Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

defense: 80s vs today

8K views 150 replies 28 participants last post by  RollWithEm 
#1 ·
was the overall defense of the nba stronger in the 80s (pick a year)?

were the wing defenders better in the 80s?
 
#2 ·
The greatest, dirtiest, roughest and most intimidating defensive team of all time came from that era in the Bad Boy Pistons and the lowest ppg they EVER allowed was 99!!! back in 1989 so that tells you a lot about how powerfull the offenses were.

Hell the 91 Bulls had AWESOME defense and they allowed 101ppg!!!

Now if those 2 teams, who were better defensively than ANY team now a days (they could also score above 100) couldn't or barely kept teams below 100 points it tells me that something else is going on besides "More sophisticated" defenses.

So to me defenses didn't get that much better, offenses became EASIER to stop. Yo can thank expansion and the salary cap for that.
 
#3 ·
um the 80's were way inferior on defense there is just a big difference

the better teams then cared about defense but not with the intsensity that they do now
 
#4 ·
Individual defenders are much better these days, though the league allowed more contact back then. Ron Artest would probably be the best on the ball defender in the 80's if you put him in that era. The average player per position back then was much smaller and less athletic then today.
 
#5 ·
Teams also concentrated more on Offense during the 80's and b4 that as well....every team wanted to run and push the ball up at any given opportunity. For how many teams can u say that today? Very few. Only 2 teams in the league today run a lot and r still able to stop guyz effectively on the other end - Kings and Nets.
 
#6 ·
And both of those teams have something that is a dying breed in the NBA, a true pass first, up tempo PG that doesn't have to look at the coach every freakin time he recieves an outlet pass.

In the 80's the league was FULL of PG's that played that way and the teams were a lot deeper because there were 23 of them with low salaries and no cap. Here are some PG's of that era:

Magic
Isiah
Stockton
Cheeks
DJ
Mark Price
Terry Porter
Mark Jackson
Kevin Johnson
Norm Nixon
Tiny Archibald
Sidney Moncrief
Sleepy Floyd
John Lucas
Sugar Ray Richardson
Fat Lever

That list DWARFS' the present crop by a country mile!!!

The PG's are a teams engine and back in the 80's they were all the race car type.

Now only Jason Kidd, Steve Nash and Bibby fit that mold.
 
#7 ·
i certainly dont see all the great defense today that everyone is talking about.dont confuse playing a zone with great defense.there were guys like michael cooper of the lakers who were great defenders who didnt even start.how about the celts with,mchale parish and d.j.,some of the great defenders of all time and philly with mo cheeks,bobby jones and moses malone.
 
#8 ·
everyone keeps making references to the best defensive teams and players. isn't it freaking obvious that team, transition, and individual defense is much much better nowadays? with scores in the 120s there isn't a lot of hard nosed defense being player. you have to realize this.
 
#9 ·
It's good to see some voices of reason here, but I'm still amazed by these retards who think defenses are better today just because teams were scoring a lot more back then.

That has nothing to do with defenses.

Those guys knew how to play the game and score. That's why they scored more points , not because defenses were bad.

Artest would be the best defender back then?

What the hell are you smoking. Artest would have been playing in the CBA in the 80s

The quality of both offense and defense is crap today. Argentina for Christ sakes did whatever they wanted to do against some of the best defenders in the NBA. Stockton and Malone are still playing at 40+. They swept Kobe and Shaq and better Lakers than these today 2 years in a row. And they were 80s guys over the hill at the time they kicked Kobe and Shaq's azz. How bad do you think they'd beat them if they played them in their prime.

You don't need to speculate, that is your proof right there. 2 80s guys over the hill sweepingthe best ( as you say ) of today, just a few years back.

What more proof do you need than 2 of the 80s guys playing against today's champs and demolishing them desopite being over the hill and having no center or any other decent teammates.

Guys like Moncrief, Cooper, Dumars don't exist today.

Even the Bulls were a veteran team with guys who entered the league in the mid 80s and nobody could beat them even when Jordan, Rodman and Harper were over the hill. They won 70 games. That is how bad the younger players are. They couldn't handle 80's players even when these guys reached 35 years of age or more. If thes guys of today played some 80s team in their prime the massacre would be unbearable, worse than Dream team against Angola.

Who cares if guys looked a little less pumped up in the 80s. That's only a detriment to today's guys. The steroids ate away at what little brains they have. They gained size, they lost everything else.
They have no brains or balls.
 
#10 ·
Originally posted by <b>golgor</b>!
Artest would be the best defender back then?

What the hell are you smoking. Artest would have been playing in the CBA in the 80s

Nice... Coop was the best defender out there. I remember watching him guard DJ one play, and then Parish the next. Only one guy had the skills to do that


They swept Kobe and Shaq and better Lakers than these today 2 years in a row. And they were 80s guys over the hill at the time they kicked Kobe and Shaq's azz. How bad do you think they'd beat them if they played them in their prime.

You don't need to speculate, that is your proof right there. 2 80s guys over the hill sweepingthe best ( as you say ) of today, just a few years back.

What more proof do you need than 2 of the 80s guys playing against today's champs and demolishing them desopite being over the hill and having no center or any other decent teammates.

They have no brains or balls.
Is there a reason why Stockton and Malone vs. Kobe of Shaq four years ago is stated in almost all of your posts? I didn't think that the Jones/Van Exel/Shaq/young Kobe team was the best out there, rather the one with the most potential. Also, Stockton and Malone were far from over the hill at that point. Those two were among the top two or three at their position. I remember an even older Kareem dominating other teams as he pushed 40. He wasn't over the hill, he was "experienced."
 
#11 ·
Originally posted by <b>golgor</b>!
It's good to see some voices of reason here, but I'm still amazed by these retards who think defenses are better today just because teams were scoring a lot more back then.

That has nothing to do with defenses.

Those guys knew how to play the game and score. That's why they scored more points , not because defenses were bad.

Artest would be the best defender back then?

What the hell are you smoking. Artest would have been playing in the CBA in the 80s

The quality of both offense and defense is crap today. Argentina for Christ sakes did whatever they wanted to do against some of the best defenders in the NBA. Stockton and Malone are still playing at 40+. They swept Kobe and Shaq and better Lakers than these today 2 years in a row. And they were 80s guys over the hill at the time they kicked Kobe and Shaq's azz. How bad do you think they'd beat them if they played them in their prime.

You don't need to speculate, that is your proof right there. 2 80s guys over the hill sweepingthe best ( as you say ) of today, just a few years back.

What more proof do you need than 2 of the 80s guys playing against today's champs and demolishing them desopite being over the hill and having no center or any other decent teammates.

Guys like Moncrief, Cooper, Dumars don't exist today.

Even the Bulls were a veteran team with guys who entered the league in the mid 80s and nobody could beat them even when Jordan, Rodman and Harper were over the hill. They won 70 games. That is how bad the younger players are. They couldn't handle 80's players even when these guys reached 35 years of age or more. If thes guys of today played some 80s team in their prime the massacre would be unbearable, worse than Dream team against Angola.

Who cares if guys looked a little less pumped up in the 80s. That's only a detriment to today's guys. The steroids ate away at what little brains they have. They gained size, they lost everything else.
They have no brains or balls.
please don't be insulted, and i'm sure you won't be because you're obviously just trolling, but you're probably the worst hater on this site.
you're so far off its not even funny, it's annoying. ask the most knowledgable people on this site and they will agree that today's defense is better. your examples are ludicrous- the bulls and the jazz were veteran teams, played good defense, and they won. what's your point? defensive prowess often comes with age. there are many great defenders in the L today and many of them are over 30. so what? they're still in today's nba!
then you bring in the US play in the WC? them losing proves the nba's weak defense? of course it doesn't. again, silly example.
ron artest wouldn't have been in the L in the 80s? your credibility is next to nothing at this point. he would have been one of the better defenders of the 80s, just like he is today.

do you look at the nba and only see the young prospects sitting on the bench and playing limited minutes? guys that shouldn't yet be in the nba and haven't learned the game yet? cause that's not the nba! it's much much more than that and contains contains some of the greatest players, offensive and defensive, of all time.
 
#12 ·
When it comes down to it people don't give a sh!t how the NBA came to have such low scores, horrible FG%'s, multiple brick laying teams and none existent fast break offense, they ONLY care about the end result.

The end result, unfortunately for the league, is that the style of play in the 80's was 10 times more exciting than what is going on now and nothing's gonna change that.

Why do you think the league has tinkered with so many freaking rules since the mid 90's??? I can tell you it was not to have a league full of teams struggling to break 100 points.

Defense may win championships but Showtime offense is what puts the as!es in the seats!
 
#13 ·
Originally posted by <b>Showtime84'</b>!
When it comes down to it people don't give a sh!t how the NBA came to have such low scores, horrible FG%'s, multiple brick laying teams and none existent fast break offense, they ONLY care about the end result.

The end result, unfortunately for the league, is that the style of play in the 80's was 10 times more exciting than what is going on now and nothing's gonna change that.

Why do you think the league has tinkered with so many freaking rules since the mid 90's??? I can tell you it was not to have a league full of teams struggling to break 100 points.

Defense may win championships but Showtime offense is what puts the as!es in the seats!
wow, great argument! defense doesn't matter cause people just want to see showtime. the question was is defense better, not is defense fun to watch.
 
#14 ·
Originally posted by <b>SkywalkerAC</b>!


please don't be insulted, and i'm sure you won't be because you're obviously just trolling, but you're probably the worst hater on this site.
you're so far off its not even funny, it's annoying. ask the most knowledgable people on this site and they will agree that today's defense is better. your examples are ludicrous- the bulls and the jazz were veteran teams, played good defense, and they won. what's your point? defensive prowess often comes with age. there are many great defenders in the L today and many of them are over 30. so what? they're still in today's nba!
then you bring in the US play in the WC? them losing proves the nba's weak defense? of course it doesn't. again, silly example.
ron artest wouldn't have been in the L in the 80s? your credibility is next to nothing at this point. he would have been one of the better defenders of the 80s, just like he is today.

do you look at the nba and only see the young prospects sitting on the bench and playing limited minutes? guys that shouldn't yet be in the nba and haven't learned the game yet? cause that's not the nba! it's much much more than that and contains contains some of the greatest players, offensive and defensive, of all time.

Todays defense IS NOT better. The league is diluted and fundamental skills like a midrange game has disappeared. It's either you dunk or shoot a 3 nowaday.

Name how many people have unstoppable midrange games nowadays? Kobe? Big Dog? Cassel? Marion?

Teams in the 80's had at least 1-3 players with a solid midrange jumper and game. The poster that pointed out the PG's, nice work. The points back then were a lot stronger. So were the centers. You don't think that makes a difference in how a team is able to score Skywalker?

Scoring has steadily declined because so have the talent levels. The athleticism has increased, and that's it. 7 footers nowadays want to be KG not Kareem. PG's want to be And1 ballers, not Jason Kidd.

It's sad really.
 
#15 ·
Originally posted by <b>SkywalkerAC</b>!


please don't be insulted, and i'm sure you won't be because you're obviously just trolling, but you're probably the worst hater on this site.
you're so far off its not even funny, it's annoying. ask the most knowledgable people on this site and they will agree that today's defense is better. your examples are ludicrous- the bulls and the jazz were veteran teams, played good defense, and they won. what's your point? defensive prowess often comes with age. there are many great defenders in the L today and many of them are over 30. so what? they're still in today's nba!
then you bring in the US play in the WC? them losing proves the nba's weak defense? of course it doesn't. again, silly example.
ron artest wouldn't have been in the L in the 80s? your credibility is next to nothing at this point. he would have been one of the better defenders of the 80s, just like he is today.

do you look at the nba and only see the young prospects sitting on the bench and playing limited minutes? guys that shouldn't yet be in the nba and haven't learned the game yet? cause that's not the nba! it's much much more than that and contains contains some of the greatest players, offensive and defensive, of all time.

Todays defense IS NOT better. The league is diluted and fundamental skills like a midrange game has disappeared. It's either you dunk or shoot a 3 nowaday.

Name how many people have unstoppable midrange games nowadays? Kobe? Big Dog? Cassel? Marion?

Teams in the 80's had at least 1-3 players with a solid midrange jumper and game. The poster that pointed out the PG's, nice work. The points back then were a lot stronger. So were the centers. You don't think that makes a difference in how a team is able to score Skywalker?

Scoring has steadily declined because so have the talent levels. The athleticism has increased, and that's it. 7 footers nowadays want to be KG not Kareem. PG's want to be And1 ballers, not Jason Kidd. Teams can't even run anymore because there are no PG's to lead them. There are maybe 2-4 great running teams nowadays? There were several in the 80's.

It's sad really.
 
#16 ·
Originally posted by <b>buduan</b>!



Todays defense IS NOT better. The league is diluted and fundamental skills like a midrange game has disappeared. It's either you dunk or shoot a 3 nowaday.

Name how many people have unstoppable midrange games nowadays? Kobe? Big Dog? Cassel? Marion?

Teams in the 80's had at least 1-3 players with a solid midrange jumper and game. The poster that pointed out the PG's, nice work. The points back then were a lot stronger. So were the centers. You don't think that makes a difference in how a team is able to score Skywalker?

Scoring has steadily declined because so have the talent levels. The athleticism has increased, and that's it. 7 footers nowadays want to be KG not Kareem. PG's want to be And1 ballers, not Jason Kidd. Teams can't even run anymore because there are no PG's to lead them. There are maybe 2-4 great running teams nowadays? There were several in the 80's.

It's sad really.
all you're doing is complaining about today's nba and not proving your point in any way. you've brought up points trying to explain why today's point totals and fg% are down but have failed to argue what made the 80s defense better. were their wing defenders better than today's?

the nba is no longer really diluted- there are many great players fighting for a 10 day contract. there are more than enough great players to supply 29 teams.

many nba players have good medium range games. dunking isn't the be all and end all but taking it hard to the rim is a very important part of the game that has risen to the forefront along with the 3. i think that number of 3s has increased out of necessity- oppressive defenses make the midrange game more difficult. it's not just nba players falling in love with the outside game, the greatest minds in basketball have incorporated 3 pointers to a greater extent for significant for good reason.

the point guard position is fine, many of them are scorers but often other players take on distributory roles. as the best in the game, players do fashion themselves after kidd. even alston doesn't use his playground moves in the nba so i don't really see where the adulation of andoners comes into play here.
believe it or not, a slow down style of play usually results in better defense being played. also, more teams would be fast breaking if transition defense wasn't strong.

so, why aren't teams fast breaking? why are teams forced beyond the 3 point line? are defenders not bigger and stronger and quicker than ever? are these not the important physical attributes of defense? do coaches not scout ahead and concentrate on defense more than ever before?

and what on earth is wrong with modeling after KG- he does it all and is one of the best defensive players in the game.
 
#17 ·
That's exactly my point. That Malone and Stockton were two of the top at their positions by the time they beat LA in the late 90s.

They were never close to being top anything in the 80s in their prime. When competition disappeared and posers like Kobe and Shaq appeared they became top even though they were already 35 years old and not as good as in the 80s

Do you get it now???????

The reason I mention Utah vs LA is because that is direct proof of a mediocre 80s team beating the Lakers with Kobe and Shaq

You guys can speculate and talk all you want. I am giving real life results.

Utah - LA 4-0

Utah - LA 4-1

San Antonio - LA 4-0

It is only after these teams got even older and could barely walk that LA had a chance ( even then they needed all the refereeing help they could get.

As for the defense, all you need to do is watch. There are more dunks because it's much easier to get around defenders. Most missed shots are wide open or semi open. There are planty opportunities to score , yet they don't.

Nothing makes your defense look better than bad offense.

That's basically what you have today.
 
#139 ·
The messed up thing about this post is that kobe was a bench player for most of this time. Definitely his second year when jazz went 4-0 and the next year i think he may have started some games. Either way, he was still very young and not even close to his peak. So if you say Malone/Stockton beat LA in their peak but "It is only after these teams got even older and could barely walk that LA had a chance" which is when LA was at their peak, whats the difference? Mute point.
 
#18 ·
wow you're blinded by hate. you base your entire argument on single examples that have very little to do with the topic. the lakers losing to utah a few years ago has NOTHING to do with the improved defense of today. do you think it has any kind of real bearing or are you just trying to change the subject because you know that you're wrong? i beg of you, try to formulate something that actually resembles an intelligent argument and leave the lakers out of it.

on a separate note out of concern,
do you hate on the league so much simply because the lakers have been winning and that somehow shows you that the league is inferior?
 
#19 ·
No, it mostly that I get bored and feel like I'm watching high school basketball whenever I dial in a channel with an NBA game these days.

So you believe that defense of today means literally TODAY.

I'll have to check, maybe it did get better overnight. Although after just seeing an NBA game where nobody was able to make a single wide open shot for almost 3 minutes I kind of doubt it did get better at either end.
 
#20 ·
The 1998 Lakers were one of the Deepest, most athletic and talented teams in the last 10 years, better than ANY present team

C-Shaq, Rooks
PF-Campbell, Blount
SF-Fox, Horry
SG-Jones, Bryant
PG-Van Exel, Fisher, Barry

What happened? Got pimp slapped by Malone, Stockton, Hornacek, Carr, Osterfag and crew.
 
#21 ·
Exactly, They got embarassed by a couple over the hill 80s guys

Hornacek 35 years old, limping on one good knee

Stockton 36 years old, about 25% slower than in the 80s

Malone 35 years old also about 25% weaker than in the 80s

Worth mentioning they did it without a real center and no other decent help.


And in the 80s in their prime they could never beat LA even though they had a legit center in Eaton and a decent power forward in Bailey.

This is something that should be noted and framed in the hall of fame, because usually you do not get a chance to compare players from differnt eras, but thanks to Utah we have a direct comparison of 80s vs today.
 
#22 ·
Originally posted by <b>Showtime84'</b>!
The 1998 Lakers were one of the Deepest, most athletic and talented teams in the last 10 years, better than ANY present team

C-Shaq, Rooks
PF-Campbell, Blount
SF-Fox, Horry
SG-Jones, Bryant
PG-Van Exel, Fisher, Barry

What happened? Got pimp slapped by Malone, Stockton, Hornacek, Carr, Osterfag and crew.
i'm sorry but this team is not that deep. please check out the blazers and the kings in the past few years. this team looks great on paper but they failed...to a team from the 90s, not the freaking 80s! just because they were playing with awesome veterans means nothing! and they aren't hands down better than every team in the nba...unless that kobe bryant is replaced with today's.
man, this has NOTHING to do with this argument. i don't give a **** about the lakers. again, try and make a real argument for once. the only pertinent issue is that this lakers team was a decent defensive unit. that's it!
 
#23 ·
I feel that today's defenses are much better. One reason is better athletes, but advanced scouting along with better video editing are also a factor. Back in the 80's players never watched tape and coaches barely did. Now NBA teams have scouts that are assigned to cover like 5 teams and they can tell you what plays they run and what signals players and coaches use to call that play. They study players moves to the point where one player makes a jab step and the defender already anticipated it.
 
#24 ·
Hey Jemel, don't you think you should change your sig.

World Champions are Yugoslavia
NBA champs are Lakers ( at least Devid Stern version. )

I mean what's the point of having discussions if even moderators here don't know the difference between world championship and the NBA championship ( then even the NBA championship really belongs to Sacramento )

I might as well pronounce myself the champion of the universe since it seems anybody just calls themselves champions of whatever they want just like that.

And no my friend , Lakers ( the real ones ) used to be my team.

I hate because I hate morons/ would be convicts if it weren't for basketball who can't play.

I don't hate Sacramento, Ray Allen or Tim Duncan and a few other good guys. There is a reason I hate and I wouldn't want it any other way
 
#25 ·
Originally posted by <b>SkywalkerAC</b>!


all you're doing is complaining about today's nba and not proving your point in any way.

I'm basically showing that lower scores nowadays doesn't translate to better defense, just a dilution in talent and a focus on the highlight reels. Why do you think the international players are taking over this league? Because they are learning the fundamentals and are better shooters because of it.


you've brought up points trying to explain why today's point totals and fg% are down but have failed to argue what made the 80s defense better. were their wing defenders better than today's?

Obviously you didn't watch the NBA in the 80's, because if you did we wouldn't even be having this conversation. So you are looking for great one on one defenders? Is that what makes todays NBA better in your opinion? I bet you have never even heard of a guy named T.R. Dunn, have you? Great on ball defender and played the lanes better than most defenders today.

How about Alvin Robertson? Averaged over 3 steals a game for several seasons. Even recorded a triple double with 10 steals one game.

Ever hear of Michael Cooper? Kevin McHale? 2 of the best defenders at their positions EVER. How about Robert Reid? Great one on one defender. Mo Cheeks? Johnny Moore? Nate McMillan?

Remember when guys like Swen Nater, Mark Eaton, Kareem, Parish, Ewing, Moses, Artis Gilmore, Ralph Sampson, Olojawaun, and Bol were clogging lanes?

Do ANY of these names sound familiar?

But the argument isn't about individual defenders is it? It's team defense. Teams had more than one star to contend with back in the day and far more fundamentally sound players. To take a page from Golgors book let's look at the Jazz. A decent team when Stockton and Malone were young and more capable. As the league became more diluted they went to the Finals as old men. You don't see the correlation there? I have more examples if you would like.

the nba is no longer really diluted- there are many great players fighting for a 10 day contract. there are more than enough great players to supply 29 teams.
There will always be players fighting for 10 day contracts, I can't believe you even said that.

many nba players have good medium range games. dunking isn't the be all and end all but taking it hard to the rim is a very important part of the game that has risen to the forefront along with the 3. i think that number of 3s has increased out of necessity- oppressive defenses make the midrange game more difficult. it's not just nba players falling in love with the outside game, the greatest minds in basketball have incorporated 3 pointers to a greater extent for significant for good reason.

Many players today have great midrange games huh? Name them. Let's see how many you can come up with, and remember I will call you out if you try and bullisht me. 3's out of necessity huh? I don't think so. Not after watching a 7 footer like Wallace shoot 12 last night. He could have his way with the Laker frontline, but he chose to jack up ill advised 3 after ill advised 3. Teams shoot the 3 more because they only need to shoot 33% to score as much as a team shooting 50% inside the arc. Too bad most coaches don't see the flaws in that philosophy. One of which is that you get no FT attempts jacking 3's. But that's for another thread.

the point guard position is fine, many of them are scorers but often other players take on distributory roles. as the best in the game, players do fashion themselves after kidd. even alston doesn't use his playground moves in the nba so i don't really see where the adulation of andoners comes into play here.
believe it or not, a slow down style of play usually results in better defense being played. also, more teams would be fast breaking if transition defense wasn't strong.
Anybody else see the flaws in this paragraph? PG's fashion themselves after Kidd do they? Like Francis? Marbury? Nash? Arenas? Which ones are you talking about? The guys I watch nowadays miss the open man far too much and try to be far to fancy on fast breaks. How many lobs do you see missed a game? I see quite a few. Bounce passes off the glass? I see that quite often without the desired result.

so, why aren't teams fast breaking? why are teams forced beyond the 3 point line? are defenders not bigger and stronger and quicker than ever? are these not the important physical attributes of defense? do coaches not scout ahead and concentrate on defense more than ever before?

They aren't fast breaking because the PG position is pretty thin these days. We have a ton of undersized SG's playing the position though. Francis and Marbury are perfect examples of that. I watch them play quite often and I can't believe how often they miss the open man or try and do everything themselves. No more great centers or even legitimate big men anymore. How is the fastbreak ignited? From a big man blocking and controlling a shot, or a defensive rebound with a great outlet.

You feel that defenders are quicker and bigger and stronger? Name a few and I'll name some that are quicker, bigger, or stronger. Your ignorance doesn't allow you to see it. Name ONE defender today that is a better low post defender than Kevin McHale. Name a better one on one defender than Michael Cooper. Show me your list of shotblockers from today and I'll show you a longer list from the 80's.

and what on earth is wrong with modeling after KG- he does it all and is one of the best defensive players in the game.
7 footers should never be as far from the hoop as he finds himself at times. 7 footers big men, not skinny men that can do it all. But that's my own personal preference.

You give me a choice of Tim Duncan or the do it all KG, I take Duncan 10 times out of 10.
 
#26 ·
Originally posted by <b>Jemel Irief</b>!
I feel that today's defenses are much better. One reason is better athletes, but advanced scouting along with better video editing are also a factor. Back in the 80's players never watched tape and coaches barely did. Now NBA teams have scouts that are assigned to cover like 5 teams and they can tell you what plays they run and what signals players and coaches use to call that play. They study players moves to the point where one player makes a jab step and the defender already anticipated it.

Defenses are better because players are better athletes? Are you kidding me? Athleticism has nothing to do with if a player is a great defender or not. Vince Carter is the best athlete in the league, would you call him all league defense? Next you'll be saying players today are better shooters and rebounders because they are more athletic. Shaq is more athletic than Moses Malone isn't he? I would rather have Malone defend or grab rebounds for me if I had to choose. There are about a half dozen centers (probably more) that are better defenders than Shaq or any other center in the league. And Shaq is far more athletic than any of them.

And who told you that teams and coaches didn't watch tape back then? Somebody lied to you. There was extensive scouting done back then, and it wasn't just from asst. coaches traveling to games. They did have VCR's back then.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top