagree you can't win without a superstar. But its up to a GM to surround them with the best possible talent, and I tend to side with the analytic guys when it comes to that.

Tony_Starks
03-28-2014, 09:46 PM
who are the quality teams built with stat guys? What i mean is what teams have completely abandoned middling, rebuilt, and become contenders?

People like Hollinger who took a top 5 team and transformed them to just bad enough to miss the playoffs but just good enough not to get a high pick....

Shammyguy3
03-28-2014, 10:56 PM
People like Hollinger who took a top 5 team and transformed them to just bad enough to miss the playoffs but just good enough not to get a high pick....

Lol at thinking the Grizzlies falling down in the standings is because of Hollinger. Randolph sucks now, he aged fast as ****. Plus the West simply got better + Grizzlies didn't have cap flexibility to keep up with teams (GSW signing Iggy, HOU signing Dwight)

Also - the Grizzlies were 5th in the West, but they still weren't better than the Heat. So at best they were 6th.

Bruno
03-28-2014, 11:04 PM
he's referring to the level of competition on a two battle front. parity, controlled by owners and GMs and personal competition between players. parity has always been poor, or at least most of the time- but player to player competition isn't what it use to be. never before have so many players decided to consciously team together, are buddies, or 'train together' (while on opposing teams) in the off season.

ThuglifeJ
03-28-2014, 11:21 PM
he's referring to the level of competition on a two battle front. parity, controlled by owners and GMs and personal competition between players. parity has always been poor, or at least most of the time- but player to player competition isn't what it use to be. never before have so many players decided to consciously team together, are buddies, or 'train together' (while on opposing teams) in the off season.

A reason why Jordan and Kobe are so impactful. They aren't afraid to spice things up, put more pressure and intensity on a game. Kids act so soft nowadays

Chrisclover
03-29-2014, 12:19 AM
I used to have an entire book of garbage Charles spewed. I appreciate his brutal honesty at times, but he also says so many things that are just downright stupid.

The league has a ton of talent, as much as at any time. Its just that there were injuries, and parity sucks right now. The talent level is as high as ever though.
Yea. But some players are just too disappointing, like several No. 1 picks --Oden, Bennett, some scandals like Kobe raping, Bynum and JR doing antics...I think some behavioral restriction clauses need to be added.

Shammyguy3
03-29-2014, 12:42 AM
A reason why Jordan and Kobe are so impactful. They aren't afraid to spice things up, put more pressure and intensity on a game. Kids act so soft nowadays

Do players like Lebron and Durant not put intensity into a game and not put pressure on the other team in a variety of facets?

Being "soft" is such a piece of ****. Just because you can't chokehold someone as they drive to the hoops and then throw them down on the ground doesn't mean the league or any of its players are soft dude.

Bostonjorge
03-29-2014, 12:46 AM
I don't think the NBA sucks. All the posts about teams and players not being as good is true. But we have some good story's that been playing out. Before the season started we all wanted to see Miami vs Indiana. Seeing what Durant can do with Westbrook back. Seeing the clippers and warriors take a huge step into true contenders. Brooklyn going from dead horse to dark horse.

They have been some bad stuff to like cry baby Dwight being on the verge of being forgotten. Injuries to rose and especially kobe. Melo not being in the playoffs. The eastern conference.

Come playoff time we are going to get some good basketball and I personally can't wait to watch.

DoMeFavors
03-29-2014, 12:56 AM
I agree its soft, stupid sleeved jerseys, no rivalries, most of the teams have horrible records. BLowouts nearly every night. Its just a boring league right now.

ShockerArt
03-29-2014, 12:58 AM
The NBA is fine. There are two all-time greats playing at their peak and plenty of 2nd tier talent in the league right now. Once the playoffs start, people will shut up and enjoy the product. The playoffs this year will be very entertaining, especially in the West.

DoMeFavors
03-29-2014, 12:59 AM
I think it has to do more with the usual suspects having terrible seasons (Lakers, Knicks, Celtics).

that happened in 05-07 and those seasons were actually good.

Lakers + Giants
03-29-2014, 01:53 AM
that happened in 05-07 and those seasons were actually good.

Spurs won in 05 and 07, Heat won in 06. Pretty interesting how those 2 are the ones favored to win it all this year.

effen5
03-29-2014, 02:22 AM
Barkley is a joke. He just hates it because it's more of an intellectual game, a passing game, a shooting game, and not the rough and rugged game of the ugly 90s. Boo-hoo.

Have you watched your team? The things you mention are none of the things the Knicks does.

effen5
03-29-2014, 02:27 AM
The lack of rivalry is why I think the NBA is boring. I honestly haven't watched a game that hasn't included the Bulls in the last two years.

AddiX
03-29-2014, 02:30 AM
the game has become more intellectual is why. Being average is the kiss of death in the NBA, and front offices started to realize that over the past decade.

As front offices have moved away from employing ex-players, and instead hiring stats guys to build rosters, this is what we get guys. Either get onboard, or watch something else.

That doesn't have anything do with it, these teams just don't try unless they have a star on there roster.

Even if there using a stat guy, that doesnt change the fact there teams suck and they lack talent.

VendettaRed07
03-29-2014, 02:40 AM
NBA isn't at the worst its ever been. No chance.

But it DOES suck right now. The entire east is terrible. The west is exciting... But honestly I can't tell if the fact that the spurs are still tearing up the league and the number 1 seed in the better conference because of how great they are, or because maybe even the vastly superior west is also pretty overrated/average.

ThuglifeJ
03-29-2014, 03:31 AM
NBA isn't at the worst its ever been. No chance.

But it DOES suck right now. The entire east is terrible. The west is exciting... But honestly I can't tell if the fact that the spurs are still tearing up the league and the number 1 seed in the better conference because of how great they are, or because maybe even the vastly superior west is also pretty overrated/average.

As great as Duncan, Parker , ginobili were back in the day they absolutely should not be leading the league still..how has no new players teams or coach come along to make those guys feel washed up and need to retire asap...? They probably laugh at the fact there hasnt been any new superstars or dominant big to come in and wipe them out of relevancy. Fricken DERRICK FISHER STILL GETS PAYED. And not even as a 12 man on roster he even plays still! There's no rush to retire because there's no overwhelming new talent arising..like there was in each past generation.

I just don't see that competitive edge. Not talking no more hard fouls, that's fine we've moved past that but there is little competitive edge. Players don't give a **** when they lose. No fricken passion for the sport spoiled ****s

John Walls Era
03-29-2014, 05:57 AM
HOw can anyone say this before the playoffs start? The western playoffs is going to be fun to watch. The East might have some surprises (Pacers don't look unbeatable).

EvanTurner
03-29-2014, 06:28 AM
The eastern conferance is the blackeye for the league. You got indy, miami, wizards. Everybody else arguably sucks. Hopefully that begins to change next year with how deep and talented the draft is. Teams like the bucks should get a star, sixers should get a star. Pretty much everybody top 12 should get some great talent.

EvanTurner
03-29-2014, 06:30 AM
Yea. But some players are just too disappointing, like several No. 1 picks --Oden, Bennett, some scandals like Kobe raping, Bynum and JR doing antics...I think some behavioral restriction clauses need to be added.
Your ppst is absolutely clueless. **** has nothing to do with the quality of basketball. Please be quiet.

Chrisclover
03-29-2014, 06:44 AM
Your ppst is absolutely clueless. **** has nothing to do with the quality of basketball. Please be quiet.
I forgot to reason it.
Off-court issues are impacting players 'on-court performance. See how Paul George gets in the vertex of his sexual scandals and people ascribe the worse record of pacers to him. And JR untied others 'shoelace, making himself having a worse reputation and adding insults to injuries for the struggling Knicks. He was very inconsistent and i think it has something to do with his bonehead behaviors.Bynum went bowling regardless of the opposition from doctors thus swindle money from the 76ers by not playing a single game.

Chrisclover
03-29-2014, 06:49 AM
Harden went to the night pub during 2012 finals and got so indulged. He misbehaved in the later games.
At least this is what has been reported rather than made up by me. There must be some sort of positive correlations between off -court behaviors and on -court performance. I said it.

Chrisclover
03-29-2014, 07:44 AM
As great as Duncan, Parker , ginobili were back in the day they absolutely should not be leading the league still..how has no new players teams or coach come along to make those guys feel washed up and need to retire asap...? They probably laugh at the fact there hasnt been any new superstars or dominant big to come in and wipe them out of relevancy. Fricken DERRICK FISHER STILL GETS PAYED. And not even as a 12 man on roster he even plays still! There's no rush to retire because there's no overwhelming new talent arising..like there was in each past generation.

I just don't see that competitive edge. Not talking no more hard fouls, that's fine we've moved past that but there is little competitive edge. Players don't give a **** when they lose. No fricken passion for the sport spoiled ****s
Fisher is a sly guy who plays with brain not muscle and speed.
Actually the PG position is very crowded in the NBA, which IMO is the deepest one out of 5 positions.We get a slew of young stars Erving, Rubio, lillard, Dragic and so forth. Fisher stays as an important rotation player for several reasons.First, Thunder 's cap space is limited thus has no power to attract young talents. Second, Fisher is still serviceable with championship experience and clutch shooting ability. But with that being said, he will retire soon ,probably next season.

torocan
03-29-2014, 08:00 AM
I think the problem isn't the NBA as a whole, I think it's a combination between the Lottery system , play off construction, the salary cap and max salary cap.

The East and West are horribly imbalanced.

If you're in the East, you're forced to watch abysmal basketball for most of the teams. There's no suspense in terms of the play offs. The #9 team in the West would currently be the 3rd seed in the East and that makes basketball fans aware that the play offs are going to be a joke.

In the West, the conference is as stacked as it's ever been. And it's frustrating as heck to know that some really good teams that deserve to be play off teams are going to get frozen out and knocked out by other really good teams while Miami and Indiana are getting the equivalent of a "bye".

Toss in that the Lottery system is making tanking an art form and the system reinforces itself.

Look at the records. If you seeded by record, the top 10/16 teams are in the West. However, look at how the lottery actually works. So you've got 2 teams with losing records that are going to be in the play offs, at the cost of 2 teams that *should* be in the play offs.

You look at that and say "not a big deal", however the way the lottery system works, those 2 teams that probably should *not* be in the play offs are frozen out of a lottery draft pick, while WC teams like Dallas and Minnesota will still get a lottery pick.

2 teams that don't need the help are going to get better. 2 teams that *still* need the help are being penalized for not being quite as much of a sucking team in a massively sucking conference. If you're a Charlotte fan I'm sure you're happy to be in the play offs, but do you *really* feel like you're so good that you don't deserve some lottery help?

Finally, you have the salary cap + max salary cap working in combination to create super concentrated talent. Salary caps in and of themselves are fine in that they enforce spending parity. However, when you *also* cap a player salary, then the penalty to a player for NOT "super stacking" talent is too big.

If you want to win a championship, you need a ton of talent. That's a given. However, the financial rewards of winning championships can be very large for a superstar. Lebron makes more per year in endorsements than he does in salary. So if you're a Superstar, the salary penalty for stacking a team is too SMALL when weighed against the potential earnings off the court.

The ONLY way you fix that is by massively increasing the Max salary for superstars or eliminating the max salary completely. So either give franchises a "franchise player" tag that lets them pay a Superstar appropriately, or remove the salary cap for players so that teams can choose to offer Lebron a huge contract like $30-40M. At least THAT way Lebron isn't giving up $5M per year for a shot at $100M in endorsements, but is instead giving up $25M per year for a shot at $100M in endorsements.

If Bosh could have made $30M per year in Toronto, does he *really* go to Miami for $16M? Does Lebron give up $40M per year in Cleveland to go to Miami for $16M?

Pay these guys what they're worth and you fix a LOT. At a minimum you get a heck of a lot more parity since most teams won't be able to afford 2 Superstars unless one of them is home grown and developed (bird rights).

bledrules
03-29-2014, 08:41 AM
And Barkley would be 100% correct,players these days just don't care about winning all they care about is the almighty dollar and its a real shame

king4day
03-29-2014, 11:27 AM
I completely disagree. What has changed? There isn't parity due to lack of elite stars. There's tanking every year because teams know they have to improve somehow.
The West playoffs will be pretty damn good and there's a good chance the East will at least have a solid set of second round matchups.

This is the first time in I don't know how long where more than 2 or 3 teams have a shot at winning it all.

bledrules
03-29-2014, 11:35 AM
I completely disagree. What has changed? There isn't parity due to lack of elite stars. There's tanking every year because teams know they have to improve somehow.
The West playoffs will be pretty damn good and there's a good chance the East will at least have a solid set of second round matchups.

This is the first time in I don't know how long where more than 2 or 3 teams have a shot at winning it all.

NBA players used to care about winning that would be the biggest change and Barkley knows it

koreancabbage
03-29-2014, 12:27 PM
knee jerk reaction, high profile classic teams doing bad (Knicks, Lakers, Celtics) having most fans in those big markets not caring as much - not a coincidence here.

League is talented as ever. if you say otherwise, you should come out of your box and get some sun.

and based on the circumstances in the East, i don't think you've seen that many teams in once conference doing that bad and the hype of the draft that is coming up with some potential franchise players. this is definitely a one-of moment.

koreancabbage
03-29-2014, 12:29 PM
NBA players used to care about winning that would be the biggest change and Barkley knows it

i would agree with this somehow- but don't tell me NBA players don't want to win - because i'm sure every time they take the floor, they want to win.

FlashBolt
03-29-2014, 12:29 PM
He is so wrong. Superteams are just more developed than ever and it's going to take more than just one season to get things right for a particular team. I think next year will be much better as the draft will certainly shake and create a lot of buzz around. Heck, I think West has been more competitive than ever. There are four or five teams that can seriously escape from that conference. As for East, yeah, it's a bit disappointing but the superstars of those respective teams are all under rebuilding mode.

ztilzer31
03-29-2014, 12:51 PM
NBA players used to care about winning that would be the biggest change and Barkley knows it

That's funny because Barkley never cared about winning.

Chronz
03-29-2014, 12:59 PM
Well its not the 80's where talent is abundant and teams are minimal thats for sure, but it cant be worse than the 70's and is prolly on par with most of the mid90's/early 2k era. How would you even back this up?

bledrules
03-29-2014, 01:05 PM
i would agree with this somehow- but don't tell me NBA players don't want to win - because i'm sure every time they take the floor, they want to win.
As long as they get their paycheck they couldn't care less,tools like Kobe and LBJ have destroyed the NBA

3RDASYSTEM
03-29-2014, 01:05 PM
I forgot to reason it.
Off-court issues are impacting players 'on-court performance. See how Paul George gets in the vertex of his sexual scandals and people ascribe the worse record of pacers to him. And JR untied others 'shoelace, making himself having a worse reputation and adding insults to injuries for the struggling Knicks. He was very inconsistent and i think it has something to do with his bonehead behaviors.Bynum went bowling regardless of the opposition from doctors thus swindle money from the 76ers by not playing a single game.

Off/on court is what a player is both so of course both will affect his life and if its personal I thought the hardwood was the way to get away from the personal probs that GEORGE has with the catfish and JR SMITH was said to be on coke during playoffs? so his shoelace act was just on par with the so called coke using and BYNUM with the bowling act, it was his choice off the court being injured just like it was his choice to play injured on court

players have had off court issues since the merger, go back and check how they would do it and its all the same cycle of today, everything is recycled eventually in his story

I just think the mental was tougher/stronger back then when compared to today's athlete so you handle things differently and weaker like they do today

D-Leethal
03-29-2014, 01:21 PM
I don't care about the talent as much as the quality of game play. Constant whistles, superstar calls, tick tack fouls, lack of toughness and aggression, every rule in the book bent to favor the offense. Footwork in the midrange has been eliminated as the "more efficient way" to play is driving full speed into a defender and putting up a weak *** shot attempt with a 0 chance of going in and getting yourself two FTs. Its too easy to initiate contact and get 2 points on a non-basketball play, a non-legitimate scoring play. Its an ugly game. Its a soft game. I appreciate the finesse aspect of basketball but only as the ying to the tougness yang which has been eliminated. The parity and the mentality of the players to go try and create the next superteam via FA is only a part of it - but thats sucks too.

P&GRealist
03-29-2014, 01:33 PM
He's right, ever since the 3 amigos came together 4 yrs ago, the league has been utter **** as a whole.

Chronz
03-29-2014, 01:38 PM
He's right, ever since the 3 amigos came together 4 yrs ago, the league has been utter **** as a whole.But it was fine the minute before that, amirite?

Hawkeye15
03-29-2014, 01:57 PM
best star duo since Magic/Bird. Western Conference on pace to challenge for most total wins by a playoff conference ever, with potentially one of the best western conference playoffs ever. Ratings at all time highs the over the last 2 years. We have the best shooting/rebounding player ever, we have maybe the best perimeter shooter ever, both in their primes. We have the best crop of PG's ever playing.

Yeah, sounds like its a crappy league to me. If some of you don't enjoy it because you don't like the Heat, or your team is down after being up for 30 years, so be it. Your missing out.

And Chuck just sounds like yet another star who is putting down the modern era because he can't get over his own.

ThuglifeJ
03-29-2014, 02:07 PM
Hawkeye, must you repeat yourself. We know your stance. And why. You keep posting the same thing.. To make it look like more people are disagreeing?

P&GRealist
03-29-2014, 02:31 PM
But it was fine the minute before that, amirite?

You said it, not me.

torocan
03-29-2014, 02:42 PM
But it was fine the minute before that, amirite?

It had never happened in that way before.

That said I don't think it started with Miami. I think the whole Celtics big 3 created a bad precedent that was only made possible through the CBA and max salary caps. While the stacking of the Celtics was bad, it was a bit more palatable as it was done through trades and drafting. However, that it was even possible to construct a big 3 like the Celtics was something that never should have been allowed to happen (no offense to Celtics fans).

If you had higher max salary or a franchise tag, the Celtics big 3 never happens. IE, no Miami. Miami was just the most recent and most visible result of that disturbing trend and punctuated the core problem, which is there is not enough financial incentive for Superstars to NOT chase a ring by stacking their teams.

The end result is that even with Good rosters, teams like Minnesota or OKC will have problems holding onto their talent. The Superstars will be expecting Championship or bust... and they don't care how they get there.

SoFreshNsoClean
03-29-2014, 04:43 PM
Flopping is another issue especially when James Harden and Durant get to the line as much as they do. The NBA has regressed.

The early 2000's when A.I., Dirk, Shaq, Kobe, Nash, Dirk, Pierce etc were in the their primes was great imo

Don't forget the Kings were contenders then as well. C-Webb, Vlade, Bibby...

SoFreshNsoClean
03-29-2014, 04:52 PM
I agree with the notion in the NBA as a whole is "bad" right now. Its not that there isn't good basketball to watch, but long time fans of the game can see how predictable the league is getting. Flopping, no defense, refs still not accountable, big time free agents always sign with big market teams, the same teams suck every year, sleeved jerseys, corny marketing, the list goes on. Even Gary Payton was being interviewed a couple months ago and said he only has respect for a few PG's (Rondo, Parker, and CP3)...he also said fans (casual) want to see players drop 60 versus real competition and defense. He attributed that to fans who play 2k (lol).

I would link the interview but I believe I got in trouble for that earlier.

MTar786
03-29-2014, 05:02 PM
shaq in 2000 was better than durant and james. i don't know what you're talking about hawk eye. and then you have duncan and kg who i would say duncan was almost as good or maybe even equal to lebron is now and kg in those days was just as good as kd is right now. I think kd will eventually pass kg tho.
then you have kobe and tmac who you can also compare to a lebron durant rivalry.
then you have webber, dirk, pierce, vince,ray allen, ai, kidd and payton. who were better than ur cp3s, harden, west brooks, dwights, blakes, loves and roses.

kobe, better than any of those names
pierce and harden maybe a wash
tmac better than all those guys too.
kidd a better all time pg than any of those names too.
payton a wash with cp3
webber and dirk who were leap years ahead of dwight lolol and we'll still have to see how far along love and blake can come thru before assessing this.

now please don't get me started with the competition for these names I'm about to mention


sheed
nash
zo
peja
yao
shareef abdur rahim
bibby
jamison
brand
latter years of karl malone
pippen
grant hill (when healthy)
marbury
francis
mutombo
b-davis

and I'm sure a lot of names i can't think of off the top of my head.

JasonJohnHorn
03-29-2014, 05:03 PM
Winning percentage tiers for the last 20 seasons

2014: 9 teams sub-40%, 3 sub-30%, 1 sub-20%
2013: 10 teams sub-40%, 3 sub-30%, 0 sub-20%
2012: 10 teams sub-40%, 1 sub-30%, 1 sub-20%
2011: 8 teams sub-40%, 6 sub-30%, 0 sub-20%
2010: 10 teams sub-40%, 2 sub-30%, 2 sub-20%
2009: 9 teams sub-40%, 6 sub-30%, 0 sub-20%
2008: 9 teams sub-40%, 6 sub-30%, 1 sub-20%
2007: 10 teams sub-40%, 2 sub-30%, 0 sub-20%
2006: 7 teams sub-40%, 2 sub-30%, 0 sub-20%
2005: 8 teams sub-40%, 3 sub-30%, 1 sub-20%
2004: 8 teams sub-40%, 2 sub-30%, 0 sub-20%
2003: 7 teams sub-40%, 3 sub-30%, 0 sub-20%
2002: 8 teams sub-40%, 3 sub-30%, 0 sub-20%
2001: 9 teams sub-40%, 4 sub-30%, 1 sub-20%
2000: 8 teams sub-40%, 4 sub-30%, 1 sub-20%
1999: 8 teams sub-40%, 4 sub-30%, 2 sub-20%
1998: 8 teams sub-40%, 6 sub-30%, 2 sub-20%
1997: 10 teams sub-40%, 6 sub-30%, 2 sub-20%
1996: 9 teams sub-40%, 3 sub-30%, 1 sub-20%
1995: 8 teams sub-40%, 4 sub-30%, 0 sub-20%

These percentages might works as an argument for parity, but they don't work as an argument for quality.

I've seen seasons in the 90's where NY, MIA, INDY and CHI all had teams that would destroy any current eastern conference teams.

In the west, there were teams like Seattle, PHO, HOU, and POR that would have like been able to easily beat any team in the east today outside of OKC and SAS (perhaps LAC would put up a fight).

If you have a whole bunch of average teams, there WILL be a champion, and there WILL be teams that rise to the top, but it doesn't mean they are good teams, it just means they aren't as bad.

Now that said, I don't think Barkley's comments are fair either. I think there have been a lot of injuries that last few seasons that have spoiled the competitiveness in the league (CHI and BK are missing their best offensive players and NY saw an EXTREMELY diverse and talented offensive plays (Amar'e) suffer from injuries and fail to return to his old form. If injuries weren't an issue for these guys, the league would be a lot better right now.


Also, as much as I prefer the 90's to today, LBJ and Durant would have both been among the best players in the league if they were playing in the 80's/90's. There are some amazing talents in the league right now.

JeremiahWing
03-29-2014, 05:12 PM
Couldn't agree more. It's especially true in regards to the lack of talented big men. The 4's and 5's of today are pathetic.

JeremiahWing
03-29-2014, 05:14 PM
Hawkeye, must you repeat yourself. We know your stance. And why. You keep posting the same thing.. To make it look like more people are disagreeing?

I've never seen a mod behave this way. Is anyone doing anything about this?

EvanTurner
03-29-2014, 05:40 PM
One thing barkley is right about and alot of older guys are rigbt about is supertars wanting to team up instead of knocking each other off. Thats why i love the bulls there the only team like **** you other teams we aint your friends during the season and we going to hard foul your ***, even you lebron.

EvanTurner
03-29-2014, 05:49 PM
I've never seen a mod behave this way. Is anyone doing anything about this?

What are you using estrogen? O o he didnt even say anything bad. Something is wrong with you so call males now days. Very effiminate

ThuglifeJ
03-29-2014, 06:57 PM
shaq in 2000 was better than durant and james. i don't know what you're talking about hawk eye. and then you have duncan and kg who i would say duncan was almost as good or maybe even equal to lebron is now and kg in those days was just as good as kd is right now. I think kd will eventually pass kg tho.
then you have kobe and tmac who you can also compare to a lebron durant rivalry.
then you have webber, dirk, pierce, vince,ray allen, ai, kidd and payton. who were better than ur cp3s, harden, west brooks, dwights, blakes, loves and roses.

kobe, better than any of those names
pierce and harden maybe a wash
tmac better than all those guys too.
kidd a better all time pg than any of those names too.
payton a wash with cp3
webber and dirk who were leap years ahead of dwight lolol and we'll still have to see how far along love and blake can come thru before assessing this.

now please don't get me started with the competition for these names I'm about to mention


sheed
nash
zo
peja
yao
shareef abdur rahim
bibby
jamison
brand
latter years of karl malone
pippen
grant hill (when healthy)
marbury
francis
mutombo
b-davis

and I'm sure a lot of names i can't think of off the top of my head.

I agree completely. Shaq and Duncan were facing greater competition too.

Don't forget Amare, Marion either..
Kenyon Martin was insane too (gets forgotten)
Reggie miller for some years
Billups
Ben Wallace..
Jermaine O Neal
Van Exel
Jordan on the Wizards
Vancouver Gasol
Cassel, Sprewell, Houston
Finley
Artest

Soo many damn good players..way more than today's game. Instead of a guy like Sprewell level player on your team it's a Matt Barnes. That's how I feel it is

Hawkeye15
03-29-2014, 07:47 PM
Hawkeye, must you repeat yourself. We know your stance. And why. You keep posting the same thing.. To make it look like more people are disagreeing?

you're not repeating yourself?

Hawkeye15
03-29-2014, 07:52 PM
shaq in 2000 was better than durant and james. i don't know what you're talking about hawk eye.

not really, but as I said pages ago, he is the only guy in the 2000's who stacks up to these 2.


and then you have duncan and kg who i would say duncan was almost as good or maybe even equal to lebron is now and kg in those days was just as good as kd is right now.

Duncan is a top 10 player ever, KG a top 20 player ever. But neither has put up the seasons LeBron has, or Durant is doing now. We are literally looking at arguably the greatest 2 year period in statistical history for 2 players at the same time.


I think kd will eventually pass kg tho.
then you have kobe and tmac who you can also compare to a lebron durant rivalry.

Kobe isnt on the same level as LeBron or Durant statistically. All he has at this point is career resume. TMac ended up hurt, which is a bummer, because he was actually a complete stud in the early part of the decade.


then you have webber, dirk, pierce, vince,ray allen, ai, kidd and payton. who were better than ur cp3s, harden, west brooks, dwights, blakes, loves and roses.

How so? 2nd tier stars will always be around.


kobe, better than any of those names
pierce and harden maybe a wash
tmac better than all those guys too.
kidd a better all time pg than any of those names too.
payton a wash with cp3

But not really


webber and dirk who were leap years ahead of dwight lolol and we'll still have to see how far along love and blake can come thru before assessing this.

now please don't get me started with the competition for these names I'm about to mention


sheed
nash
zo
peja
yao
shareef abdur rahim
bibby
jamison
brand
latter years of karl malone
pippen
grant hill (when healthy)
marbury
francis
mutombo
b-davis

and I'm sure a lot of names i can't think of off the top of my head.

see above. Perennial all star, 2nd tier stars are always around.

Point is, anyone who is saying the league isn't as good now, is just not giving it enough thought. The NBA really hasn't had peaks and valley's of talent level for over 35 years. If you think it has, you are being biased in what team you follow, or wish to lose.

Hawkeye15
03-29-2014, 07:54 PM
One thing barkley is right about and alot of older guys are rigbt about is supertars wanting to team up instead of knocking each other off. Thats why i love the bulls there the only team like **** you other teams we aint your friends during the season and we going to hard foul your ***, even you lebron.

welcome to the new America guys, where people who have come out of school in the last 10 years will work for 5 companies or more before they retire. People act like athletes are any different than the general population outside of them being genetically superior at a game...

ThuglifeJ
03-29-2014, 08:48 PM
Lol I've given it plenty of thought. I'm sure others and Barkley has as well. The more I think about it or compare to other eras the more it pisses me off no matter what angle you look at it.

Get outa here with this historical stats crap as well..Tmac or any past scorer would excel in today's league where you can get to the line as you please or get touch fouls..the lack of competition (huge reason why today's league sucks) contributes to lebron and Durants historical stats, for sure.

What on earth would Shaqs numbers be today's game? Oh my goodness. You need to take that into account

Hawkeye15
03-29-2014, 09:05 PM
Lol I've given it plenty of thought. I'm sure others and Barkley has as well. The more I think about it or compare to other eras the more it pisses me off no matter what angle you look at it.

Get outa here with this historical stats crap as well..Tmac or any past scorer would excel in today's league where you can get to the line as you please or get touch fouls..the lack of competition (huge reason why today's league sucks) contributes to lebron and Durants historical stats, for sure.

What on earth would Shaqs numbers be today's game? Oh my goodness. You need to take that into account

you realize how idiotic that statement alone is, right? Barkley literally has no filter. Half the crap that comes out of his mouth is hilarious, most of it overreaction and not true. But he is a character. Always has been, hence why he has a job in front of the camera.

You are 26? You sound like my dad. Everyone from yesterday would be soooooooooooooo much better now.

Sure...

ThuglifeJ
03-29-2014, 09:42 PM
Well I guess you do have a point I have NO IDEA what Shaq would do against today's abundance of elite Centers. Yes I'm only 26, like I said - I have no reason to be biased against today's NBA since I'm still youngish.

ThuglifeJ
03-29-2014, 09:46 PM
Sounds more like you can't stand to hear everyone say how bad today's league is since its something your Dad would say..than you ACTUALLY think its a good product. Thing is people of all ages feel this way. I'm sure if kids got some highlights of 2000 they'd feel the same way too..

I'm having a better time watching march madness than this weak game we have to watch..and i never liked college hoops much. At least its competitive and they care.

Hawkeye15
03-29-2014, 09:56 PM
Sounds more like you can't stand to hear everyone say how bad today's league is since its something your Dad would say..than you ACTUALLY think its a good product. Thing is people of all ages feel this way. I'm sure if kids got some highlights of 2000 they'd feel the same way too..

I'm having a better time watching march madness than this weak game we have to watch..and i never liked college hoops much. At least its competitive and they care.

nah, I just have a problem with people saying how bad todays league is because their favorite players are not the dominant players playing. I mean, nearly every poster that has agreed with Barkley is guilty of this.

But hey, who am I do disagree with the non-filter Chuckster, right? Only been watching since before you were born and have studied advanced stats...

ghettosean
03-29-2014, 10:29 PM
nah, I just have a problem with people saying how bad todays league is because their favorite players are not the dominant players playing. I mean, nearly every poster that has agreed with Barkley is guilty of this.

But hey, who am I do disagree with the non-filter Chuckster, right? Only been watching since before you were born and have studied advanced stats...

I hate when people discredit OPINION in this way it's a disgrace and pathetic.

As for what Barkley said he's right todays league is the worst it's been and this is mostly based on the way the game is played today... Did anyone see Lance Stephenson get ejected a few nights ago with heat vs indy... He gets ejected for Wade holding up his arms after talking trash FOR TALKING :facepalm: I remember when ejections were saved for plays that were used to cause physical harm to a player not because he said something that might hurt another players feelings...

They are going to a new level of soft these days!!!


i mean things are beyond pathetic in todays game and advanced stats or not with all the ticky tack touch fouls today greats from the past would dominate todays game. I'm surprised this is even being debated.

Hawk stop talking about advanced stats it doesn't tell the story/comparison of the piss poor soft game of today to other eras. This is the softest the league has ever been bar none.

Hawkeye15
03-29-2014, 10:42 PM
reading through this thread, the pro-Barkley people are LeBron haters and Laker fans mostly.

telling..

5ass
03-29-2014, 10:50 PM
reading through this thread, the pro-Barkley people are LeBron haters and Laker fans mostly.

telling..

Same old song and dance. Anything to try and discredit LeBron.

Chrisclover
03-30-2014, 12:29 AM
When the superstars were not gathering to rush a championship, it might be better for the development of the league.

Chrisclover
03-30-2014, 12:33 AM
i would agree with this somehow- but don't tell me NBA players don't want to win - because i'm sure every time they take the floor, they want to win.
Everyone wants to win, otherwise they do not get paid well. The difference is whether they are willing to have a pay cut to stay and help the team. Harden leaving the thunder was a case that he wanted money more than winning.

ThuglifeJ
03-30-2014, 12:39 AM
nah, I just have a problem with people saying how bad todays league is because their favorite players are not the dominant players playing. I mean, nearly every poster that has agreed with Barkley is guilty of this.

But hey, who am I do disagree with the non-filter Chuckster, right? Only been watching since before you were born and have studied advanced stats...

Now you're just being ridiculous. So every single one of us poster's don't like the NBA and think it's a crap product nowadays (even though this is a common belief as you can see) because our favorite player (who'm you all know everyone's) isn't in their prime anymore? We're not all that irrational.
I was obsessed with Penny Hardaway and Shaq in Orlando..Pippen was my favorite player when I was a little little kid..Loved loved Jordan like everyone else as a kid. I had no problems moving on to VC, Tmac, Kidd when they were done... I love Curry now, he sure seems to be pretty dominant offensively imo.. and I don't hold any bitterness (or whatever you're assuming here) to the NBA because Tmac, Kidd retired and VC is old.. That has nothing to do with my stance. If anything it's just more sad that the players nowadays are harder to like for the many reasons...like the flopping, not showing much enthusiasm or passion, un-charismatic, and just not that good.


Just because Chuck says ridiculous things on TNT for fun doesn't mean he isn't smart or knows what he's talking about at times. This was during the NCAA TOURNAMENT anyways he's not allowed to be a complete bonehead on there like he is on TNT halftime. They were asking him about Parker entering the draft and he was saying this and how he shouldn't because the league sucks nowadays. He said this earlier in the year as well.

Chrisclover
03-30-2014, 12:39 AM
when we talk about the regression of new talents, we have to know that part of which is about the big men. There are fewer monsters than ever. Besides Howard, how many traditional centers who can both offend and defend well are here ?Hibbert at many case is just a defensive anchor, Noah does everything but not so phenomenal offensively. ..We need more people like Shaq, Wilt.

Hawkeye15
03-30-2014, 12:44 AM
Now you're just being ridiculous. So every single one of us poster's don't like the NBA and think it's a crap product nowadays (even though this is a common belief as you can see) because our favorite player (who'm you all know everyone's) isn't in their prime anymore? We're not all that irrational.
I was obsessed with Penny Hardaway and Shaq in Orlando..Pippen was my favorite player when I was a little little kid..Loved loved Jordan like everyone else as a kid. I had no problems moving on to VC, Tmac, Kidd when they were done... I love Curry now, he sure seems to be pretty dominant offensively imo.. and I don't hold any bitterness (or whatever you're assuming here) to the NBA because Tmac, Kidd retired and VC is old.. That has nothing to do with my stance. If anything it's just more sad that the players nowadays are harder to like for the many reasons...like the flopping, not showing much enthusiasm or passion, un-charismatic, and just not that good.


Just because Chuck says ridiculous things on TNT for fun doesn't mean he isn't smart or knows what he's talking about at times. This was during the NCAA TOURNAMENT anyways he's not allowed to be a complete bonehead on there like he is on TNT halftime. They were asking him about Parker entering the draft and he was saying this and how he shouldn't because the league sucks nowadays. He said this earlier in the year as well.

nah. You get your opinion. You are leaching onto a fliterless ex-player who agrees with you.

We all have our opinion. Here is a suggestion. If the NBA doesn't entertain you, or anyone anymore, stop watching.

Ratings suggest otherwise...

Hawkeye15
03-30-2014, 12:45 AM
when we talk about the regression of new talents, we have to know that part of which is about the big men. There are fewer monsters than ever. Besides Howard, how many traditional centers who can both offend and defend well are here ?Hibbert at many case is just a defensive anchor, Noah does everything but not so phenomenal offensively. ..We need more people like Shaq, Wilt.

fewer great big men (don't buy it btw), but exponentially better PG play.

Chrisclover
03-30-2014, 12:52 AM
fewer great big men (don't buy it btw), but exponentially better PG play.
Yea, PG position is probably the deepest league-wide.

tdg823
03-30-2014, 01:10 AM
League is more athletic, possibly more skilled, but that's debatable and more heavily analyzed. It seems at the same time to be mentally weaker as a whole, softer, less intense, less fundamentally sound.

Really a moot point to argue though, because it's inconclusive. I guess that's human nature and the point of this whole site, but man y'all do know you'll never convince anyone that thinks to the contrary right? I mean this isn't a 2+2 thing where you can lay at a few sticks and prove who's right.
Interested to hear the case for today's big men being comparable to the those of recent era's. Hawkeye do you really think the quality holds up today? Before I personally dismiss that one, I'd like to hear a rationale if you have the inclination to explain it... Not meant sarcastically, honest curiosity.

effen5
03-30-2014, 01:56 AM
League is more athletic, possibly more skilled, but that's debatable and more heavily analyzed. It seems at the same time to be mentally weaker as a whole, softer, less intense, less fundamentally sound.

Really a moot point to argue though, because it's inconclusive. I guess that's human nature and the point of this whole site, but man y'all do know you'll never convince anyone that thinks to the contrary right? I mean this isn't a 2+2 thing where you can lay at a few sticks and prove who's right.
Interested to hear the case for today's big men being comparable to the those of recent era's. Hawkeye do you really think the quality holds up today? Before I personally dismiss that one, I'd like to hear a rationale if you have the inclination to explain it... Not meant sarcastically, honest curiosity.

League is more athletic, but outside of a small handful, the league is far from being skilled.

Oldmantrash
03-30-2014, 02:12 AM
Love the NBA now as much as ever.
Look forward to watching all the teams play.

I'm a hoop junkie, so maybe I'm a bad person to comment on this lol.

Give me any nba game, over any mlb game any day.

effen5
03-30-2014, 05:02 AM
Love the NBA now as much as ever.
Look forward to watching all the teams play.

I'm a hoop junkie, so maybe I'm a bad person to comment on this lol.

Give me any nba game, over any mlb game any day.

I used to be a huge basketball junkie as well but my interest in the NBA outside of my home team has gone completely down the drain. I no longer care to watch any other teams outside of the Bulls, and even with the Bulls my interest has gone down (mostly due to Rose being hurt...again...)

Ebbs
03-30-2014, 05:16 AM
I still don't get it.

Hawkeye is 100% right. Durant and Bron are having mythic seasons. Durant is having a better season than numerous Jordan prime years. LeBron is there as well poised for a 3peat run. The East is not good but go back and look at the Jason Kidd nets led teams and tell me you'd rather watch them than the current Heat and Pacerss.

The Jordan era is overrated due to Jordan. IMO after the bad boy pistons fell off the East didn't overly excite me. Jalen Rose / Reggie Miller pacers and Ewing Knicks were good and exciting but they weren't even better than Rose led Bulls in 2011, or the Celtivs in 2012. There is a ton of talent in the league right now even if it's stacked together. The West has been competitive every year since I started watching the game. Even though for over a decade only the Mavs, Lakers, or Spurs came out there were always good teams and injuries that muddied the waters.

People have this incessant need to defend the past due to a fear of losing those previous moments. But the previous moments right in front of you people...

Ebbs
03-30-2014, 05:17 AM
Love the NBA now as much as ever.
Look forward to watching all the teams play.

I'm a hoop junkie, so maybe I'm a bad person to comment on this lol.

Give me any nba game, over any mlb game any day.

Yes

effen5
03-30-2014, 05:21 AM
I still don't get it.

Hawkeye is 100% right. Durant and Bron are having mythic seasons. Durant is having a better season than numerous Jordan prime years. LeBron is there as well poised for a 3peat run. The East is not good but go back and look at the Jason Kidd nets led teams and tell me you'd rather watch them than the current Heat and Pacerss.

The Jordan era is overrated due to Jordan. IMO after the bad boy pistons fell off the East didn't overly excite me. Jalen Rose / Reggie Miller pacers and Ewing Knicks were good and exciting but they weren't even better than Rose led Bulls in 2011, or the Celtivs in 2012. There is a ton of talent in the league right now even if it's stacked together. The West has been competitive every year since I started watching the game. Even though for over a decade only the Mavs, Lakers, or Spurs came out there were always good teams and injuries that muddied the waters.

People have this incessant need to defend the past due to a fear of losing those previous moments. But the previous moments right in front of you people...

What? You don't think that the 90s Knicks would beat the 11 Bulls or the Celtics of 12? Are you ****in high? And hell no Jordan era was not overrated. The 90s had as much or even more talent than today, and a lot more skilled too and they were spread all over the league. Shawn Kemp and Gary Payton - Seattle, Karl Malone and John Stockton - Utah, Jordan and pippen - Bulls, Reggier Miller - Pacers, Tim Hardaway ZO - Miami, Penny and Shaq - Orlando, Thunder Dan, KJ, Barkley - Phoenix, Clyde and Hakeem - Rockets, Kevin Garnett, Stephan Marbury - Minnesota.... I mean these are HOFers we're talking about and they are spread all over the league...eastern and western conferences....it was competitive and there was a **** ton of rivalries too...

Ebbs
03-30-2014, 05:26 AM
I still don't get it.

Hawkeye is 100% right. Durant and Bron are having mythic seasons. Durant is having a better season than numerous Jordan prime years. LeBron is there as well poised for a 3peat run. The East is not good but go back and look at the Jason Kidd nets led teams and tell me you'd rather watch them than the current Heat and Pacerss.

The Jordan era is overrated due to Jordan. IMO after the bad boy pistons fell off the East didn't overly excite me. Jalen Rose / Reggie Miller pacers and Ewing Knicks were good and exciting but they weren't even better than Rose led Bulls in 2011, or the Celtivs in 2012. There is a ton of talent in the league right now even if it's stacked together. The West has been competitive every year since I started watching the game. Even though for over a decade only the Mavs, Lakers, or Spurs came out there were always good teams and injuries that muddied the waters.

People have this incessant need to defend the past due to a fear of losing those previous moments. But the previous moments right in front of you people...

What? You don't think that the 90s Knicks would beat the 11 Bulls or the Celtics of 12? Are you ****in high? And hell no Jordan era was not overrated. The 90s had as much or even more talent than today, and a lot more skilled too.

Yes I do. I think Rondo - Allen - Pierce - Garnett Celtics were better than the 90's a Knicks.

Yea it was. We don't have to agree but there is this invisible standard people have for basketball due to that period and despite us being right there people deny it.

effen5
03-30-2014, 05:35 AM
Yes I do. I think Rondo - Allen - Pierce - Garnett Celtics were better than the 90's a Knicks.

Yea it was. We don't have to agree but there is this invisible standard people have for basketball due to that period and despite us being right there people deny it.

Garnett in his prime couldn't even get out of the first round in the 90s and you are saying that Celtics team could beat the Knicks...wow. FYI you aren't right....you are 100% wrong.

brewboy288
03-30-2014, 05:37 AM
At a time when young brats are coming into the league off of four years of high school and one year of college basketball experience, yes. Young kids who play for the money and aren't willing to put in the work, or even play defense (I mean let's face it, nobody does in the NBA) the NBA is at an al time low. Maybe not as far as potential, but as far as good entertaining basketball, it's at an all time low. And it will be for a long time until the NBA and NCAA work out a deal that says you have to play at least three years of college ball before you can enter the draft. One out of every one hundred might be good enough to skip three seasons of college ball and make it in the NBA. A Lebron or a Kobe, or a T-Mac don't come along very often, or at all anymore. The NBA has turned into a selfish, guaranteed contract money wanting popularity contest.

Punk
03-30-2014, 07:02 AM
Love Charles but the NBA is missing Kobe, Westbrook at 100%, Rose, Lopez, Noel, etc. The league is having a down year in regular season product but there is reasons why.

Also, I don't understand how people can complain about parity when Phoenix, Washington, Charlotte, Toronto are up and coming. The West is wide open. The East is Indy and Miami but then there is darkhorses like Chicago and Brooklyn.

I don't understand the annual parity complaint. The Heat aren't dominating anybody last time I checked.

EvanTurner
03-30-2014, 07:07 AM
I hate when people discredit OPINION in this way it's a disgrace and pathetic.

As for what Barkley said he's right todays league is the worst it's been and this is mostly based on the way the game is played today... Did anyone see Lance Stephenson get ejected a few nights ago with heat vs indy... He gets ejected for Wade holding up his arms after talking trash FOR TALKING :facepalm: I remember when ejections were saved for plays that were used to cause physical harm to a player not because he said something that might hurt another players feelings...

They are going to a new level of soft these days!!!


i mean things are beyond pathetic in todays game and advanced stats or not with all the ticky tack touch fouls today greats from the past would dominate todays game. I'm surprised this is even being debated.

Hawk stop talking about advanced stats it doesn't tell the story/comparison of the piss poor soft game of today to other eras. This is the softest the league has ever been bar none.

This post is beyond true

sammyvine
03-30-2014, 07:45 AM
Hawkeye thinks he is king basketball. He always tries to belittle people's opinions especially when they are not propping up Lebron.

I lost all respect for him when he tried to say in one thread that he and fans know more about basketball than a lot of professional players after Durant said something about Kobe Bryant.

ldawg
03-30-2014, 08:23 AM
that's funny Charles said that. Me and my buddy was saying the same thing last week. The nba has become boring with only a few match ups that excites.

ldawg
03-30-2014, 08:25 AM
I did not buy the NBA pass the last to years. We don't talk or argue about NBA anymore.

ewing
03-30-2014, 09:12 AM
chuck is a dolt,

D-Leethal
03-30-2014, 10:56 AM
I wasn't aware quality of talent = quality of gameplay. Also, I was not aware viewership was a good indicator of quality. I must need to start listen to the billboard top 40 hits more often. Quality stuff there.

Hawkeye, you are trying way too hard to be "the voice of reason". Everyone knows the gameplay in today's NBA is borderline embarrassing, and its not the fault of the players playing the games so you don't need to rush to their defense.

monty77
03-30-2014, 11:59 AM
That is partly true, because there are some things in the NBA which stink out: a lot of teams tanking, Miami's dinasty and lack of quality big men in the league. Besides it will be even worse within two years, when players such as Duncan, Kobe, Nowitzki and Garnett retires.

Tanking: it is shameful, I don't understand how the NBA allows this actitude. It is easily provable that GM in many teams don't act in order to improve his team this year, they don't want to win and despise the season. Roster and coach always want to win but it is hard when you don't have any chance with a mis-sold roster. 76ers selling Turner is a good example but there are plenty of them.

It must be two divisions in the NBA, the last teams had to descend to second division and the best teams in the second division had to ascend to first division and get the best draft pick selections to become more competitive. It would avoid this ridiculous.

Heat's dinasty: this is a bad example of winning spirit. Three top 10 players arrange to play together and win the NBA easily, without any difficulty and merit. What if Jordan, Malone and Olajuwon had played together when they were 25-26 years? It would have been a very boring. I apreciate more Malone without any title than Lebron with 10. His attitude damages the NBA.

There are no great player at Center position: Howard and Cousins are very good players, but I don't like them. I don't trust in them because of their lack of ethic work. Noah, Horford, Pekovic are good players, but they cannot be compared with Ewing, Olajuwon, O'Neal and other good centers who played in the last two decades. I hope that players such as Drummond, A.Davis and Embiid solve it.

When players as Bryant, Nowitki and Duncan leave the NBA maybe it becomes the worst league ever. They are players who base their succees on their talents. James, Paul George and other top 5 in the league have talent too, but base their succees on their physical. That is also bad.

The first premise to become a NBA player is athletic ability, that was different 20 years ago, when players such as Tony Allen and Reggie Evans hadn't lasted more than 10 years in the league.

beyourself
03-30-2014, 12:53 PM
It's because coaches no longer tolerate iso wings who jack up a ton of shots. The only guy who plays like that today is Melo.

The only way to score a lot of points these days is to be efficient. Melo is the only true volume scorer in the entire NBA.

I don't consider Durant a classic volume scorer because he forces nothing and usually averages around 18 attempts per game.

ldawg
03-30-2014, 01:29 PM
The Nba took all the emotion out of the game. That Indy Heat game was shameful when Lance got Kick out. I mean what is a competitive sport if you don't have competitive players? Fans feed off the emotion of the game. Don't want to make Duncan an example but I will. Duncan was and is a great player but no one Notice Spurs, You know why? Duncan the star of that team and have 0 emotion, he is boring. Now picture the NBA with no emotion. Its boring the excitement is gone out the game they are like Robots. The fans cant get emotional because the players on the floor cant. I am not saying get in someone face but if you make a big bucket you should be allow to celebrate a bit without being kick out the game. Then you cant play defense its just a mess.

beyourself
03-30-2014, 01:43 PM
The Nba took all the emotion out of the game. That Indy Heat game was shameful when Lance got Kick out. I mean what is a competitive sport if you don't have competitive players? Fans feed off the emotion of the game. Don't want to make Duncan an example but I will. Duncan was and is a great player but no one Notice Spurs, You know why? Duncan the star of that team and have 0 emotion, he is boring. Now picture the NBA with no emotion. Its boring the excitement is gone out the game they are like Robots. The fans cant get emotional because the players on the floor cant. I am not saying get in someone face but if you make a big bucket you should be allow to celebrate a bit without being kick out the game. Then you cant play defense its just a mess.

Disagree. Emotions isn't what makes them boring. Playing fundamental basketball makes them boring to fans.

Fans want to see somebody iso and start shooting 25 times a game.

P&GRealist
03-30-2014, 01:58 PM
It's just P&R's, fast breaks and hoisting up 25 3 pointers a game.

That is NOT what James Naismith envisioned.

P&GRealist
03-30-2014, 02:00 PM
The Nba took all the emotion out of the game. That Indy Heat game was shameful when Lance got Kick out. I mean what is a competitive sport if you don't have competitive players? Fans feed off the emotion of the game. Don't want to make Duncan an example but I will. Duncan was and is a great player but no one Notice Spurs, You know why? Duncan the star of that team and have 0 emotion, he is boring. Now picture the NBA with no emotion. Its boring the excitement is gone out the game they are like Robots. The fans cant get emotional because the players on the floor cant. I am not saying get in someone face but if you make a big bucket you should be allow to celebrate a bit without being kick out the game. Then you cant play defense its just a mess.

Very good point.

P&GRealist
03-30-2014, 02:02 PM
It's because coaches no longer tolerate iso wings who jack up a ton of shots. The only guy who plays like that today is Melo.

The only way to score a lot of points these days is to be efficient. Melo is the only true volume scorer in the entire NBA.

I don't consider Durant a classic volume scorer because he forces nothing and usually averages around 18 attempts per game.

Durant still forces a lot of bad 3s

Also, Melo doesn't get near the touch and ticky tack and bobbing the head back type of fouls calls that Durant gets.

beyourself
03-30-2014, 02:05 PM
Durant still forces a lot of bad 3s

Also, Melo doesn't get near the touch and ticky tack and bobbing the head back type of fouls calls that Durant gets.

Any 3 from 30-31 feet and in is not forced for Durant. He's making over 40% of them. The guy is just not a classic volume scorer. He forces nothing.

P&GRealist
03-30-2014, 02:05 PM
Love Charles but the NBA is missing Kobe, Westbrook at 100%, Rose, Lopez, Noel, etc. The league is having a down year in regular season product but there is reasons why.

Also, I don't understand how people can complain about parity when Phoenix, Washington, Charlotte, Toronto are up and coming. The West is wide open. The East is Indy and Miami but then there is darkhorses like Chicago and Brooklyn.

I don't understand the annual parity complaint. The Heat aren't dominating anybody last time I checked.

Washington and Charlotte at .500 or below basketball in the weak east and masking that 6th and 7th seed does not equate to 'up and coming'. Therefore your theory of parity existing is vastly flawed.

P&GRealist
03-30-2014, 02:06 PM
Any 3 from 30-31 feet and in is not forced for Durant. He's making over 40% of them. The guy is just not a classic volume scorer. He forces nothing.

Great. Now please respond to my ticky tack fouls comment.

P&GRealist
03-30-2014, 02:08 PM
nah, I just have a problem with people saying how bad todays league is because their favorite players are not the dominant players playing. I mean, nearly every poster that has agreed with Barkley is guilty of this.

But hey, who am I do disagree with the non-filter Chuckster, right? Only been watching since before you were born and have studied advanced stats...

So now advanced stats makes you James Naismith's grandson?

P&GRealist
03-30-2014, 02:08 PM
Hawkeye thinks he is king basketball. He always tries to belittle people's opinions especially when they are not propping up Lebron.

I lost all respect for him when he tried to say in one thread that he and fans know more about basketball than a lot of professional players after Durant said something about Kobe Bryant.
He is King of basketball.

Advanced stats ya know.

P&GRealist
03-30-2014, 02:11 PM
you realize how idiotic that statement alone is, right? Barkley literally has no filter. Half the crap that comes out of his mouth is hilarious, most of it overreaction and not true. But he is a character. Always has been, hence why he has a job in front of the camera.

You are 26? You sound like my dad. Everyone from yesterday would be soooooooooooooo much better now.

Sure...

So now you are degrading other people's opinions and calling them idiotic?

Aren't you or weren't you a moderator for this site?

ztilzer31
03-30-2014, 02:16 PM
Hawkeye thinks he is king basketball. He always tries to belittle people's opinions especially when they are not propping up Lebron.

I lost all respect for him when he tried to say in one thread that he and fans know more about basketball than a lot of professional players after Durant said something about Kobe Bryant.

I've seen you post. You're the type that says "Yeah LBJ's good, but not good in the clutch" then have no information to back it up.

Then people like Hawkeye come in and call you an idiot, and you "lose respect for them". FYI no one has respect for a guy who just spews **** out of his math like it's fact then gets pissy because he gets proven wrong.

Lol.

ztilzer31
03-30-2014, 02:21 PM
People listen to old ****s like Chuck way too much.

The younger generation is ALWAYS better than the previous generation, and the older generation ALWAYS tries to knock them down. That's in anything in life. To not believe in progression is straight stupid.

ztilzer31
03-30-2014, 02:22 PM
Garnett in his prime couldn't even get out of the first round in the 90s and you are saying that Celtics team could beat the Knicks...wow. FYI you aren't right....you are 100% wrong.

Lol this comment is dumb. Just thought I'd point that out.

P&GRealist
03-30-2014, 02:22 PM
I've seen you post. You're the type that says "Yeah LBJ's good, but not good in the clutch" then have no information to back it up.

Then people like Hawkeye come in and call you an idiot, and you "lose respect for them". FYI no one has respect for a guy who just spews **** out of his math like it's fact then gets pissy because he gets proven wrong.

Lol.

So are you saying if people don't back up their arguments with advanced statistical information, that means they shouldn't post here?

Did James Naismith say that you need to study advanced statistics to talk about the game that he so dearly loved and created?

P&GRealist
03-30-2014, 02:24 PM
Lol this comment is dumb. Just thought I'd point that out.
But why is his comment dumb?

Surely you should be using advanced statistics to back up your claim, or else your claim must be deemed as sinful and invalid.

ztilzer31
03-30-2014, 02:25 PM
So are you saying if people don't back up their arguments with advanced statistical information, that means they shouldn't post here?

Did James Naismith say that you need to study advanced statistics to talk about the game that he so dearly loved and created?

You need to have a brain, and think critically. Not just watch youtube highlights lol. Statistics in basketball aren't perfect, but they still explain things. You getting mad, and throwing a tissy fit doesn't change that.

ztilzer31
03-30-2014, 02:27 PM
So now you are degrading other people's opinions and calling them idiotic?

Aren't you or weren't you a moderator for this site?

He said that opinion is idiotic. Man get your panties out of a bunch and dig the bucket of sand out of there.

P&GRealist
03-30-2014, 02:28 PM
You need to have a brain, and think critically. Not just watch youtube highlights lol. Statistics in basketball aren't perfect, but they still explain things. You getting mad, and throwing a tissy fit doesn't change that.

Who says I'm throwing a fit? I'm trying to understand how you John Hollingers of the world think. What is it that makes you people tick? What is it that makes you get out of your beds in the morning, get on ur phones or computers, and start blasting others and putting down their opinions just because they don't use stats as their bible?

ztilzer31
03-30-2014, 02:28 PM
But why is his comment dumb?

Surely you should be using advanced statistics to back up your claim, or else your claim must be deemed as sinful and invalid.

Comment is dumb because it lacks context. However if you'd like to ignore it you can, and live in lala land where youtube videos=facts, and stats/reality=useless.

P&GRealist
03-30-2014, 02:29 PM
He said that opinion is idiotic. Man get your panties out of a bunch and dig the bucket of sand out of there.

Why are you talking about my unmentionables?

There is a reason they call it that, because they should not be mentioned.

ztilzer31
03-30-2014, 02:30 PM
Who says I'm throwing a fit? I'm trying to understand how you John Hollingers of the world think. What is it that makes you people tick? What is it that makes you get out of your beds in the morning, get on ur phones or computers, and start blasting others and putting down their opinions just because they don't use stats as their bible?

We use what is applicable to us as fans. Stats are one of those. Stats are FACTS. Not opinions. So when someone says "Kobe is more clutch then Lebron", and someone lays out FACTS to show that is not true, and people like you get mad yes... It's you throwing a tissy fit because what you tube/ESPN told you isn't actually true.

ztilzer31
03-30-2014, 02:31 PM
Why are you talking about my unmentionables?

There is a reason they call it that, because they should not be mentioned.

Oh I get it. You're trolling. Nice dude. Pathetic lol.

WVNowitzki
03-30-2014, 02:40 PM
This is a subjective opinion...but the league has had a major drop off in interest from me considerably in the past 5+ years and here are some reasons why, maybe some of you feel this way also.

I honestly can not stand the amount of pampering the so called "superstars" receive. The rules have been altered just enough to condition players to this style, but not quite enough to where it can a full fledged case can be made for change.

Flopping is the worst it's ever been (Dirk included so I don't hear the **** talk), these guys are talented enough to where they don't need to resort to these kind of tactics, but it's now part of the game. It isn't going away either, the more the younger players growing up today that are playing in high school and college see this, the more they emulate because they see that it is the norm.

I can't stand when I turn a game on and see whatever "star" player get looked at wrong, or breathed on and they are sent to the line. Fouls certainly happen, but the rate some of these guys get to the line is out of control. It slows the game down and takes the momentum out of things. Refs also have a lot to do with it as much as the players and I'm sure it's perpetrated from the top executives of the league and trickles down.

Basically, this has turned into an entertainment league and I would put the NBA, at the top of the list of sports leagues as the closest comparison to the WWE. Heaven forbid certain players not get the amount of calls they feel they deserve or put up the numbers they believe they should get. I guess you can't sell your brand putting up 10-15 a night or fouling out, you've got to manufacture stars instead of them letting them grow organically.

Another thing that some people love, but it's certainly a damning thing for this league as a whole is the super teams. It started with Boston and has set a terrible precedent on how teams feel they need to construct themselves to compete. You can't listen to any sports talk about this league and not hear commentators talk about a team's "big three" or who can a team get to make a "big three." Even on the lesser, sub .500 teams, they always try and find a way to lump a group of members into that teams proposed 3 "best" players.

Where is the desire to want to be the best? All these guys are friends and too chummy. There are very few guys left in this league with that killer instinct and while I'm certainly not a Kobe fan, I love his attitude. He doesn't want to be friends, he wants to murder you when you step on that court and how could any fan not love that attitude in today's day and age?

These are just a few of the many reasons I have become incredibly turned off by the NBA and basketball in general over the years and I see it getting a whole lot worse before it gets better.


TL;DR - Flopping, Refs falling for it and encouraging it. More about money than competitiveness, super teams, too friendly with other players.

JEDean89
03-30-2014, 03:02 PM
the amount of butthurt on this thread :laugh:

SLY WILLIAMS
03-30-2014, 04:20 PM
Its not the worst ever. I have seen worse eras BUT it is far from the best era as well. Teamwork, players with solid fundamentals, and superstar leaders are lacking compared to the better eras.

ThuglifeJ
03-30-2014, 04:40 PM
This is a subjective opinion...but the league has had a major drop off in interest from me considerably in the past 5+ years and here are some reasons why, maybe some of you feel this way also.

I honestly can not stand the amount of pampering the so called "superstars" receive. The rules have been altered just enough to condition players to this style, but not quite enough to where it can a full fledged case can be made for change.

Flopping is the worst it's ever been (Dirk included so I don't hear the **** talk), these guys are talented enough to where they don't need to resort to these kind of tactics, but it's now part of the game. It isn't going away either, the more the younger players growing up today that are playing in high school and college see this, the more they emulate because they see that it is the norm.

I can't stand when I turn a game on and see whatever "star" player get looked at wrong, or breathed on and they are sent to the line. Fouls certainly happen, but the rate some of these guys get to the line is out of control. It slows the game down and takes the momentum out of things. Refs also have a lot to do with it as much as the players and I'm sure it's perpetrated from the top executives of the league and trickles down.

Basically, this has turned into an entertainment league and I would put the NBA, at the top of the list of sports leagues as the closest comparison to the WWE. Heaven forbid certain players not get the amount of calls they feel they deserve or put up the numbers they believe they should get. I guess you can't sell your brand putting up 10-15 a night or fouling out, you've got to manufacture stars instead of them letting them grow organically.

Another thing that some people love, but it's certainly a damning thing for this league as a whole is the super teams. It started with Boston and has set a terrible precedent on how teams feel they need to construct themselves to compete. You can't listen to any sports talk about this league and not hear commentators talk about a team's "big three" or who can a team get to make a "big three." Even on the lesser, sub .500 teams, they always try and find a way to lump a group of members into that teams proposed 3 "best" players.

Where is the desire to want to be the best? All these guys are friends and too chummy. There are very few guys left in this league with that killer instinct and while I'm certainly not a Kobe fan, I love his attitude. He doesn't want to be friends, he wants to murder you when you step on that court and how could any fan not love that attitude in today's day and age?

These are just a few of the many reasons I have become incredibly turned off by the NBA and basketball in general over the years and I see it getting a whole lot worse before it gets better.


TL;DR - Flopping, Refs falling for it and encouraging it. More about money than competitiveness, super teams, too friendly with other players.
Agree fully

ThuglifeJ
03-30-2014, 04:41 PM
That is partly true, because there are some things in the NBA which stink out: a lot of teams tanking, Miami's dinasty and lack of quality big men in the league. Besides it will be even worse within two years, when players such as Duncan, Kobe, Nowitzki and Garnett retires.

Tanking: it is shameful, I don't understand how the NBA allows this actitude. It is easily provable that GM in many teams don't act in order to improve his team this year, they don't want to win and despise the season. Roster and coach always want to win but it is hard when you don't have any chance with a mis-sold roster. 76ers selling Turner is a good example but there are plenty of them.

It must be two divisions in the NBA, the last teams had to descend to second division and the best teams in the second division had to ascend to first division and get the best draft pick selections to become more competitive. It would avoid this ridiculous.

Heat's dinasty: this is a bad example of winning spirit. Three top 10 players arrange to play together and win the NBA easily, without any difficulty and merit. What if Jordan, Malone and Olajuwon had played together when they were 25-26 years? It would have been a very boring. I apreciate more Malone without any title than Lebron with 10. His attitude damages the NBA.

There are no great player at Center position: Howard and Cousins are very good players, but I don't like them. I don't trust in them because of their lack of ethic work. Noah, Horford, Pekovic are good players, but they cannot be compared with Ewing, Olajuwon, O'Neal and other good centers who played in the last two decades. I hope that players such as Drummond, A.Davis and Embiid solve it.

When players as Bryant, Nowitki and Duncan leave the NBA maybe it becomes the worst league ever. They are players who base their succees on their talents. James, Paul George and other top 5 in the league have talent too, but base their succees on their physical. That is also bad.

The first premise to become a NBA player is athletic ability, that was different 20 years ago, when players such as Tony Allen and Reggie Evans hadn't lasted more than 10 years in the league.

Great post.

Ebbs
03-30-2014, 05:27 PM
Yes I do. I think Rondo - Allen - Pierce - Garnett Celtics were better than the 90's a Knicks.

Yea it was. We don't have to agree but there is this invisible standard people have for basketball due to that period and despite us being right there people deny it.

Garnett in his prime couldn't even get out of the first round in the 90s and you are saying that Celtics team could beat the Knicks...wow. FYI you aren't right....you are 100% wrong.

What are you talking about. How am I wrong. How did you prove I was wrong in any capacity.

Your comment is beyond ********. First of all Garnett only played 3 seasons in the 90's. Second of all he did get out of the first round in ninny. Thirdly KG's prime numbers are as good if not better than Ewing's.

The Celtics were good. None of the 90's Knicks had the combined talent level that the Celtics did when they came together even though it was on the back end of their careers.

You remember that the Knicks team had a chance right? Hakeem with Horry and Kenny the Jet lolllll best the so called "great" 90's Knicks.

Jamiecballer
03-30-2014, 06:48 PM
The decline of quality of play in the NBA has coincided with "the golden age of point guards". Don't know if anyone else has noticed that. Once upon a time the point guard actually looked to involve others first and foremost.

I think you can pretty much trace this back to Iverson and ultimately all the way back to Jordan.

SLY WILLIAMS
03-30-2014, 07:23 PM
What are you talking about. How am I wrong. How did you prove I was wrong in any capacity.

Your comment is beyond ********. First of all Garnett only played 3 seasons in the 90's. Second of all he did get out of the first round in ninny. Thirdly KG's prime numbers are as good if not better than Ewing's.

The Celtics were good. None of the 90's Knicks had the combined talent level that the Celtics did when they came together even though it was on the back end of their careers.

You remember that the Knicks team had a chance right? Hakeem with Horry and Kenny the Jet lolllll best the so called "great" 90's Knicks.

That 1994 team was not the Knicks best team of the 1990's in my opinion. The Knicks better teams came 1-2 years before while Jordan was still playing. I might take the early 90's (1991, 1992, 1993) Bulls, Pistons, and Knicks all ahead of that Celtics team of Garnett, Pierce and Ray if they went head to head. I would not be surprised to see those Pistons beat todays Heat.

ztilzer31
03-30-2014, 07:25 PM
The decline of quality of play in the NBA has coincided with "the golden age of point guards". Don't know if anyone else has noticed that. Once upon a time the point guard actually looked to involve others first and foremost.

I think you can pretty much trace this back to Iverson and ultimately all the way back to Jordan.

What? What time period do you consider the "golden age of PG's"?

Jamiecballer
03-30-2014, 07:29 PM
What? What time period do you consider the "golden age of PG's"?

Its in quotes for a reason because I personally wouldn't call it that but the last decade or so. According to many the league is rife with good PGs.

ThuglifeJ
03-30-2014, 07:40 PM
Why are the kg pierce Allen Celtics being brought up? That's like 2008 NBA , when they were still good and the league was still solid.
Were talking 2014 and last couple years where the NBA product has become crap.

effen5
03-30-2014, 08:05 PM
Because this guy thinks the 08 celtics who almost lost to a vinny del negro coached, rookie Derrick rose led team could beat the 90s Knicks. ****in absurd.

Chronz
03-30-2014, 08:07 PM
It had never happened in that way before.

That said I don't think it started with Miami. I think the whole Celtics big 3 created a bad precedent that was only made possible through the CBA and max salary caps. While the stacking of the Celtics was bad, it was a bit more palatable as it was done through trades and drafting. However, that it was even possible to construct a big 3 like the Celtics was something that never should have been allowed to happen (no offense to Celtics fans).

If you had higher max salary or a franchise tag, the Celtics big 3 never happens. IE, no Miami. Miami was just the most recent and most visible result of that disturbing trend and punctuated the core problem, which is there is not enough financial incentive for Superstars to NOT chase a ring by stacking their teams.

The end result is that even with Good rosters, teams like Minnesota or OKC will have problems holding onto their talent. The Superstars will be expecting Championship or bust... and they don't care how they get there.
Not sure what this has to do with quality of play, league wide. Those markets have always had it harder and they have something better than franchise tags IMO, they get restricted free agency. Im sure you could incentivize staying put but if players want to leave, they will find a way to make it happen. Tagging players in the NBA could just lead to a bad situation anyways, same way players tell their teams to not bother matching offers sheets, which is a great sign of this being a players league.

As for the Celtics Big-3, I dont see what makes it any easier to stomach considering it was basically a move done with lots of back channeling, KG ultimately holding all the cards even though hes still under contract for another team, as opposed to free agents just choosing the best situation. I dont see anything to stomach, I dont chide players for career decisions or teams for improving their talent base.

Seems like you would rather kill player movement entirely, to me, nothing would hurt the game more.




You said it, not me.
Did I have you pegged?

hugepatsfan
03-30-2014, 08:08 PM
The Celtics didn't have KG that year they almost lost to the Bulls. How would the 90s Knicks be without Ewing?

effen5
03-30-2014, 08:09 PM
The Celtics didn't have KG that year they almost lost to the Bulls. How would the 90s Knicks be without Ewing?

You think the 2012 team could beat the 90s Knicks? With all the celtics passed their prime?

effen5
03-30-2014, 08:11 PM
I don't think any team right now could beat the 95 Magic.

hugepatsfan
03-30-2014, 08:32 PM
Not sure what this has to do with quality of play, league wide. Those markets have always had it harder and they have something better than franchise tags IMO, they get restricted free agency. Im sure you could incentivize staying put but if players want to leave, they will find a way to make it happen. Tagging players in the NBA could just lead to a bad situation anyways, same way players tell their teams to not bother matching offers sheets, which is a great sign of this being a players league.

As for the Celtics Big-3, I dont see what makes it any easier to stomach considering it was basically a move done with lots of back channeling, KG ultimately holding all the cards even though hes still under contract for another team, as opposed to free agents just choosing the best situation. I dont see anything to stomach, I dont chide players for career decisions or teams for improving their talent base.

Seems like you would rather kill player movement entirely, to me, nothing would hurt the game more.




Did I have you pegged?

What separates the BOS big 3 from the MIA big 3 for me is the work leading up to it. How did MIA get in position to add Lebron and Bosh... they went years without signing players to long term deals. They gave away Michael Beasley (at the time still a player with potential) for a 2nd round picks just to clear space. The work on their part had nothing to do with basketball. Their strategy had nothing to do with developing talent. It was all about making a good marketing pitch to free agents.

BOS actually drafted/traded for and developed Al Jefferson, Gerald Green, Sebastian Telfair, Delonte West, and Ryan Gomes into tradable assets. Al Jefferson was a great young chip at that point so he made the centerpiece of the KG deal. The original proposal also was set to include the #5 pick in the draft that year. However, KG nixed the deal by not agreeing to an extension. BOS in turn made a panic deal with Ray Allen to appease Paul Pierce, because he was growing tired of playing for a non-contender. While this was happening, the Lakers dropped out of the running for KG after refusing to include Bynum. The Celtics still had a young Al Jefferson with great potential and coming off a double double season already at under 23 years old. KG was now willing to sign an extension with Ray on board and the teams were able to work out a package despite the #5 pick being gone.

The NBA is just such low quality for me now because teams have caught on that "bottoming out" is the quickest way to rebuild. It just makes for a ****** product from too many teams. MIA's big 3 represents that. BOS never really sought to bottom out. The year we "tanked" for Oden/Durant actually started as a year where we looked to be a playoff team in the weak east. It just so happened that our 2 best players at the time - Pierce and Wally Scerviak - got hurt. In their emergence Tony Allen actually was playing all star level ball until he blew out his knee. BOS's big 3 didn't come out of a 3 year tanking plan. That's where the difference lies IMO. I can get excited about watching the buildup to BOS's big 3. The leadup to MIA's just doesn't excite me at all.

hugepatsfan
03-30-2014, 08:35 PM
You think the 2012 team could beat the 90s Knicks? With all the celtics passed their prime?

No. The only Celtics team that should be considered is the 08 team. KG hurt his knee the next year and was never the same guy from that point on. The Celtics only had the real KG for one year of their run. If KG didn't hurt his knee his prime could have lasted another 1-2 seasons and they maybe win another title (or even 2 possibly - they almost one one that second year even with the diminished KG).

Chronz
03-30-2014, 08:53 PM
What separates the BOS big 3 from the MIA big 3 for me is the work leading up to it. How did MIA get in position to add Lebron and Bosh... they went years without signing players to long term deals. They gave away Michael Beasley (at the time still a player with potential) for a 2nd round picks just to clear space. The work on their part had nothing to do with basketball. Their strategy had nothing to do with developing talent. It was all about making a good marketing pitch to free agents.

BOS actually drafted/traded for and developed Al Jefferson, Gerald Green, Sebastian Telfair, Delonte West, and Ryan Gomes into tradable assets. Al Jefferson was a great young chip at that point so he made the centerpiece of the KG deal. The original proposal also was set to include the #5 pick in the draft that year. However, KG nixed the deal by not agreeing to an extension. BOS in turn made a panic deal with Ray Allen to appease Paul Pierce, because he was growing tired of playing for a non-contender. While this was happening, the Lakers dropped out of the running for KG after refusing to include Bynum. The Celtics still had a young Al Jefferson with great potential and coming off a double double season already at under 23 years old. KG was now willing to sign an extension with Ray on board and the teams were able to work out a package despite the #5 pick being gone.
The Heat sacrificed some of Wade's best seasons in an effort to strike FA gold, they pursued other guys with limited cap space to no avail. They couldn't do a complete tank job with Wade already on board. I know what makes them different, I just dont see what makes either one any easier/harder to stomach, certainly not to the side of the debate that has a guy under contract for another team, pulling all the strings. I do like that KG admitted he should have done such a move a long time ago tho. And from what I remember, KG didn't like the situation in LA regardless of what they offered.




The NBA is just such low quality for me now because teams have caught on that "bottoming out" is the quickest way to rebuild. It just makes for a ****** product from too many teams. MIA's big 3 represents that. BOS never really sought to bottom out. The year we "tanked" for Oden/Durant actually started as a year where we looked to be a playoff team in the weak east. It just so happened that our 2 best players at the time - Pierce and Wally Scerviak - got hurt. In their emergence Tony Allen actually was playing all star level ball until he blew out his knee. BOS's big 3 didn't come out of a 3 year tanking plan. That's where the difference lies IMO. I can get excited about watching the buildup to BOS's big 3. The leadup to MIA's just doesn't excite me at all.
Is it really the quickest tho? The studies I've seen suggest its not that powerful but thats not to say teams dont believe in it. I just think Mark Cuban said it best, when everybody is trying to do the same thing, market value pops up elsewhere, its sorta how he got Monta on a friendly deal.

And is the disparity in team records really so different than some other years? I would need to check some facts before buying that.

DetroitBadBoy
03-30-2014, 08:58 PM
The league will always be a step down from the past with the terrible rules of officiating.

torocan
03-30-2014, 10:10 PM
Not sure what this has to do with quality of play, league wide. Those markets have always had it harder and they have something better than franchise tags IMO, they get restricted free agency. Im sure you could incentivize staying put but if players want to leave, they will find a way to make it happen. Tagging players in the NBA could just lead to a bad situation anyways, same way players tell their teams to not bother matching offers sheets, which is a great sign of this being a players league.

As for the Celtics Big-3, I dont see what makes it any easier to stomach considering it was basically a move done with lots of back channeling, KG ultimately holding all the cards even though hes still under contract for another team, as opposed to free agents just choosing the best situation. I dont see anything to stomach, I dont chide players for career decisions or teams for improving their talent base.

Seems like you would rather kill player movement entirely, to me, nothing would hurt the game more.

Did I have you pegged?

No, what I'm opposed to is the artificial distortion of the player market.

Imagine the following scenario... you STILL have a Team salary cap (to promote parity), but you remove the individual player salary cap. What would happen then?

Lebron would NOT be offered $20M in free agency, he would most likely be offered $35M or $40M per year.
Wade would NOT be offered $20M in free agency, he would most likely have been offered $30 or $35M.

So what happens then? If players or teams want to build a "super team", then Players are facing the choice of choosing BIG bucks, or joining the "super team". As players improve, their market value improves and the amounts of money offered further increases. This creates more financial opportunities for players AND encourages even MORE player movement.

What this does is it puts smaller markets on more even footing for superstars vs teams that *already* have superstars. Maybe Lebron STILL goes to the big market, but what about players 2-10? 11-20? Could ANY team afford to pay Lebron $40M AND Wade $35M AND the luxury tax?

As for your original question in terms of how the current system hurts the quality of play league wide, how it hurts the league is by having ONLY the most talented and skilled players on a handful of teams, you end up with only 5 or 6 very good teams, lots of mediocre teams, and lots of very BAD teams. This makes for BAD basketball on a LARGE number of teams -- teams that basically have to "marquee" 3rd tier players.

Look at it from the perspective of talent distribution. If you have 30 teams and 30 All Stars, as a league what you *ideally* want is to encourage a relatively even distribution of those stars. IF you want to gain an advantage, you want it through good planning and building of good systems. IE, smart trades, good drafting, and strong coaching and FO's.

Individual "stars" have such a HUGE impact on a basketball team that you *never* want it to be easy to build a "super team". If a team creates a "super team", you want it to be a rare occurrence, and the result of superior management and operations over the LONG term. And you want a system that makes it *HARD* to keep maintaining a high level of superior talent.

As for RFA, that is USELESS in preventing the building of super teams as it ONLY lasts for the FIRST contract. You draft a player at 21, develop them for 4 years, then they are free to go anywhere they wish. Given that drafted players do not even enter their prime until their 2nd contract, the odds of retaining that player through simple FA/Bird rights is extremely limited. There is NO incentive to NOT go to a team stacked with other stars since the "pay cut" they take is small compared to the financial up side of winning a championship. If you either remove the individual max salaries, or create a "franchise tag" that allows *every* team to designate ONE player as a Supermax (I proposed 2x the normal max), then you now force players AND teams to pay a substantial financial penalty for super stacking a team through FA.

Essentially what player max salaries does is it basically destroys anything resembling fair competition for talent.

Here is the best analogy.

Imagine you're a small business and want to compete with Microsoft for a super star talent out of MIT. However, that grad out of MIT likes the idea of working for Microsoft since they already have a large market presence.

So how would you compete for that MIT grad? Normally what you would do is offer them either more compensation or the potential for more compensation. This might be in the form of direct salary, or through the offering of share options.

Now imagine the Gov't came in and said, "Sorry, you're not allowed to pay them more than Microsoft."

How would that impact your ability to hire someone? How would that affect the decision process of a potential hire?

"Hrm, I could work for this small company in the middle of nowhere for the *same* money, OR I could go work for Microsoft... a big company with lots of financial stability, big market presence, and a famous name."

THIS is what maximum salaries does. It tilts the advantage even *further* as it removes one of the *few* points of leverage that a Team salary cap *should* create, ie, limitations to the ability of Teams to super stack their rosters by just spending money like drunken sailors.

It also deters player movement, as it becomes EASIER for those teams to RETAIN that talent as the financial penalties do NOT outweigh the attraction of chasing multiple rings.

That was my point.

NBA_Starter
03-30-2014, 10:36 PM
The league will always be a step down from the past with the terrible rules of officiating.

They need to tweak the age of leaving college also.

ghettosean
03-30-2014, 11:20 PM
Who says I'm throwing a fit? I'm trying to understand how you John Hollingers of the world think. What is it that makes you people tick? What is it that makes you get out of your beds in the morning, get on ur phones or computers, and start blasting others and putting down their opinions just because they don't use stats as their bible?

We use what is applicable to us as fans. Stats are one of those. Stats are FACTS. Not opinions. So when someone says "Kobe is more clutch then Lebron", and someone lays out FACTS to show that is not true, and people like you get mad yes... It's you throwing a tissy fit because what you tube/ESPN told you isn't actually true.

This is ridiculous!!! This is what I can't stand about people who just look at stats only. They think it tells anything and everything but numbers can be interpreted differently by those who view them... On top of that stats can be influenced based on how the game is ruled and regulated which is why a lot of people hate this soft contonelle tissue paper of a league today and people ONLY looking at stats will never understand.

For example if Adam Silver says hey there is another 7ft 6" monster out there like Yao Ming but he's got no skills at all, can't dribble nothing but we want another great big in the league... hmmmmmm... let's get rid of the 3 seconds in the key rule that will make this guy a superstar. So buddy camps out on offense and defense averages 40pts 20reb for his career does that really make him the best player ever or at least the best big man because advanced stats show him off the charts. No because he just benefited from the leagues softness but since the media and stats bolster him up he just seems like the best ever. But anyone who is naive enough to just rely on the numbers and not take the way the game is played in that era is just dense.

Stats don't tell the full story from era to era and some of those basing there opinions solely on stats and discrediting others who have seen these different eras with there own eyes need to take a seat and shut it before they sound even more foolish than they do now.

Stats can be manipulated and it's no coincidence rule changes came in place shortly after MJ left the league so we could have another GOAT as soon as humanly possible. That's more money in the bank for the league, media... etc and a whole lot more people spouting things they no absolutely nothing about.

P.S

The real greats of old would eat up this soft league alive... just eat it up.

Chronz
03-31-2014, 12:11 AM
No, what I'm opposed to is the artificial distortion of the player market.

Imagine the following scenario... you STILL have a Team salary cap (to promote parity), but you remove the individual player salary cap. What would happen then?

Lebron would NOT be offered $20M in free agency, he would most likely be offered $35M or $40M per year.
Wade would NOT be offered $20M in free agency, he would most likely have been offered $30 or $35M.

So what happens then? If players or teams want to build a "super team", then Players are facing the choice of choosing BIG bucks, or joining the "super team". As players improve, their market value improves and the amounts of money offered further increases. This creates more financial opportunities for players AND encourages even MORE player movement.

What this does is it puts smaller markets on more even footing for superstars vs teams that *already* have superstars. Maybe Lebron STILL goes to the big market, but what about players 2-10? 11-20? Could ANY team afford to pay Lebron $40M AND Wade $35M AND the luxury tax?
I've seen this idea passed around before, it may make a difference, the biggest losers will be the role players who cash in on market demands. In the end, if a player prioritizes winning, they can and will accommodate teams to grant their request.



As for your original question in terms of how the current system hurts the quality of play league wide, how it hurts the league is by having ONLY the most talented and skilled players on a handful of teams, you end up with only 5 or 6 very good teams, lots of mediocre teams, and lots of very BAD teams. This makes for BAD basketball on a LARGE number of teams -- teams that basically have to "marquee" 3rd tier players.
Bad for parity but thats the way the NBA has worked for years, few powers with legitimate chance to win, a few other fringe contenders and thats about it. Not seeing why this hurts the game historically speaking. I actually have less confidence in picking favorites this year than I ever did in the 90's thats for sure.


Look at it from the perspective of talent distribution. If you have 30 teams and 30 All Stars, as a league what you *ideally* want is to encourage a relatively even distribution of those stars. IF you want to gain an advantage, you want it through good planning and building of good systems. IE, smart trades, good drafting, and strong coaching and FO's.
I disagree, I would rather see a few transcendent teams, than a hypothetical league full of 45 win teams. And eventually those advantages you speak of, tip the scale to the point where the player has to leave anyways, to go out and find his own support system.


Individual "stars" have such a HUGE impact on a basketball team that you *never* want it to be easy to build a "super team". If a team creates a "super team", you want it to be a rare occurrence, and the result of superior management and operations over the LONG term. And you want a system that makes it *HARD* to keep maintaining a high level of superior talent.
I couldn't disagree more, the reason I fell in love with the NBA was because of "super teams". But then again, the only NBA I truly know was one in which parity was nonexistent.


As for RFA, that is USELESS in preventing the building of super teams as it ONLY lasts for the FIRST contract. You draft a player at 21, develop them for 4 years, then they are free to go anywhere they wish.
You've lost me, RFA allows you to match the offer of any team and that allows you to retain that player for many years. Correct me if Im wrong, but franchise tags allow the team to retain the player for a year, right? Maybe 2? How is that better than RFA? Though I kind of agree in that neither of them would be useful in preventing anything you suggest.


There is NO incentive to NOT go to a team stacked with other stars since the "pay cut" they take is small compared to the financial up side of winning a championship.
I dont think you can make that big of a blanket statement, players are different. Back when Bron was on an up and coming Cavs squad, he couldn't convince any star to leave their team, Bosh included. Hell, Cleveland couldn't even convince a hometown product in Michael Redd to leave the likes of Milwaukee. That extra year of security and more millions matter sometimes.



If you either remove the individual max salaries, or create a "franchise tag" that allows *every* team to designate ONE player as a Supermax (I proposed 2x the normal max), then you now force players AND teams to pay a substantial financial penalty for super stacking a team through FA.

Essentially what player max salaries does is it basically destroys anything resembling fair competition for talent.
It will definitely make players think twice about leaving money on the table, but I think you seriously underrate just what players are willing to endure in order to find themselves some competent teammates.


Here is the best analogy.

Imagine you're a small business and want to compete with Microsoft for a super star talent out of MIT. However, that grad out of MIT likes the idea of working for Microsoft since they already have a large market presence.

So how would you compete for that MIT grad? Normally what you would do is offer them either more compensation or the potential for more compensation. This might be in the form of direct salary, or through the offering of share options.

Now imagine the Gov't came in and said, "Sorry, you're not allowed to pay them more than Microsoft."

How would that impact your ability to hire someone? How would that affect the decision process of a potential hire?

"Hrm, I could work for this small company in the middle of nowhere for the *same* money, OR I could go work for Microsoft... a big company with lots of financial stability, big market presence, and a famous name."

THIS is what maximum salaries does. It tilts the advantage even *further* as it removes one of the *few* points of leverage that a Team salary cap *should* create, ie, limitations to the ability of Teams to super stack their rosters by just spending money like drunken sailors.

It also deters player movement, as it becomes EASIER for those teams to RETAIN that talent as the financial penalties do NOT outweigh the attraction of chasing multiple rings.

That was my point.
I understand the theory, what Im still not understanding is how the absence of this hypothetical (And in your world, an optimal league) is hurting this game, when that hypothetical league has never really existed. The NBA was built on superteams IMO.

NYSpirit1
03-31-2014, 12:23 AM
the ONLY angle this works from for me, is that the Lakers and Knicks suck, and the league is always better commercially when they are good teams.

This. Throw in the Celtics and three of the hallmark franchises blow.

That really hurts the league.

NYSpirit1
03-31-2014, 12:31 AM
Let's face it - if the East was elite and the top 52+ win teams were the Heat, Knicks, Celtics, Nets, Bulls and Sixers, nobody would be saying the league sucks.

The big market, traditional franchises along with the Lakers being real good is good for the league.

The Knicks, Lakers, Sixers and Celtics are terrible while the Nets and Bulls are 45-win mediocre.

Throw in the tanking, the East as a whole and the list of small market West teams no one cares about and you have your issue. San Antonio, OKC and Indiana being three of the top 4 teams is literally death for the NBA.

Duncan and Ginobili need to retire and SA needs to go through their crappy period. They're literally one of the most boring, team oriented, faceless franchises I've ever seen this season and they're the top team. They're literally never talked about and it's a snoozer watching their games.

The NBA needs more of guys like LeBron headlining and less of the teams like the Spurs and Pacers.

CKinKC
03-31-2014, 01:04 AM
Players are too young, referees refuse to call traveling when players take 4 steps, everyone is buddy buddy instead of hating each other, all the players are concerned more about shoe deals...these are the little things to people that hate the NBA. I still like it, but I'm in the minority with people I'm associated with. I don't want to sound racist at all either, but Im white and the only friends of mine that even care about the NBA are black. Not one of my white friends give 2 ***** about the NBA. Just an observation

WVNowitzki
03-31-2014, 01:45 AM
Let's face it - if the East was elite and the top 52+ win teams were the Heat, Knicks, Celtics, Nets, Bulls and Sixers, nobody would be saying the league sucks.

The big market, traditional franchises along with the Lakers being real good is good for the league.

The Knicks, Lakers, Sixers and Celtics are terrible while the Nets and Bulls are 45-win mediocre.

Throw in the tanking, the East as a whole and the list of small market West teams no one cares about and you have your issue. San Antonio, OKC and Indiana being three of the top 4 teams is literally death for the NBA.

Duncan and Ginobili need to retire and SA needs to go through their crappy period. They're literally one of the most boring, team oriented, faceless franchises I've ever seen this season and they're the top team. They're literally never talked about and it's a snoozer watching their games.

The NBA needs more of guys like LeBron headlining and less of the teams like the Spurs and Pacers.

This attitude right here, is why the NBA is deteriorating because this is the type of fan they attract. You just called out the Spurs who are one of the most consistent, well coached, fundamentally sound teams to EVER play the game, because they don't have a high light reel dunk dunk fest every night basically. Can you not see how ludicrous that sounds?

Want to know why they are a snoozer to you, because they have 0 ego on that team. Not one of those guys gives a **** about being in the media, or shoe deals or commercials, they are there to do their job. They play basketball the right way, the correct way and yet they are condemned by modern day NBA fans because they don't have a diva leading the charge for them. This attitude blows my mind.

Also, just because the "large market" teams aren't good, people are insistent that this contributes to the lack of ratings. While this may hold true slightly, it's better in the long run to have fresh, new teams in the mix. If it was a constant year after year of Laker's vs Celtics or whatever other large market teams facing off, you would ostracize and alienate the majority of the country and the only people who would really give a **** was fans of those particular teams.

Fans like this are driving the NBA to be like it is, because they are ok with what the league has and is turning into. I for one hope the ratings crumble and the NBA has its back turned to them, but lets be honest, money talks and it certainly wont change any time soon.

effen5
03-31-2014, 01:50 AM
This attitude right here, is why the NBA is deteriorating because this is the type of fan they attract. You just called out the Spurs who are one of the most consistent, well coached, fundamentally sound teams to EVER play the game, because they don't have a high light reel dunk dunk fest every night basically. Can you not see how ludicrous that sounds?

Want to know why they are a snoozer to you, because they have 0 ego on that team. Not one of those guys gives a **** about being in the media, or shoe deals or commercials, they are there to do their job. They play basketball the right way, the correct way and yet they are condemned by modern day NBA fans because they don't have a diva leading the charge for them. This attitude blows my mind.

Also, just because the "large market" teams aren't good, people are insistent that this contributes to the lack of ratings. While this may hold true slightly, it's better in the long run to have fresh, new teams in the mix. If it was a constant year after year of Laker's vs Celtics or whatever other large market teams facing off, you would ostracize and alienate the majority of the country and the only people who would really give a **** was fans of those particular teams.

Fans like this are driving the NBA to be like it is, because they are ok with what the league has and is turning into. I for one hope the ratings crumble and the NBA has its back turned to them, but lets be honest, money talks and it certainly wont change any time soon.

I agree. I actually like watching the Spurs play more than the Clippers for example....Spurs are so fundamentally sound...its hard not to like them. I think the reason why I don't like the game anymore is because more teams aren't fundamentally sound...

Jeffy25
03-31-2014, 01:51 AM
I think there's plenty of talent. It's just taken a new form.

For those that say we don't have the top talent any longer.

Lebron and durant are insanely dominant right now. Like bird/magic level.

But the tier below them is still great. Love, curry, Westbrook, harden, Howard, Paul, griffin, etc is a really great group of young stars. People talk about the core from the early 00's, and it think this group can compare.


A lot of people don't like the new style of play. I imagine mostly former players wouldn't like it the most. But it doesn't mean there is less talent.

The tanking though, that's a big black eye

Jeffy25
03-31-2014, 01:56 AM
This attitude right here, is why the NBA is deteriorating because this is the type of fan they attract. You just called out the Spurs who are one of the most consistent, well coached, fundamentally sound teams to EVER play the game, because they don't have a high light reel dunk dunk fest every night basically. Can you not see how ludicrous that sounds?

Want to know why they are a snoozer to you, because they have 0 ego on that team. Not one of those guys gives a **** about being in the media, or shoe deals or commercials, they are there to do their job. They play basketball the right way, the correct way and yet they are condemned by modern day NBA fans because they don't have a diva leading the charge for them. This attitude blows my mind.

Also, just because the "large market" teams aren't good, people are insistent that this contributes to the lack of ratings. While this may hold true slightly, it's better in the long run to have fresh, new teams in the mix. If it was a constant year after year of Laker's vs Celtics or whatever other large market teams facing off, you would ostracize and alienate the majority of the country and the only people who would really give a **** was fans of those particular teams.

Fans like this are driving the NBA to be like it is, because they are ok with what the league has and is turning into. I for one hope the ratings crumble and the NBA has its back turned to them, but lets be honest, money talks and it certainly wont change any time soon.

:clap:

Punk
03-31-2014, 02:51 AM
The league will always be a step down from the past with the terrible rules of officiating.

They need to tweak the age of leaving college also.

Well, that would also require tweaking the logic of the NBA and NBA fans as well. If a player stays in school for 2-3 years and comes into the league at 23-24, they are looked upon as too old to be rookies developing despite if they can play and impact the game quicker.

Case and point, Mason Plumlee dropped to 22 in the draft due to his age despite him being polished and extremely athletic over the likes of Alex Len, Steven Adams, Kelly Olynyk and now Plumlee appears to now be the best big in the draft with Noel being out.

I'm not sure the NBA will accept a legit college rule change with the addiction of the age of young players/old players.

tdg823
03-31-2014, 03:48 AM
This is ridiculous!!! This is what I can't stand about people who just look at stats only. They think it tells anything and everything but numbers can be interpreted differently by those who view them... On top of that stats can be influenced based on how the game is ruled and regulated which is why a lot of people hate this soft contonelle tissue paper of a league today and people ONLY looking at stats will never understand.

For example if Adam Silver says hey there is another 7ft 6" monster out there like Yao Ming but he's got no skills at all, can't dribble nothing but we want another great big in the league... hmmmmmm... let's get rid of the 3 seconds in the key rule that will make this guy a superstar. So buddy camps out on offense and defense averages 40pts 20reb for his career does that really make him the best player ever or at least the best big man because advanced stats show him off the charts. No because he just benefited from the leagues softness but since the media and stats bolster him up he just seems like the best ever. But anyone who is naive enough to just rely on the numbers and not take the way the game is played in that era is just dense.

Stats don't tell the full story from era to era and some of those basing there opinions solely on stats and discrediting others who have seen these different eras with there own eyes need to take a seat and shut it before they sound even more foolish than they do now.

Stats can be manipulated and it's no coincidence rule changes came in place shortly after MJ left the league so we could have another GOAT as soon as humanly possible. That's more money in the bank for the league, media... etc and a whole lot more people spouting things they no absolutely nothing about.

P.S

The real greats of old would eat up this soft league alive... just eat it up.

+1

numba1CHANGsta
03-31-2014, 04:18 AM
R.i.p nba 1946-2011

amos1er
03-31-2014, 04:30 AM
Barkley talks out of his arse at times true, but he kind of has a point. The NBA isn't quite as exciting as it used t be. That said, the western conference is really fun to watch. However, they should skip the whole first round of the playoffs this season because that is going to be boring as **** to watch. The semi's and the conference finals however should be great!!! The finals could be interesting depending no which teams make it there. San Antonio vs. Indiana would be a pretty bad scenario for me personally, though I will be happy if San Antonio goes all the way after how close they game last season, but that series would bore me to tears.

amos1er
03-31-2014, 04:33 AM
I think there's plenty of talent. It's just taken a new form.

For those that say we don't have the top talent any longer.

Lebron and durant are insanely dominant right now. Like bird/magic level.

But the tier below them is still great. Love, curry, Westbrook, harden, Howard, Paul, griffin, etc is a really great group of young stars. People talk about the core from the early 00's, and it think this group can compare.


A lot of people don't like the new style of play. I imagine mostly former players wouldn't like it the most. But it doesn't mean there is less talent.

The tanking though, that's a big black eye

Durant is having a legendary season sure, but Magic and Bird comparisons are hardly warranted.

torocan
03-31-2014, 07:36 AM
Let's face it - if the East was elite and the top 52+ win teams were the Heat, Knicks, Celtics, Nets, Bulls and Sixers, nobody would be saying the league sucks.

The big market, traditional franchises along with the Lakers being real good is good for the league.

The Knicks, Lakers, Sixers and Celtics are terrible while the Nets and Bulls are 45-win mediocre.

Throw in the tanking, the East as a whole and the list of small market West teams no one cares about and you have your issue. San Antonio, OKC and Indiana being three of the top 4 teams is literally death for the NBA.

Duncan and Ginobili need to retire and SA needs to go through their crappy period. They're literally one of the most boring, team oriented, faceless franchises I've ever seen this season and they're the top team. They're literally never talked about and it's a snoozer watching their games.

The NBA needs more of guys like LeBron headlining and less of the teams like the Spurs and Pacers.

The logic that the NBA can *only* thrive when big market teams are dominant is a false premise.

Tell me, in the last 10 years how often has the NFL been dominated by big market teams? How about the NHL? I thought so.

The NBA would be SO much bigger if the run to the Championships was a more open race. As many people as there are in NY, LA and Chicago, there are a LOT more people in the rest of the country combined. And when they feel they have NO chance every year, they just start tuning out.

The overemphasis on "highlight basketball" has been a devil's deal for the NBA. High flying dunks look great, but the media overemphasis on "athletic stars" has taken away from the public understanding of the game. Look at how Football is covered... break downs of plays and scrimmages. Now compare it to the NBA where often beautiful offensive and defensive sets are completely ignored for the "highlight dunk".

Where are the breakdowns of the sets? Where is the explanation of what happened in the 5s of set up that LED to that dunk? Where is the instruction to the audience of just HOW great fundamental basketball can be?

There is a beauty in the game of basketball that goes well BEYOND the "flashy" star. However, the NBA in their reckless chase for the next Michael Jordan every generation has created a monster of their own making... a media machine that always looks for the short and easy video/sound clip instead of making even a token effort to SHOW the public what is *really* happening on the court.

Would it be hard for the audience to adjust at first if they were doing full break downs? Yes. However NOT breaking down the game and changing the focus to the actual WAY the game is played is the equivalent of watching the UFC and ignoring the Grappling side of a match and only showing knock out punches.

Yes, the highlight knock outs are great and all, but as many UFC fans will tell you, watching a great grappling match can be JUST as exciting, JUST as thrilling... as long as you *UNDERSTAND* what you're seeing.

And in this respect, the NBA has failed the fan base miserably.

That SO many "fans" believe that some of the most *beautiful* basketball they will see in their lifetimes is "boring" and "unexciting" tells us as much about the decline NBA basketball as anything...

kdspurman
03-31-2014, 11:21 AM
This attitude right here, is why the NBA is deteriorating because this is the type of fan they attract. You just called out the Spurs who are one of the most consistent, well coached, fundamentally sound teams to EVER play the game, because they don't have a high light reel dunk dunk fest every night basically. Can you not see how ludicrous that sounds?

Want to know why they are a snoozer to you, because they have 0 ego on that team. Not one of those guys gives a **** about being in the media, or shoe deals or commercials, they are there to do their job. They play basketball the right way, the correct way and yet they are condemned by modern day NBA fans because they don't have a diva leading the charge for them. This attitude blows my mind.

Also, just because the "large market" teams aren't good, people are insistent that this contributes to the lack of ratings. While this may hold true slightly, it's better in the long run to have fresh, new teams in the mix. If it was a constant year after year of Laker's vs Celtics or whatever other large market teams facing off, you would ostracize and alienate the majority of the country and the only people who would really give a **** was fans of those particular teams.

Fans like this are driving the NBA to be like it is, because they are ok with what the league has and is turning into. I for one hope the ratings crumble and the NBA has its back turned to them, but lets be honest, money talks and it certainly wont change any time soon.

Well put!

b@llhog24
03-31-2014, 08:49 PM
Because Barkley is widely regarded as a source of wisdom and profound insight.

Sent via Tapatalk

Jeffy25
03-31-2014, 11:46 PM
Durant is having a legendary season sure, but Magic and Bird comparisons are hardly warranted.


30.8 PER, fifth scoring title in a row probably coming.


Bird nor Magic ever did that....in fact, neither topped 27 in a regular season.

ThuglifeJ
04-01-2014, 12:29 AM
30.8 PER, fifth scoring title in a row probably coming.


Bird nor Magic ever did that....in fact, neither topped 27 in a regular season.

No, they did not. But a scoring title from Durant does not equate to an exciting, interesting, good, NBA product. Bird and Magic rivalry was one you couldn't miss for many reasons..Boston - LA, Race (at the time when it was a thing still), Two unique legends - top 10 players all time going at it franchise vs franchise. It was way way more anticipated than a Heat Thunder matchup. I enjoy Heat Thunder games but it just cant be put on that Bird/Magic level.

Hawkeye15
04-01-2014, 01:53 AM
This attitude right here, is why the NBA is deteriorating because this is the type of fan they attract. You just called out the Spurs who are one of the most consistent, well coached, fundamentally sound teams to EVER play the game, because they don't have a high light reel dunk dunk fest every night basically. Can you not see how ludicrous that sounds?

Want to know why they are a snoozer to you, because they have 0 ego on that team. Not one of those guys gives a **** about being in the media, or shoe deals or commercials, they are there to do their job. They play basketball the right way, the correct way and yet they are condemned by modern day NBA fans because they don't have a diva leading the charge for them. This attitude blows my mind.

Also, just because the "large market" teams aren't good, people are insistent that this contributes to the lack of ratings. While this may hold true slightly, it's better in the long run to have fresh, new teams in the mix. If it was a constant year after year of Laker's vs Celtics or whatever other large market teams facing off, you would ostracize and alienate the majority of the country and the only people who would really give a **** was fans of those particular teams.

Fans like this are driving the NBA to be like it is, because they are ok with what the league has and is turning into. I for one hope the ratings crumble and the NBA has its back turned to them, but lets be honest, money talks and it certainly wont change any time soon.

great post bro

Hawkeye15
04-01-2014, 01:54 AM
Durant is having a legendary season sure, but Magic and Bird comparisons are hardly warranted.

what's funny, is at the end of their careers, LeBron and Durant have a pretty awesome chance of surpassing that duo. Statistically, they already have.

ThuglifeJ
04-01-2014, 05:29 AM
Durant is having a legendary season sure, but Magic and Bird comparisons are hardly warranted.

what's funny, is at the end of their careers, LeBron and Durant have a pretty awesome chance of surpassing that duo. Statistically, they already have.

Well if Lebron was on the Celtics and Durant - Lakers, both being best teams in league..then you might have something. Not saying that's how it should be, but it does make a difference.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't Magics Lakers and Birds Celtics usually the best teams in the league? I hardly consider Heat Thunder the same as those Celtics Lakers.. maybe a couple years ago..but the intensity of those rivalries is a different level.

Just saying lining two guys up, adding their stats, doesn't make them a BIRD/MAGIC duo
Get real. They don't even consider eachother rivals, rather buddies.

Walt
04-01-2014, 08:52 AM
Things great for the NBA today:

1. LeBron and Durant

2. The San Antonio Spurs

3. Heat/Pacers games (and ECF)

4. Chris Paul

5. Dirk still dominating at age 36

6. The West

LongIslandIcedZ
04-01-2014, 09:24 AM
I get what he is saying.

I don't think there is anything awesome about the Heat walking to the Finals, or at the very least the ECF. I like the competition, and the close series. I like upsets.

The West is unbelievable. The Western Conference playoffs are going to be awesome, and the East is going to be a joke. In that respect, I think the NBA is struggling there. I haven't seen that many different eras of the NBA so I cant rank them, but only about half the NBA is really good right now IMO.

3RDASYSTEM
04-01-2014, 09:50 AM
Any 3 from 30-31 feet and in is not forced for Durant. He's making over 40% of them. The guy is just not a classic volume scorer. He forces nothing.

even if he shot in the 30 percentile he still has a flame, that's the thing with me I can see his shot is pure and you never have to show me or tell me he is shooting 40pct because that doesn't justify anything, just like the 30pct doesn't because im sure if he had PHI type surrounding talent then he would not be shooting high of pct but it wouldn't take away from the fact his shot/stroke is pure

he Is both a killer and volume scorer, especially last yrs playoffs when he was on a island by himself, it just depends on the situation but being a volume scorer isn't bad, it just means you take a lot of shots(for the team) and all the scoring champs past and present shoot volume or they wouldn't win the scoring title, same goes for assists and rebounds, you got to them to pad the stats and that consists of handling the ball a lot( see CP3 for assist proof) or K LOVE, they are volume assist/rebound type players, or do you also dis agree on that?

Chronz
04-01-2014, 02:36 PM
Well if Lebron was on the Celtics and Durant - Lakers, both being best teams in league..then you might have something. Not saying that's how it should be, but it does make a difference.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't Magics Lakers and Birds Celtics usually the best teams in the league? I hardly consider Heat Thunder the same as those Celtics Lakers.. maybe a couple years ago..but the intensity of those rivalries is a different level.

Just saying lining two guys up, adding their stats, doesn't make them a BIRD/MAGIC duo
Get real. They don't even consider eachother rivals, rather buddies.

Hes talking about level of play, not the semantics surrounding their friendship/ public perception.

Not sure what you were trying to get at with the whole, Bron on Celtics and KD on Lakers thing.

Chronz
04-01-2014, 02:49 PM
even if he shot in the 30 percentile he still has a flame, that's the thing with me I can see his shot is pure and you never have to show me or tell me he is shooting 40pct because that doesn't justify anything, just like the 30pct doesn't because im sure if he had PHI type surrounding talent then he would not be shooting high of pct but it wouldn't take away from the fact his shot/stroke is pure

he Is both a killer and volume scorer, especially last yrs playoffs when he was on a island by himself, it just depends on the situation but being a volume scorer isn't bad, it just means you take a lot of shots(for the team) and all the scoring champs past and present shoot volume or they wouldn't win the scoring title, same goes for assists and rebounds, you got to them to pad the stats and that consists of handling the ball a lot( see CP3 for assist proof) or K LOVE, they are volume assist/rebound type players, or do you also dis agree on that?

Nothing you said was true

Jeffy25
04-01-2014, 04:23 PM
I get what he is saying.

I don't think there is anything awesome about the Heat walking to the Finals, or at the very least the ECF. I like the competition, and the close series. I like upsets.

The West is unbelievable. The Western Conference playoffs are going to be awesome, and the East is going to be a joke. In that respect, I think the NBA is struggling there. I haven't seen that many different eras of the NBA so I cant rank them, but only about half the NBA is really good right now IMO.

From what I can recall, the West has been dominating for over a decade now....and the East has been pretty weak.

ThuglifeJ
04-01-2014, 05:46 PM
Well if Lebron was on the Celtics and Durant - Lakers, both being best teams in league..then you might have something. Not saying that's how it should be, but it does make a difference.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't Magics Lakers and Birds Celtics usually the best teams in the league? I hardly consider Heat Thunder the same as those Celtics Lakers.. maybe a couple years ago..but the intensity of those rivalries is a different level.

Just saying lining two guys up, adding their stats, doesn't make them a BIRD/MAGIC duo
Get real. They don't even consider eachother rivals, rather buddies.

Hes talking about level of play, not the semantics surrounding their friendship/ public perception.

Not sure what you were trying to get at with the whole, Bron on Celtics and KD on Lakers thing.

The rivalry was huge and highly exciting, resulting in excitement for the league. Bron Durant isn't comparable rivalry excitement wise compared to bird magic..which I thought we were talking about which is what the thread suggests - the league is boring, lacks interest among fans, worst its been. The league isn't measured by how good of stats your top two players are producing, it may help but certainly doesn't represent the product as a whole