PDA

View Full Version : Would any 90s centers would see a decrease in their production in the modern era?



KnicksorBust
03-12-2015, 12:26 PM
Hakeem
DRob
Zo
Ewing
Shaq
Dikembe
etc.

Would any 90s centers would see a decrease in their production in the modern era?

JasonJohnHorn
03-12-2015, 12:54 PM
I think for all players the blocks-per game would go down. With the increase in 3 point attempts, it is just harder to get 3 or 4 blocks a game like they used to when every PG, SG and SF was driving to the hole and every coach had a guy in the post that would back down at least 15-18 times a night But other than a reduction in blocks, I'd imagine it'd go like this:


Hakeem: His reboudning and defense would still be huge, and because he was a good playmaker, he's still be getting the ball a lot, though less shots. I think he's numbers would resemble prime Duncan.

DRob: Same as Hakeem... I think his numbers would resemble Duncan's or Garnett's.

Zo: No. He was like Garnett. He wasn't touching the ball on offense too much. He was about defense and reboudning. Coaches still use the post, so giving him 14-16 shots a game seems like about what he'd be getting today.

Ewing: I don't think he would fair well today. He didn't have the post moves of Hakeem, the shear dominance of Shaq, or the passing ot D-Rob or Hakeem. He's still be an All-Star, but like other bigs that have a decent post game, his shots would drop. I think he'd resemble Al Jefferson.

Shaq: He's be doing about the same. He throws everybody around and shoots over 55%, so he would be efficient enough to still be given 22+ shots a game.


Dikembe: He never got a lot of touches, so I think he'd still be getting the same about of boards and points.


Great idea for a thread by the way. It does seem like analytics has changed the way coaches look at the game and the kinds of plays teams run. Guys in the post just don't get as many shots as they used to.

shep33
03-12-2015, 01:03 PM
Depends on how teams use them within their system.

beasted86
03-12-2015, 01:08 PM
There are a lot more chuckers in the league now. There would surely be a couple "Kobe 2004s" in the league that would have us see inefficient players taking shots away from a prime Hakeem, Robinson, Shaq, etc.

ewing
03-12-2015, 01:15 PM
I think Dikembe would have more trouble into today's league. he never had any offensive game and like to spend all his time in the paint on both ends. everyone else would be more then fine. I have a little troulbe with Zo, b/c he had two careers and honestly its get confusing. i'm sure their games would develop a differently. if you are asking if those guys have to tools to dominate in today's NBA. The answer is yes.

bleedprple&gold
03-12-2015, 01:21 PM
Amazing how many good centers there were in the 90s. If those guys were playing today they would probably be the best 6 centers in the league.

dhopisthename
03-12-2015, 01:53 PM
I think that the centers scoring would go down as it is much easier to clog the paint in todays game. However the rest of the numbers would stay approximately the same

celticsman2009
03-12-2015, 02:23 PM
I bet Arvydas Sabonis would be getting more touches now since he could hit the three and stretch the floor.

IKnowHoops
03-12-2015, 02:29 PM
I think Drob, Hakeem, and Shaq would just dominate this era as there are no bigs that can stop or guard them at all. Ewing to for that matter. I think the other centers stay about the same.

Slug3
03-12-2015, 02:38 PM
Amazing how many good centers there were in the 90s. If those guys were playing today they would probably be the best 6 centers in the league.

Which would probably lead to other teams getting bigs that are big and not really shooters to try and help tie them down.

valade16
03-12-2015, 02:41 PM
To those saying Patrick Ewing would struggle to score, wouldn't he be a better version of LMA today? Ewing had range out to 20 feet and could easily space the floor to knock down the open jumper and had enough post moves to be a problem down low if he had a smaller opponent.

I don't think Ewing would have much of a problem in todays game.

ewing
03-12-2015, 02:46 PM
To those saying Patrick Ewing would struggle to score, wouldn't he be a better version of LMA today? Ewing had range out to 20 feet and could easily space the floor to knock down the open jumper and had enough post moves to be a problem down low if he had a smaller opponent.

I don't think Ewing would have much of a problem in todays game.


he was also a bigger and twice the finisher at the cup as LMA. Put Ewing in screen roll with a competent PG and 3 shooters spacing the floor and its over. he would get better looks on a good team today.

JasonJohnHorn
03-12-2015, 03:54 PM
To those saying Patrick Ewing would struggle to score, wouldn't he be a better version of LMA today? Ewing had range out to 20 feet and could easily space the floor to knock down the open jumper and had enough post moves to be a problem down low if he had a smaller opponent.

I don't think Ewing would have much of a problem in todays game.

It depends if they would call that travel on him ;-)

From the ages of 25-27 he he was very efficient, but the rest of his career he hovered around .500, which is great, mind you, but given that guys like has been shooting over 55% for most of his career in the league today and has never gotten even as much as 12 shots a game, tells you something.

I miss the post up game myself. I liked watching Ewing and Hakeem and DRob in the paint, and Malone and Barkley and Nance, among others, but the coaching mentality has shifted. Why shoot a FG at .500 when you can shoot a 3 at .400? After ten shots you got 10 points one way and 12 the other.

That makes it hard for the likes of Al Jefferson, Zach Randolph, and Gortat to make a living (as well as other bigs who can score with about a 50% accuracy rate).

How great was Ewing? He was awesome. But few people would be talking about him today if he played in Minny, or Portland, or Milwaukee. He was inferior to Hakeem, DRob and Shaq. He only made the defensive team three times (all second team), and he never made an All-NBA First team. His 7 All-NBA second team selections are impressive, but considering he was hovering around 20/10 for 15 years, it seems odd that that is all he had. But he was in NY, so he got a lot of hype. It's like David Lee... he got contracts for sponsorship in NY.... in GSW, not so much. Being an All-Star in NY raises your profile.

Because he was a post player for the most part, I think he'd get fewer looks today. You are spot on; he had a solid jump. I seen him hit a lot of 15-20 footers. In that respect, he'd like be put in the same category in terms of scoring as KG or TD; 18-22 a game. But he's not as good as passer as either of them.

I hope this does't sound to negative. I think he'd likely be the best scoring C in the league today, but in the context of his own playing days, he was usually 4th best in all practicality.

ewing
03-12-2015, 04:08 PM
^^^ i don't mean to be repetitive but i just don't understand how it would harder for Ewing to score. He was surrounded by no offensive talent, played for a team whose pace was super slow, and played ridiculously physical. It was a grind every night. Its harder for everyone when the defense is always set and its harder when your teammates aren't real threats. He had tools for the post, in both screen roll and pick and pop, on the glass, and in catch and shoot spots, filling lanes, in transition. He was a beast with mobility, power, and a jump shot. Would refs call the travel on his runner across the lane IDK, but if they did he wouldn't shoot it. How many 7 foot 250 pound guys do you see in the league today with all those tools. I don't see one. I certainly don't see one that doesn't get looks at the basket. IMO he would be actually be a more efficient scorer in today.

Tony_Starks
03-12-2015, 04:20 PM
First off good question.

Second, those guys would KILL in todays game. The majority of the bigs now are so lost fundamentally they'd get ate alive. Not to mention todays Bigs are not even really equipped to defend someone with a full array of post moves because honestly who has them? Duncan, DMC,Gasol, and Aldridge when they feel like it and who else?....Those skills are far an between these days so Ewing and crew would keep guys in foul trouble...

nycericanguy
03-12-2015, 04:39 PM
They would all still dominate... and Ewing wasn't hyped because he was in NY, stop it. He was one of the best players in the history of the game, thats why he was hyped.

He was better than Alonzo Morning and Zo got hyped a lot.

Also like someone said teams would look for more big guys to try to stop those guys.

Those players were so great, that the league and teams today would be adjusting to them, NOT the other way around.

ewing
03-12-2015, 04:44 PM
Which would probably lead to other teams getting bigs that are big and not really shooters to try and help tie them down.


of course, it would be a mix. An influx of big man talent like that would lead to a need for more big guys, and some revitalization of the post. the way the game has developed in the last 20 years would also lead to these big guys having more range. Hakeem and Patrick would likely have 3 point range etc etc. The one thing i can say for sure is that these guy would be really good.

lol, please
03-12-2015, 04:51 PM
Hakeem
DRob
Zo
Ewing
Shaq
Dikembe
etc.

Would any 90s centers would see a decrease in their production in the modern era?

I think Ewing and Shaq would dominate in any era.

A better question would be would soft centers like Dwight be effective in the 80s and 90s.

KnicksorBust
03-12-2015, 04:54 PM
Hakeem
DRob
Zo
Ewing
Shaq
Dikembe
etc.

Would any 90s centers would see a decrease in their production in the modern era?

I think Ewing and Shaq would dominate in any era.

A better question would be would soft centers like Dwight be effective in the 80s and 90s.

What makes him soft? He is a multiple defensive player of the year. Incredible rebounder. In his prime was the best finisher in the NBA. And consistently would draw double teams throughout his career.

smiddy012
03-12-2015, 05:06 PM
Ewing would make DH cry if he played today. Not the most skilled big ever offensively, but I doubt we could find one who was any tougher. Only reason he doesn't have a ring or two is cuz of MJ. Gosh I miss those old school matchups between Chicago vs. Detroit or NY, cuz it was war every time we faced them.

smiddy012
03-12-2015, 05:10 PM
And yeah, what made Mutambo special in his day was his length and size, a prime DH (which is obviously in the past) is definitely better IMO. I mean, Mutambo would be one of the best defensive big men in the league, and perhaps the best, but I don't see him making more than 8 all-star teams in today's league as he'd have so much more size to deal with (which he wouldn't be skilled enough to overcome).

smiddy012
03-12-2015, 05:17 PM
What makes him soft? He is a multiple defensive player of the year. Incredible rebounder. In his prime was the best finisher in the NBA. And consistently would draw double teams throughout his career.

Clearly you didn't watch 90s basketball.

Shlumpledink
03-12-2015, 05:58 PM
These guys are entering the league by themselves right? Or all at once? I could see each of them winning dpoty if they were in the game today.

Dikembe/Zo/Ewing/DRob/Hakeem/Shaq would win defensive player of the year. If Ibaka and Howard can dominate, these guys can run away with it.

I would love to see Hakeem and DRob in a fast paced offense. They'd have goat numbers playing in a run and gun offense. Both of them can shoot, pass, run the floor, create havoc defensively, and rebound. I would love to see that.

I don't think Dikembe is going to score any more, but Ewing will be pretty dominant offensively still I imagine. He can post up or space the floor, which is going to help out. He may not run the floor as good as some of the other guys but he can make a great half court offense

KnicksorBust
03-12-2015, 07:15 PM
What makes him soft? He is a multiple defensive player of the year. Incredible rebounder. In his prime was the best finisher in the NBA. And consistently would draw double teams throughout his career.

Clearly you didn't watch 90s basketball.

Lmao. If you have no real reply please just dont quote my post. :)

smiddy012
03-12-2015, 07:50 PM
Lmao. If you have no real reply please just dont quote my post. :)

Would you agree that Ewing was much tougher than DH, or no?

KnicksorBust
03-12-2015, 08:52 PM
Lmao. If you have no real reply please just dont quote my post. :)

Would you agree that Ewing was much tougher than DH, or no?

How did I end up simultaneously in two debates where people are using my favorite player of all-time against me? Lol. Something has gone horribly wrong. Anyway...

Lets say I agree that Ewing was "tougher." How does that make Howard soft? One doesn't prove the other.

SLY WILLIAMS
03-12-2015, 10:13 PM
Eddie Johnson compares Dwight Howard to Patrick Ewing

http://www.usatoday.com/videos/sports/nba/2015/01/06/21325739/

Bruno
03-12-2015, 10:21 PM
There are a lot more chuckers in the league now. There would surely be a couple "Kobe 2004s" in the league that would have us see inefficient players taking shots away from a prime Hakeem, Robinson, Shaq, etc.

hakeem ewing and robinson would have loved to play with a wing like Kobe. those guys never had the luxury of having a wing who drew double teams. they'd either punish defenders down low in single coverage like Dwight did against Lopez last year, or they'd be smothered by sophisticated zones, depending on the team. if Kobe could be excellent with Shaq and Gasol at different periods in his career then Robinson and Hakeem would have worked even better. especially if they were professional and showed up to camp in shape and ready to lead like they always did.

JasonJohnHorn
03-12-2015, 11:38 PM
^^^ i don't mean to be repetitive but i just don't understand how it would harder for Ewing to score.


It's just about the shift from the post to the perimeter. They got a time limit now for back-to-the-basket plays, which would hurt Ewing, but Ewing would be as efficient today (I think there are a lot of great defensive centers in the league today, so it wouldn't be any easier), but the issue is more how the coaches run things.

Could Ewing score as much on as many shots? YES! I agree to that 100%. Would any coaches give him that many shots these days? I don't think so. Just because of how coaches approach analytics. More jump shots, more 3's. Less post play. That just seems to be the way a lot of coaches are going.

I mean, look at Pop. He's the best coach in the league, and I think that we can agree that TD is an amazing scorer and in his prime, could pretty much score at will, but Pop never even gave him as many as 19 shots a game. Ewing had 7 straight season over 18 shots a game, and 2 at 20+ and 3 at 19+. Coaches just wouldn't give a post player that many shots a game these days unless it was Shaq.

The seasons Ewing got 18.6 and 18.4 shots per game, he scored less than when TD got 18.3 shots a game, oddly enough despite having a higher FG%.

It's not meant as a knock o Ewing, it's just a shift in the way teams are coached.

nycericanguy
03-12-2015, 11:51 PM
^ That was more indicative of the team Ewing was on... NY never had a true #2 scorer.

Prime Duncan had 5 straight years of 17+ FGA, his career FGA are 15, Ewing 16.3. If Ewing had Tony Parker, Manu and all the other scorers Duncan has played with I'm sure there would be almost no difference. Plus the 90's game was faster pace. It's only recently that the NBA pace has picked up again.


Ewing career 21ppg on 16.3 FGA
Duncan 19.6ppg on 15


You're really reaching to try to put down Ewing for some reason.

ewing
03-13-2015, 12:06 AM
It's just about the shift from the post to the perimeter. They got a time limit now for back-to-the-basket plays, which would hurt Ewing, but Ewing would be as efficient today (I think there are a lot of great defensive centers in the league today, so it wouldn't be any easier), but the issue is more how the coaches run things.

Could Ewing score as much on as many shots? YES! I agree to that 100%. Would any coaches give him that many shots these days? I don't think so. Just because of how coaches approach analytics. More jump shots, more 3's. Less post play. That just seems to be the way a lot of coaches are going.

I mean, look at Pop. He's the best coach in the league, and I think that we can agree that TD is an amazing scorer and in his prime, could pretty much score at will, but Pop never even gave him as many as 19 shots a game. Ewing had 7 straight season over 18 shots a game, and 2 at 20+ and 3 at 19+. Coaches just wouldn't give a post player that many shots a game these days unless it was Shaq.

The seasons Ewing got 18.6 and 18.4 shots per game, he scored less than when TD got 18.3 shots a game, oddly enough despite having a higher FG%.

It's not meant as a knock o Ewing, it's just a shift in the way teams are coached.


well said, i even with the current trend i still think it would depend on personal and philosophy. David Blatt was thought was some motion offensive genius before he could clear out for LeBron and Kyrie. Plus like i stated Ewing could score in a variety of ways from a lot different positions on the floor, most them not utilizing back down pivoting post ups. his go to post move was the turn around J- more LMA then Al Jefferson. Plus, with the type of shooting and green light the most good team have today it would pick your poison with Ewing in the screen roll. Looking at Ewing's skill set, I have a hard time thinking his attempts would be limited with most personal. The one knock i can think of is the fact that he was not a great passer. If he was i'd play through him all the time in 1/2. even without that the amount of movement his touches and the threat of his touches would create for opposing defenses would make up for a lot of this deficiency. On the other end, it not a coincidence that team with teams with these type of interior presences on offensive are better defensive teams. Its not just size. It allows you maintain floor balance and have a set defense. If you wanted to utilize Ewing to his max i think he would most always get shots.

smiddy012
03-13-2015, 12:25 AM
How did I end up simultaneously in two debates where people are using my favorite player of all-time against me? Lol. Something has gone horribly wrong. Anyway...

Lets say I agree that Ewing was "tougher." How does that make Howard soft? One doesn't prove the other.

I would concede that part of the reason Ewing was tougher was because of the difference of the times. When I refer to toughness I refer to it more from a mental perspective. I just remember Ewing playing for blood in a fashion I've never seen DH play.

ewing
03-13-2015, 12:26 AM
another thing about Ewing, he's not Tim Duncan. Pat would demand the ball. IMO its why he fell of a cliff after his prime. I'm against ball hawking but you do have to adjust to your best players. I don't think you could maximize his impact without touches.

Sadds The Gr8
03-13-2015, 02:26 AM
Not too much if at all....if AD and cousins can get 23-25 ppg without even being in their primes yet, I don't see why those centers couldn't get those #s since they were more accomplished post players. The league just lacks elite offensive bigs.

G_S_W
03-13-2015, 03:28 AM
Patrick was an absolutely brilliant offensive player. You could tell he was going to be one of the greatest two way bigs of all time even as a freshman at georgetown.

Without being overly presumptuous, it seems clear enough that many of his critics on the forum have never seen him play. No one who watched Patrick play could walk away and not understand he was one of the all time greats.

Oh, and Hakeem at 50 is more talented and skilled than Dwight Howard at 30.

SLY WILLIAMS
03-13-2015, 09:57 AM
If Brook Lopez can average around 20-7-1.5 in his better seasons,

I do not see any reason Patrick would not average at least 24-11-2.5 in his better seasons playing today

Guys like Brook Lopez and Al Jefferson are no way near as good as Patrick Ewing was in his prime.

THE MTL
03-13-2015, 09:33 PM
I would think Patrick Ewing would be better. Among the 90s centers he actually had a 15ft baby shot. The game nowadays are anti-post therefore overall I think every center would see a decrease in shots though

jimm120
03-13-2015, 09:40 PM
To those saying Patrick Ewing would struggle to score, wouldn't he be a better version of LMA today? Ewing had range out to 20 feet and could easily space the floor to knock down the open jumper and had enough post moves to be a problem down low if he had a smaller opponent.

I don't think Ewing would have much of a problem in todays game.

That's what I was thinking.

Out of Hakeem and Robinson (his "main competitors" of that time), Ewing was the one with the best outside shot. He was ALL Fadeaway. Back down, spin, and take an unblockable fadeaway.

jimm120
03-13-2015, 09:43 PM
It depends if they would call that travel on him ;-)

From the ages of 25-27 he he was very efficient, but the rest of his career he hovered around .500, which is great, mind you, but given that guys like has been shooting over 55% for most of his career in the league today and has never gotten even as much as 12 shots a game, tells you something.

I miss the post up game myself. I liked watching Ewing and Hakeem and DRob in the paint, and Malone and Barkley and Nance, among others, but the coaching mentality has shifted. Why shoot a FG at .500 when you can shoot a 3 at .400? After ten shots you got 10 points one way and 12 the other.

That makes it hard for the likes of Al Jefferson, Zach Randolph, and Gortat to make a living (as well as other bigs who can score with about a 50% accuracy rate).

How great was Ewing? He was awesome. But few people would be talking about him today if he played in Minny, or Portland, or Milwaukee. He was inferior to Hakeem, DRob and Shaq. He only made the defensive team three times (all second team), and he never made an All-NBA First team. His 7 All-NBA second team selections are impressive, but considering he was hovering around 20/10 for 15 years, it seems odd that that is all he had. But he was in NY, so he got a lot of hype. It's like David Lee... he got contracts for sponsorship in NY.... in GSW, not so much. Being an All-Star in NY raises your profile.

Because he was a post player for the most part, I think he'd get fewer looks today. You are spot on; he had a solid jump. I seen him hit a lot of 15-20 footers. In that respect, he'd like be put in the same category in terms of scoring as KG or TD; 18-22 a game. But he's not as good as passer as either of them.

I hope this does't sound to negative. I think he'd likely be the best scoring C in the league today, but in the context of his own playing days, he was usually 4th best in all practicality.

Ewing shot lower (around 50%) because he took a lot of outside shots.

Just like how Amare (before injuries) was "only" a 50% shooter at PF or C, while other PF/C were netting 55%-65%.

Ewing took most of his shots from the outside. Thus, his % was lower.

Chronz
03-13-2015, 09:46 PM
No offense ewing, but you're overrating Patrick. I know he had this reputation for being this good shooter but I always felt he chucked them up far too willingly, without the efficiency to back it. I remember booing him when he was with the Magic and wasting their possessions with a jumper that never fell. I know he was WAY beyond his prime but even then he had the gall to highjack an offense.

I think there are good-great shooters (Like KG is good and Dirk is great) and there are streaky ones. Ewing shooting from the post was a good shooter, bit too reliant on the fallaway but a good shooter none the less, but from the perimeter? He could get hot but I wouldn't call him a great offensive player like some have here precisely because he relied on that shot so often. He seemed to peak early and should have focused more intently on defense once it became clear he wasn't the same athlete. Bigmen tend to peak later in the sport (I think its because they are most physically imposing as youngsters and rely less on the skill game they inevitably develop) but Ewing matured physically sooner than most, he was essentially like what Bron was to the 2K era in terms of being a man-child.

Maybe being that much bigger than his competition hurt his game and longevity. You combine that with him being a defensive specialist of sorts in Georgetown for 4 full years and I think it stunted his development. Now Im a fan of George Thompson, but I've heard many fans complain about how he held Ewing back. This is all just 1 big theory of mine but the end point is true none the less, Ewing was predictable offensively because he never really mastered any skill and he lost his agility early. I liken it to Shaq's toe injury and how that completely changed the moves he could make offensively. Only Ewing just got old fast, thats why he fancied himself a jumpshooter and didn't work on his passing game. Thats the biggest difference between he and Hakeem offensively, both of them could score well enough (Hakeem abit better obviously) but once Dream mastered the art of passing, his team and teammates saw their efficiency really rise.


Watching Ewing eviscerate the Celtics that one series, I cant help but wonder what could have been. He dismantled them in the interior, in transition and didn't really search for those outlet jumpers.
At his peak, he was a great offensive player, throughout the majority of his prime however, he was just good. Thats why I asked about the Ewing theory, usually when players enter levels of subpar efficiency but refuse to lessen their load accordingly, they have a tendency of holding offenses back. For Ewing, the individual efficiency numbers seem to suggest this started in 95-96 when he was still an All-Star but the Knicks offense began a true freefall from even their "Brick City" days. That said, I dont think he ever really held the team back, at least not until they actually got some guys with actual talent to be held back (Like Allan Houston/Camby).







------------------------------------------


Anyways on topic, I think playing in this era would help him quite a few ways but also hurt him in others. In terms of his development, he would have likely joined the NBA sooner (thereby not wasting much of his athletic prime playing against kids) and would have grown up in an era that has shunned the midrange game. Still, ignoring that hypothetical and relying solely on the time machine game where the same player is inserted here. I dont think much changes, prolly alil less scoring lil more efficiency, really depends on the kind of finisher and passer you think he was. He would benefit from drop offs of today's penetrating guards but the post-up schemes have evolved to the point where you have to have alot of misdirection first, unlike Shaq, he couldn't just move bodies where he plz, so he would have alil less post up or he would have to rely even more on fallaways. Then again, on the occasions he actually did get to post up, he would have enjoyed the spacing and loathed the athletic wings who swarmed on him. Teams hate giving up open 3's but they will only let you play 1 on 1 if they know you can hurt them with the pass. I dont think Ewing had the selfless ego to do that. I remember a story where he outright ignored Don Nelson's pleads to work on his passing.



Patrick was an absolutely brilliant offensive player. You could tell he was going to be one of the greatest two way bigs of all time even as a freshman at georgetown.

Without being overly presumptuous, it seems clear enough that many of his critics on the forum have never seen him play. No one who watched Patrick play could walk away and not understand he was one of the all time greats.

Oh, and Hakeem at 50 is more talented and skilled than Dwight Howard at 30.

You did not describe Patrick at all, nor was he seen as a great offensive prospect in his youth. Great player tho

alexander_37
03-13-2015, 10:30 PM
Ewing would dominate today. He would be a 20/10 guy for sure. Would he be as good as Hakeem, Shaq, or D-Rob? No but he never was.

ewing
03-14-2015, 07:58 AM
No offense ewing, but you're overrating Patrick. I know he had this reputation for being this good shooter but I always felt he chucked them up far too willingly, without the efficiency to back it. I remember booing him when he was with the Magic and wasting their possessions with a jumper that never fell. I know he was WAY beyond his prime but even then he had the gall to highjack an offense.

no offense but if you are citing Ewing's sonics for magic days or even his late 90s knicks days you are cherry picking. you know quite well the op and direction of the thread is not how a washed up pat ewing would do in todays nba. if you think it took gall to high jack the offense in this prime when his #2 option was starks or Wilkens you are wrong. The thread is about prime Ewing. I agree Pat did fall off a cliff and one of his flaws was that he was unable to accept a secondary offensive role later in his career

I think there are good-great shooters (Like KG is good and Dirk is great) and there are streaky ones. Ewing shooting from the post was a good shooter, bit too reliant on the fallaway but a good shooter none the less, but from the perimeter? He could get hot but I wouldn't call him a great offensive player like some have here precisely because he relied on that shot so often. He seemed to peak early and should have focused more intently on defense once it became clear he wasn't the same athlete. Bigmen tend to peak later in the sport (I think its because they are most physically imposing as youngsters and rely less on the skill game they inevitably develop) but Ewing matured physically sooner than most, he was essentially like what Bron was to the 2K era in terms of being a man-child.

how many points did you want his teams to give up, 60? Ewing was a relentless defender i cant think of a player that was more focused on that end, there are guys that played just as hard

Maybe being that much bigger than his competition hurt his game and longevity. You combine that with him being a defensive specialist of sorts in Georgetown for 4 full years and I think it stunted his development. Now Im a fan of George Thompson, but I've heard many fans complain about how he held Ewing back. This is all just 1 big theory of mine but the end point is true none the less, Ewing was predictable offensively because he never really mastered any skill and he lost his agility early. I liken it to Shaq's toe injury and how that completely changed the moves he could make offensively. Only Ewing just got old fast, thats why he fancied himself a jumpshooter and didn't work on his passing game. Thats the biggest difference between he and Hakeem offensively, both of them could score well enough (Hakeem abit better obviously) but once Dream mastered the art of passing, his team and teammates saw their efficiency really rise.

I think you are overstating, things. Ewing was one hell of an athlete up until the mid 90s. he had a 10 year run. you are right that he came into the league raw offensively but for approx 7 years or so Ewing had the offensive game a physical tools that would have made him an MVP candidate in todays league. He was not the passer the Hakeem was and it was definitely another flaw in this game. Houston was also smart enough to surround Hakeem with guys that could actually shoot.

Watching Ewing eviscerate the Celtics that one series, I cant help but wonder what could have been. He dismantled them in the interior, in transition and didn't really search for those outlet jumpers.
At his peak, he was a great offensive player, throughout the majority of his prime however, he was just good. Thats why I asked about the Ewing theory, usually when players enter levels of subpar efficiency but refuse to lessen their load accordingly, they have a tendency of holding offenses back. For Ewing, the individual efficiency numbers seem to suggest this started in 95-96 when he was still an All-Star but the Knicks offense began a true freefall from even their "Brick City" days. That said, I dont think he ever really held the team back, at least not until they actually got some guys with actual talent to be held back (Like Allan Houston/Camby).


again no is suggesting that Pat Ewing aged like Tim Duncan. we both know there is not one gm in this league that would not give his right arm for pat ewing b/t 1985 and 1995.







------------------------------------------


Anyways on topic, I think playing in this era would help him quite a few ways but also hurt him in others. In terms of his development, he would have likely joined the NBA sooner (thereby not wasting much of his athletic prime playing against kids) and would have grown up in an era that has shunned the midrange game. Still, ignoring that hypothetical and relying solely on the time machine game where the same player is inserted here. I dont think much changes, prolly alil less scoring lil more efficiency, really depends on the kind of finisher and passer you think he was. He would benefit from drop offs of today's penetrating guards but the post-up schemes have evolved to the point where you have to have alot of misdirection first, unlike Shaq, he couldn't just move bodies where he plz, so he would have alil less post up or he would have to rely even more on fallaways. Then again, on the occasions he actually did get to post up, he would have enjoyed the spacing and loathed the athletic wings who swarmed on him. Teams hate giving up open 3's but they will only let you play 1 on 1 if they know you can hurt them with the pass. I dont think Ewing had the selfless ego to do that. I remember a story where he outright ignored Don Nelson's pleads to work on his passing.

Ewing was never a great passer however he was a finisher and in today league where he have a glut of PG talent and slight dearth of big man talent he would over power people around the rim. I think he would benefit greatly from the drop offs and screen roll with a spread floor and you would see a lot more Ewing dunks in todays game.

I think Ewing would move people. I am not sure what you mean here. He is just stronger then the majority of bigs in todays league. ****** had his video of will chandler overpowering someone in the post in a recent article

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUDlKYAOC7w






You did not describe Patrick at all, nor was he seen as a great offensive prospect in his youth. Great player tho

Anyway Chronz while a agree with some of you criticism of Ewing's game, i don't think they make case against the oblivious which is that a prime Patrick Ewing is a potential MVP level talent in todays league.

FlashBolt
03-14-2015, 03:53 PM
Hakeem would be your most impactful center in today's NBA. He had all the skills to complement the game today.

benny01
03-14-2015, 04:09 PM
Anyway Chronz while a agree with some of you criticism of Ewing's game, i don't think they make case against the oblivious which is that a prime Patrick Ewing is a potential MVP level talent in todays league.
obvious. Just a little help, obliviously

ewing
03-14-2015, 04:47 PM
obvious. Just a little help, obliviously

thank you Benny, you are a gentlemen

Method28
03-15-2015, 02:30 PM
I feel all of those guys would dominate given the lack of inside presence in today's game. Just because the game has changed, doesn't mean going inside as often as before wouldn't work.

Also, we talk about this all the time with my family.....we have a cousin who was an NBA Center during that era. Good player, but he'd kill it in today's game. He just happened to play during a time where there were all of those great Centers. I have zero doubt they'd all be just as good if not better.

FlashBolt
03-15-2015, 03:29 PM
Some of you guys just don't get it. The reason there aren't any good NBA centers (compared to the past) is strictly due to the rules and how the game has changed. GM's look for a center who can defend the paint, rebound, and set picks. The days of them taking over games are done and it's why besides Dwight, no center has been relied on to do so much offensively the past ten or so years. I don't think it has anything to do with center's being not as good. It's just the environment of the modern NBA doesn't call for them to be the type of center that others in the past were. There's no way all these "centers" just disappear out of the blue while PG's are on the rise. Magic IMO would have a tough time playing in today's NBA whereas he didn't back then.

kdspurman
03-16-2015, 10:48 AM
Some of you guys just don't get it. The reason there aren't any good NBA centers (compared to the past) is strictly due to the rules and how the game has changed. GM's look for a center who can defend the paint, rebound, and set picks. The days of them taking over games are done and it's why besides Dwight, no center has been relied on to do so much offensively the past ten or so years. I don't think it has anything to do with center's being not as good. It's just the environment of the modern NBA doesn't call for them to be the type of center that others in the past were. There's no way all these "centers" just disappear out of the blue while PG's are on the rise. Magic IMO would have a tough time playing in today's NBA whereas he didn't back then.

I think that's partly true. But I also think it's because many big men lack the basic fundamentals, and prefer to play a different style. These big guys don't stay in college long (not that many guys do), & they rely a great deal on their athleticism to make an impact.

Tony_Starks
03-16-2015, 12:06 PM
Some of you guys just don't get it. The reason there aren't any good NBA centers (compared to the past) is strictly due to the rules and how the game has changed. GM's look for a center who can defend the paint, rebound, and set picks. The days of them taking over games are done and it's why besides Dwight, no center has been relied on to do so much offensively the past ten or so years. I don't think it has anything to do with center's being not as good. It's just the environment of the modern NBA doesn't call for them to be the type of center that others in the past were. There's no way all these "centers" just disappear out of the blue while PG's are on the rise. Magic IMO would have a tough time playing in today's NBA whereas he didn't back then.

I think that's partly true. But I also think it's because many big men lack the basic fundamentals, and prefer to play a different style. These big guys don't stay in college long (not that many guys do), & they rely a great deal on their athleticism to make an impact.

It all starts at the high school and college level. You don't see guys going to work in the paint at that level unless theres a ridiculous size advantage that can't be ignored. Look at Back in the day Bigs were taught the bread and butter of post footwork, back to the basket moves and counter moves, facing up, and then lastly shooting out on the perimeter as a last resort.

Today its exact opposite. Everyone wants a stretch big now so these guys are basically taught shooting skills first, paint moves second. And if they have a completely broken jumper then they basically teach them to be a Ben Wallace or Noah so they can crash boards leading to extra shot attempts for the shooters. Look at Dwight and DJ for example, they don't even have the post moves of a good high school Big in the 80s 90s because theyve never been taught.

Its basically the Euro style of ball. I credit Don Nelson and then DAntoni with really popularizing the concept of basically having 5 shooters on the floor at all times so the court is wide open....

Chronz
03-16-2015, 04:53 PM
Anyway Chronz while a agree with some of you criticism of Ewing's game, i don't think they make case against the oblivious which is that a prime Patrick Ewing is a potential MVP level talent in todays league.

So was prime Alonzo Mourning.

R. Johnson#3
03-16-2015, 06:25 PM
I think for all players the blocks-per game would go down. With the increase in 3 point attempts, it is just harder to get 3 or 4 blocks a game like they used to when every PG, SG and SF was driving to the hole and every coach had a guy in the post that would back down at least 15-18 times a night But other than a reduction in blocks, I'd imagine it'd go like this:


Hakeem: His reboudning and defense would still be huge, and because he was a good playmaker, he's still be getting the ball a lot, though less shots. I think he's numbers would resemble prime Duncan.

DRob: Same as Hakeem... I think his numbers would resemble Duncan's or Garnett's.

Zo: No. He was like Garnett. He wasn't touching the ball on offense too much. He was about defense and reboudning. Coaches still use the post, so giving him 14-16 shots a game seems like about what he'd be getting today.

Ewing: I don't think he would fair well today. He didn't have the post moves of Hakeem, the shear dominance of Shaq, or the passing ot D-Rob or Hakeem. He's still be an All-Star, but like other bigs that have a decent post game, his shots would drop. I think he'd resemble Al Jefferson.

Shaq: He's be doing about the same. He throws everybody around and shoots over 55%, so he would be efficient enough to still be given 22+ shots a game.


Dikembe: He never got a lot of touches, so I think he'd still be getting the same about of boards and points.


Great idea for a thread by the way. It does seem like analytics has changed the way coaches look at the game and the kinds of plays teams run. Guys in the post just don't get as many shots as they used to.

Yeah he didn't have the post moves of Hakeem but he still had some pretty damn good post moves. I think Ewing would be one of the centres who would fair the best in today's NBA. Sure he didn't fake people out of their shoes like Hakeem but if you gave him space he'd nail a turn around jumper or fade away on you. Ewing also went right at defenders when he faced up and put the ball on the floor. He'd get a ton of foul calls in today's NBA and he was a 74% FT shooter, not bad for a centre. Ewing was so quick for his size too and had great hands around the rim. He wasn't an amazing passer but could pass his way out of a double team which is all centre's in today's NBA need to be able to do. I'm not a Knicks fan or anything, but I grew up watching them with my Dad prior to the Raptors. Even in today's NBA I find it hard to believe that Ewing wouldn't be a #1 scoring option on most teams.

valade16
03-17-2015, 09:26 AM
It's weird that the analytical movement has kind of killed the post presence because statistically isn't the best possible shot in terms of efficiency a shot w/3 ft of the basket? Wouldn't a guy like Hakeem or McHale who could routinely get that shot at a high % be an analytics dream?

ewing
03-17-2015, 11:47 AM
It's weird that the analytical movement has kind of killed the post presence because statistically isn't the best possible shot in terms of efficiency a shot w/3 ft of the basket? Wouldn't a guy like Hakeem or McHale who could routinely get that shot at a high % be an analytics dream?

thats not what killed the post game and its not dead. Almost every good team in the league has a guy that they are dependent on that scores out of the post (LMA, Blake, Gasol/Zo BO, Tim Duncan) I swear everyone who has only watched one generation of basketball is sure that there's is total watershed. It different but its not a revolution, honestly the biggest differences are more guys can shoot, which believe it or not a lot of people saw coming (Pitino was talking about the 3 point revolution in the 80s), and you cant hand check. Its not a post dominate league but it is still a weapon and weapon trending up a little if you ask me, we wont go back to generally post up dominated offensives but...

IDunknown
03-17-2015, 07:53 PM
To those saying Patrick Ewing would struggle to score, wouldn't he be a better version of LMA today? Ewing had range out to 20 feet and could easily space the floor to knock down the open jumper and had enough post moves to be a problem down low if he had a smaller opponent.

I don't think Ewing would have much of a problem in todays game.


^^^ i don't mean to be repetitive but i just don't understand how it would harder for Ewing to score. He was surrounded by no offensive talent, played for a team whose pace was super slow, and played ridiculously physical. It was a grind every night. Its harder for everyone when the defense is always set and its harder when your teammates aren't real threats. He had tools for the post, in both screen roll and pick and pop, on the glass, and in catch and shoot spots, filling lanes, in transition. He was a beast with mobility, power, and a jump shot. Would refs call the travel on his runner across the lane IDK, but if they did he wouldn't shoot it. How many 7 foot 250 pound guys do you see in the league today with all those tools. I don't see one. I certainly don't see one that doesn't get looks at the basket. IMO he would be actually be a more efficient scorer in today.

Ewing is getting crazy disrespected in here. He doesn't have post moves as good as Hakeem, and isn't as physical as Shaq? Who is?

IKnowHoops
03-17-2015, 08:57 PM
Some of you guys just don't get it. The reason there aren't any good NBA centers (compared to the past) is strictly due to the rules and how the game has changed. GM's look for a center who can defend the paint, rebound, and set picks. The days of them taking over games are done and it's why besides Dwight, no center has been relied on to do so much offensively the past ten or so years. I don't think it has anything to do with center's being not as good. It's just the environment of the modern NBA doesn't call for them to be the type of center that others in the past were. There's no way all these "centers" just disappear out of the blue while PG's are on the rise. Magic IMO would have a tough time playing in today's NBA whereas he didn't back then.

No bro, there is nobody out there that are even close to Drob, Hakeem, Shaq, Ewing. And if they were in the league today they would be doing what Anthony Davis is doing but at an even higher level. There is nobody in the league on Anthony Davis's level, let alone a Drob, Hakeem or Shaq.

IKnowHoops
03-17-2015, 09:12 PM
There just haven't been great centers that have come into the league. NBA game is what it is, but teams will always draft a good big man over a good small man. Hakeem>Shaq to Oden>Durant and had Embiid been 100% healthy, he would of been drafted #1 over Wiggins.

But as I said before, the good centers just have not been there. Think about how many centers have been drafted #1 overall in college in the last 10 years. Oden is the only one I can think of. Well from 85 to 92, Shaq,Drob,Hakeem,Ewing went #1 in a 7 year period. During that same span Alonzo went second and Mutumbo went 4th. All four of those guys would be easy number 1 picks in todays college game too. In the last 15 years the centers absolutely have simply not been as good. Anthony Davis is the only big in the league that can get to that level.

R. Johnson#3
03-18-2015, 04:26 PM
Ewing is getting crazy disrespected in here. He doesn't have post moves as good as Hakeem, and isn't as physical as Shaq? Who is?

A lot of people clearly never watched Ewing play and are just making ridiculous comparisons.

IKnowHoops
03-18-2015, 05:29 PM
A lot of people clearly never watched Ewing play and are just making ridiculous comparisons.

Agreed. Ewing would be LMA on steroids...and thats being nice to LMA

FlashBolt
03-20-2015, 01:57 AM
There just haven't been great centers that have come into the league. NBA game is what it is, but teams will always draft a good big man over a good small man. Hakeem>Shaq to Oden>Durant and had Embiid been 100% healthy, he would of been drafted #1 over Wiggins.

But as I said before, the good centers just have not been there. Think about how many centers have been drafted #1 overall in college in the last 10 years. Oden is the only one I can think of. Well from 85 to 92, Shaq,Drob,Hakeem,Ewing went #1 in a 7 year period. During that same span Alonzo went second and Mutumbo went 4th. All four of those guys would be easy number 1 picks in todays college game too. In the last 15 years the centers absolutely have simply not been as good. Anthony Davis is the only big in the league that can get to that level.

That's completely b.s. The game doesn't work that way anymore. You can't just destroy the paint. You're comparing Davis who legitimately has a midrange game and can set picks/is the euro-big player. Davis came out playing as a guard... these are how players are being taught how to play today. The game has transitioned. It's why all the big guys are getting injured often and that's due to their body not being able to adjust to a game in which is totally different. Marc Gasol, Noah, Drummond, DeAndre; none of these guys are relied on to score. Ewing, Hakeem, Shaq, and D-Rob were relied on to score because that's how they played the game back then. It's a guard's game these days coupled with wings and the frontcourt is often neglected (see Chris Bosh/Love) because they are often just there to defend, set picks, and free up the paint. I don't know what to tell you but I refuse to believe that the reason for the disappearance in "big men" is due to someone not being good enough. You don't just lose big men like that. No one is drafting centers anymore? They just drafted Embiid last season and Towns/Okafor can certainly become centers in the NBA as the #1 picks. But the game won't call for them to be dominant. Just look at the disparity in the level of PG's compared to the past. That's where all the fun is at now.

IKnowHoops
03-20-2015, 02:10 AM
That's completely b.s. The game doesn't work that way anymore. You can't just destroy the paint. You're comparing Davis who legitimately has a midrange game and can set picks/is the euro-big player. Davis came out playing as a guard... these are how players are being taught how to play today. The game has transitioned. It's why all the big guys are getting injured often and that's due to their body not being able to adjust to a game in which is totally different. Marc Gasol, Noah, Drummond, DeAndre; none of these guys are relied on to score. Ewing, Hakeem, Shaq, and D-Rob were relied on to score because that's how they played the game back then. It's a guard's game these days coupled with wings and the frontcourt is often neglected (see Chris Bosh/Love) because they are often just there to defend, set picks, and free up the paint. I don't know what to tell you but I refuse to believe that the reason for the disappearance in "big men" is due to someone not being good enough. You don't just lose big men like that. No one is drafting centers anymore? They just drafted Embiid last season and Towns/Okafor can certainly become centers in the NBA as the #1 picks. But the game won't call for them to be dominant. Just look at the disparity in the level of PG's compared to the past. That's where all the fun is at now.

On no team, in any system are those players comparable. The distance in talent between the two groups is so large I wouldn't even know where to begin nor would I even waste my time arguing it, and thats a first on PSD.

FlashBolt
03-20-2015, 02:49 AM
On no team, in any system are those players comparable. The distance in talent between the two groups is so large I wouldn't even know where to begin nor would I even waste my time arguing it, and thats a first on PSD.

I'm not comparing them by any means. Just saying that the most prominent centers of this generation play a completely different game. They are the euro league center rather than your traditional pass it to the big man and watch them cause havoc. I'm not disagreeing with you that Shaq/Hakeem/D-Rob were amazing players but the days of having those centers completely wrecking the league won't be happening in this generation. The game isn't fit for them to do so. Look at all these shooters out there. They don't just pop in outta nowhere.

kdspurman
03-20-2015, 08:37 AM
I'm not comparing them by any means. Just saying that the most prominent centers of this generation play a completely different game. They are the euro league center rather than your traditional pass it to the big man and watch them cause havoc. I'm not disagreeing with you that Shaq/Hakeem/D-Rob were amazing players but the days of having those centers completely wrecking the league won't be happening in this generation. The game isn't fit for them to do so. Look at all these shooters out there. They don't just pop in outta nowhere.

Can you imagine the looks those shooters would get though if teams had to double or triple team guys in the post? Or because they don't want to leave the shooters, they play em' 1 on 1 and take advantage. A guy like Cousins is someone who still kind of plays like some of those bigs did. Back to basket, physical, etc... he's just got some screws loose.

slashsnake
03-22-2015, 06:36 AM
another thing about Ewing, he's not Tim Duncan. Pat would demand the ball. IMO its why he fell of a cliff after his prime. I'm against ball hawking but you do have to adjust to your best players. I don't think you could maximize his impact without touches.

He fell off a cliff because he was ancient.

15.0 point 9.7 board 37 year old Patrick Ewing his last year in NY right? That's the fall there.

Duncan was 37 last year... 15.1 points and 9.7 boards.

Duncan last year became the only other player in NBA history to average 15+ and 9+ at 37 or older. Making him and Ewing the most productive old *** bigs ever at that extreme age.

I mean 37, his 15-10 year is the year of 8 point 8 board a game David Robinson. Of 12 point 6 board Cleveland Shaq. Of 10 point 6 board Olajuwon. Of 6 point 4 board Alonzo Mourning. Of Garnett LAST YEAR.



Ewing is tied with Elgin Baylor as the oldest player in NBA history to average 20 and 10 in a season. Everyone fell off before he did.

Ewing had 6 seasons of 20-10 after age 30. That's an NBA record. Double what Barkley, Olajuwan, or Karl Malone had. As many as Shaq, Duncan, Robinson, and Garnett COMBINED.

He's one of 6 players in the history of the league to average 20-10 with 2 blocks in a single season after age 30. That's right, only 6 guys in the entire history of the league can say I did that... Oh he did it a record 5 times too.

How far has the center position fallen when we remember seeing Ewing and say he fell off a cliff, and see a great today putting up the SAME EXACT NUMBERS and say he's defining the act of playing at a high level as he ages gracefully? I think he would have done quite well today. He boarded, he ran the court well, he played straight up D, help D, enforcer D. He could sit there as your primary option again and again and again without any issue on offense. Was he Prime Olajuwon or Prime Shaq? Of course not. But you are comparing him to two of the best ever to play the position.

And no offense, but it's easier to adjust to your best players as you age when those players are Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili, rather than when it's Latrell Sprewell. Still getting a team to a conference finals isn't bad success. Especially for a Spre/Houston led team. There's a lot of guys today in their primes that would never put up a 20-10 game against a prime Alonzo Mourning to clinch a series much less at 37.

If Kobe Bryant was born 15 years earlier, we'd be sitting here saying he's clearly no Jordan. Would that mean he couldn't be one of the best player 15 years later though? Of course not. We've seen it.

Chronz
03-22-2015, 12:14 PM
He fell off a cliff because he was ancient.

15.0 point 9.7 board 37 year old Patrick Ewing his last year in NY right? That's the fall there.

Duncan was 37 last year... 15.1 points and 9.7 boards.

Duncan last year became the only other player in NBA history to average 15+ and 9+ at 37 or older. Making him and Ewing the most productive old *** bigs ever at that extreme age.

I mean 37, his 15-10 year is the year of 8 point 8 board a game David Robinson. Of 12 point 6 board Cleveland Shaq. Of 10 point 6 board Olajuwon. Of 6 point 4 board Alonzo Mourning. Of Garnett LAST YEAR.



Ewing is tied with Elgin Baylor as the oldest player in NBA history to average 20 and 10 in a season. Everyone fell off before he did.

Ewing had 6 seasons of 20-10 after age 30. That's an NBA record. Double what Barkley, Olajuwan, or Karl Malone had. As many as Shaq, Duncan, Robinson, and Garnett COMBINED.

He's one of 6 players in the history of the league to average 20-10 with 2 blocks in a single season after age 30. That's right, only 6 guys in the entire history of the league can say I did that... Oh he did it a record 5 times too.

How far has the center position fallen when we remember seeing Ewing and say he fell off a cliff, and see a great today putting up the SAME EXACT NUMBERS and say he's defining the act of playing at a high level as he ages gracefully? I think he would have done quite well today. He boarded, he ran the court well, he played straight up D, help D, enforcer D. He could sit there as your primary option again and again and again without any issue on offense. Was he Prime Olajuwon or Prime Shaq? Of course not. But you are comparing him to two of the best ever to play the position.

And no offense, but it's easier to adjust to your best players as you age when those players are Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili, rather than when it's Latrell Sprewell. Still getting a team to a conference finals isn't bad success. Especially for a Spre/Houston led team. There's a lot of guys today in their primes that would never put up a 20-10 game against a prime Alonzo Mourning to clinch a series much less at 37.

If Kobe Bryant was born 15 years earlier, we'd be sitting here saying he's clearly no Jordan. Would that mean he couldn't be one of the best player 15 years later though? Of course not. We've seen it.

I wonder how horrible those stats look when you actually account for pace/efficiency.

slashsnake
03-23-2015, 02:33 AM
I wonder how horrible those stats look when you actually account for pace/efficiency.

Good point. I think I get what you are pointing at with the Knicks slow down, slug it out pace.

Duncan may have the edge at 37 with 15.1 points to Ewing's 15.0 points, but the Spurs play at a 105.4 point a game pace and the Knicks played at a 92 a game pace.

IE

at 37, Ewing was scoring 16.3% of his teams offense.
at 37, Duncan was scoring 14.1% of his teams offense.

Ewing at that scoring rate with that pace would be over 17 a game.

FlashBolt
03-23-2015, 03:02 AM
Can you imagine the looks those shooters would get though if teams had to double or triple team guys in the post? Or because they don't want to leave the shooters, they play em' 1 on 1 and take advantage. A guy like Cousins is someone who still kind of plays like some of those bigs did. Back to basket, physical, etc... he's just got some screws loose.

That's certainly plausible. I'm not saying a player like Shaq wouldn't dominate in today's league but you have to consider that Shaq wouldn't be as effective. Players just aren't being bred to play a type of basketball style. Just like how these new players are coming in shooting threes. It's just what they are being taught.

IKnowHoops
03-23-2015, 04:11 AM
I'm not comparing them by any means. Just saying that the most prominent centers of this generation play a completely different game. They are the euro league center rather than your traditional pass it to the big man and watch them cause havoc. I'm not disagreeing with you that Shaq/Hakeem/D-Rob were amazing players but the days of having those centers completely wrecking the league won't be happening in this generation. The game isn't fit for them to do so. Look at all these shooters out there. They don't just pop in outta nowhere.

The thing is, those guys were so good they would adjust and still put up dominant numbers in any era, in any style of play. Again, they would all be Anthony Davis on steroids in todays game. David and Hakeem are just bigger, taller, longer, better versions of Anthony Davis. Shaq is just a monster. The game changing couldn't stop these three player's dominance. They are all dominant enough to continually go down low to them and regardless of what your team did before they got there, you change for these players.

Ive seen the blazers continually go down low to LMA. These three put LMA to shame in the post. If the blazers will feed LMA over and over in todays game, Im sure there are plenty of teams that will have no problem going down low 3 of the top 6 centers of all time.

IKnowHoops
03-23-2015, 04:49 AM
I'm not comparing them by any means. Just saying that the most prominent centers of this generation play a completely different game. They are the euro league center rather than your traditional pass it to the big man and watch them cause havoc. I'm not disagreeing with you that Shaq/Hakeem/D-Rob were amazing players but the days of having those centers completely wrecking the league won't be happening in this generation. The game isn't fit for them to do so. Look at all these shooters out there. They don't just pop in outta nowhere.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XivZd3mRVw

Exactly what part of there game could this version of the NBA slow down or stop? Please note the time on the video where a scoring scenario would not happen for them in todays nba. And enjoy a reminder of why David and Shaq would annihilate this nba worse than they did in there own time.

slashsnake
03-23-2015, 05:01 AM
The thing is, those guys were so good they would adjust and still put up dominant numbers in any era, in any style of play. Again, they would all be Anthony Davis on steroids in todays game. David and Hakeem are just bigger, taller, longer, better versions of Anthony Davis. Shaq is just a monster. The game changing couldn't stop these three player's dominance. They are all dominant enough to continually go down low to them and regardless of what your team did before they got there, you change for these players.

Ive seen the blazers continually go down low to LMA. These three put LMA to shame in the post. If the blazers will feed LMA over and over in todays game, Im sure there are plenty of teams that will have no problem going down low 3 of the top 6 centers of all time.

I agree there with this 100%... Not sure why the change, just a weak trend or what?

Maybe it's that colleges aren't spending time coaching and teaching them. And who can blame them. You work on him freshman year on fundamentals where he is weak, and if he's a good big talent, he's gone before you get to reap any of those rewards. So instead, at the college level you try to maximize his skills, work with what he already does best. He can jump, you just keep running him off screens and never really work to develop his back to the basket game.

But yeah, if you had a weapon you can go down to that can consistently shoot 50-60%, draw fouls, force teams to double team, etc.. even today, teams would be dying for it. They are much better offensive versions of Dwight, and he's a 20 pt a game guy over the last 7 years. Better post moves, better shot. Yeah, 25 a game wouldn't be a problem for any of them and 30+ is possible here and there for a year.

The only reason I could see some production would be down is the minutes guys play today. Ewing, Olajuwon, Robinson, early Shaq... Those guys were all 37-41 minute a game guys in their prime years. Jimmy Butler is the only player averaging more than 37 minutes a game this season. Just how coaches rest guys might be their only issue.

valade16
03-23-2015, 09:10 AM
I wonder how horrible those stats look when you actually account for pace/efficiency.

The Knicks were usually one of the slowest paced teams in the league. If anything, had they played at a league average pace, you'd likely see better numbers.

You are right about the efficiency though, that went out in his 98 season (when he was 35).

KnicksorBust
03-23-2015, 11:35 AM
He fell off a cliff because he was ancient.

15.0 point 9.7 board 37 year old Patrick Ewing his last year in NY right? That's the fall there.

Duncan was 37 last year... 15.1 points and 9.7 boards.

Duncan last year became the only other player in NBA history to average 15+ and 9+ at 37 or older. Making him and Ewing the most productive old *** bigs ever at that extreme age.

I mean 37, his 15-10 year is the year of 8 point 8 board a game David Robinson. Of 12 point 6 board Cleveland Shaq. Of 10 point 6 board Olajuwon. Of 6 point 4 board Alonzo Mourning. Of Garnett LAST YEAR.



Ewing is tied with Elgin Baylor as the oldest player in NBA history to average 20 and 10 in a season. Everyone fell off before he did.

Ewing had 6 seasons of 20-10 after age 30. That's an NBA record. Double what Barkley, Olajuwan, or Karl Malone had. As many as Shaq, Duncan, Robinson, and Garnett COMBINED.

He's one of 6 players in the history of the league to average 20-10 with 2 blocks in a single season after age 30. That's right, only 6 guys in the entire history of the league can say I did that... Oh he did it a record 5 times too.

How far has the center position fallen when we remember seeing Ewing and say he fell off a cliff, and see a great today putting up the SAME EXACT NUMBERS and say he's defining the act of playing at a high level as he ages gracefully? I think he would have done quite well today. He boarded, he ran the court well, he played straight up D, help D, enforcer D. He could sit there as your primary option again and again and again without any issue on offense. Was he Prime Olajuwon or Prime Shaq? Of course not. But you are comparing him to two of the best ever to play the position.

And no offense, but it's easier to adjust to your best players as you age when those players are Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili, rather than when it's Latrell Sprewell. Still getting a team to a conference finals isn't bad success. Especially for a Spre/Houston led team. There's a lot of guys today in their primes that would never put up a 20-10 game against a prime Alonzo Mourning to clinch a series much less at 37.

If Kobe Bryant was born 15 years earlier, we'd be sitting here saying he's clearly no Jordan. Would that mean he couldn't be one of the best player 15 years later though? Of course not. We've seen it.

Do you think Ewing aged as well as Karl Malone?

Chronz
03-23-2015, 11:56 AM
Good point. I think I get what you are pointing at with the Knicks slow down, slug it out pace.

Duncan may have the edge at 37 with 15.1 points to Ewing's 15.0 points, but the Spurs play at a 105.4 point a game pace and the Knicks played at a 92 a game pace.

IE

at 37, Ewing was scoring 16.3% of his teams offense.
at 37, Duncan was scoring 14.1% of his teams offense.

Ewing at that scoring rate with that pace would be over 17 a game.
Slower pace allows you [forces you] to funnel more possessions towards Halfcourt "stars" , hence the reason the Knicks thrived in a fastbreak game on route to the Finals. Still' it's good that we start with pace , now let's get to the efficiency, ill even give you the advantage in usage. You really think any barometer grades chucking that highly?

Chronz
03-23-2015, 11:58 AM
The Knicks were usually one of the slowest paced teams in the league. If anything, had they played at a league average pace, you'd likely see better numbers.

You are right about the efficiency though, that went out in his 98 season (when he was 35).

Not by My estimations

SLY WILLIAMS
03-23-2015, 12:58 PM
How many strong post defenders are there today? How many of todays guys could stop a prime Shaq down in the post once he got the ball? Against many of todays guys it would almost be like a man playing against teenagers once Shaq caught the ball within 10 feet of the hoop.

KnicksorBust
03-23-2015, 01:05 PM
How many strong post defenders are there today? How many of todays guys could stop a prime Shaq down in the post once he got the ball? Against many of todays guys it would almost be like a man playing against teenagers once Shaq caught the ball within 10 feet of the hoop.

How many guys could do that in the 90s/00s?

Bogut, Dwight, Asik, Marc Gasol, Gortat, Jordan, Drummond.

Chronz
03-23-2015, 01:17 PM
How many guys could do that in the 90s/00s?

Bogut, Dwight, Asik, Marc Gasol, Gortat, Jordan, Drummond.

He's got a point. Teams used to stash 7 ft stiffs to combat the likes of Shaq. Gasol went on some kind of paleo diet, Dwight struggled with older shaq(+yao), dj isn't doing **** and those are the better defenders you named. Id take elden Campbell before those guys if we're taking about slowing down Shaq

valade16
03-23-2015, 01:29 PM
Not by My estimations

To which part? The pace or the efficiency?

Because in 1999 (the year Ewing averaged 15/10) the Knicks had the dead last pace in the league at 89.1.

KnicksorBust
03-23-2015, 02:41 PM
He's got a point. Teams used to stash 7 ft stiffs to combat the likes of Shaq. Gasol went on some kind of paleo diet, Dwight struggled with older shaq(+yao), dj isn't doing **** and those are the better defenders you named. Id take elden Campbell before those guys if we're taking about slowing down Shaq

I've got a point. Ewing/Zo/Dikembe/Hakeem couldn't do jack to slow down Shaq. How is that question relevant?

NYKalltheway
03-23-2015, 08:08 PM
It's a different game, more perimeter focused, so probably yeah. It'd depend on their situation as well. I think that players such as Shaq, Hakeem, DRob and Ewing would have better even better numbers these days. The non-elite ones would be the ones to suffer by the difference.