defense: 80s vs today - Page 2 - Basketball Forum : Professional and College Basketball Forums
BasketballForum.com is the premier basketball Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
User Tag List

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-22-2003, 10:30 PM   #16 (permalink)
Legend
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: British Columbia, Canada!
Age: 33
Posts: 11,876
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
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.
__________________
AC
SkywalkerAC is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 02-22-2003, 10:39 PM   #17 (permalink)
Suspended Member
 

Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 149
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.
golgor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2003, 10:53 PM   #18 (permalink)
Legend
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: British Columbia, Canada!
Age: 33
Posts: 11,876
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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?
__________________
AC
SkywalkerAC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2003, 11:00 PM   #19 (permalink)
Suspended Member
 

Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 149
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.
golgor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2003, 11:00 PM   #20 (permalink)
6th Man
 

Join Date: Oct 2002
Age: 33
Posts: 413
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.
Showtime84' is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2003, 11:03 PM   #21 (permalink)
Suspended Member
 

Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 149
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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.
golgor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2003, 11:16 PM   #22 (permalink)
Legend
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: British Columbia, Canada!
Age: 33
Posts: 11,876
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
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!
__________________
AC
SkywalkerAC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2003, 11:20 PM   #23 (permalink)
BBB.net archivist
Photobucket
 
Jamel Irief's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2002
Location: SoCal
Age: 97
Posts: 24,816
Mentioned: 96 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1697 Post(s)
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.
__________________
Jamel Irief is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2003, 11:32 PM   #24 (permalink)
Suspended Member
 

Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 149
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
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
golgor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2003, 12:27 AM   #25 (permalink)
Player
 

Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 715
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
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.


Quote:
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.

Quote:
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.

Quote:
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.

Quote:
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.

Quote:
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.

Quote:
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.
buduan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2003, 12:35 AM   #26 (permalink)
Player
 

Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 715
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
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.
buduan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2003, 03:09 AM   #27 (permalink)
Suspended Member
 

Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 149
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Hey buduan, how come you are agreeing with me on this one?

Come on. Keep it honest.


Tim is Good, KG not as good.

One McHale worth more than both of those together.

What did he average in '86 27-28 pts. a game at 61% shooting?

McHale is the best low post player that ever played the game.
golgor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2003, 05:56 AM   #28 (permalink)
Player
 

Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 715
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by <b>golgor</b>!
Hey buduan, how come you are agreeing with me on this one?

Come on. Keep it honest.


I agree with some of what you say, however the way you address people and respond to their opinion is childish and shows no class.
buduan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2003, 06:03 AM   #29 (permalink)
Player
 

Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 715
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally posted by <b>golgor</b>!


One McHale worth more than both of those together.

What did he average in '86 27-28 pts. a game at 61% shooting?

McHale is the best low post player that ever played the game.

26 points on 60% actually. And McHale better than both Duncan and KG put together? So if you were starting a team you would take McHale over both of those players?

You exaggerrate far too much. One on one, yes he was better. But you have McHale's entire career to base your opinion off of. Duncan and KG have played what, 6-7 years in the league? When all is said and done they both might be considered far superior to him. Notice I said "might" (before you go on your insult laced tirade.)
buduan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2003, 06:26 AM   #30 (permalink)
Suspended Member
 

Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 149
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
That's just the way it goes.

Mc Hale just had a very short career, so did Bird really. They were injured and finished by '88.

Another guy most people have already forgotten is Kevin Johnson.
The most underrated player I know of. Had so many injuries, but when healthy the quickest guy I've ever seen, could shoot at 50%+ and managed to beat the great 80s Laker team singlehandedly one year. They just couldn't catch him. He was slashing through at will. Then most of the 90s he spent fighting injuries, but still put up some good numbers. ( and I'm not talking about Shaq boo-boo or Kobe's fake tendinitis, this guys really screwed up his knees and missed a lot of games. )

Garnett or Duncan aren't getting any better. They will play another 8-10 years the same way they are playing now. So what you see now is what you get.

I look at players in their prime, even if that lasts only a couple of years. Therefore 2-3 seasons of McHale in his prime are worth a lot more than 15 years of mediocrity from Duncan or KG ( mediocrity compared to 1980s quality, take Orlando Woolridge for example, anybody remembers him??? Probably not, well, neither duncan or KG would take his spot on a team back when he was healthy circa 85,86 and averaging 23 a game shooting 55% even next to a ball hog like MJ ).
These guys are both around 7 feet. Taller than McHale and they can't shoot over 50% even against much weaker competition . In the grand scheme of things that is pretty bad.

Last edited by golgor; 02-23-2003 at 06:34 AM.
golgor is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:57 AM.



User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.1.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 2002 2013 BasketballBoards.net.

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1