was the overall defense of the nba stronger in the 80s (pick a year)?
were the wing defenders better in the 80s?
were the wing defenders better in the 80s?
Originally posted by <b>golgor</b>!
Hey buduan, how come you are agreeing with me on this one?
Come on. Keep it honest.
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.
Really. Other than the top 4-5 teams name these teams that had 3 players with solid mid range jumpers.....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?
Lets take 1985 for example:Really. Other than the top 4-5 teams name these teams that had 3 players with solid mid range jumpers.....
Stupid?Originally posted by <b>golgor</b>!
How about Chicago???
Had Paxon, Jordan, Hodges and Pippen
Finished one place above the bottom in Central Division in 87-88
How about Milwaukee???:
Ricky Pierce, Moncrief, Green, Mike Dunleavy , all 50% or better shooters
How about Dallas??:
Dantley, Harper, Blackman, Shrempf, Perkins, Agguire, with all these didn't make the playoffs that same year
How about Indiana??:
Had Reggie, Chuck Person, Smits, Fleming, finished dead last winning only 28 games
How about Sonics??:
Had Dale Ellis, Mc Millan,Mc Key ,and Threatt
How about Portland?? with Porter, Drexler, Wandeweghe, didn't make playoffs either.
All teams with three or more very good mid range shooters, most above 50% and most of these teams didn't make playoffs or even finished last in their divisions circa 87 and 88.
Satisfied now?????
And what's height have to do with anything here.
Just means they lie more about that just like they do about everything else today
Players I know personally since I spent time with former Yugo team
Kukoc listed at 6 - 11 is 6 - 9 1/2
Divac listed at 7- 1 is 6 - 11 1/4
Stojakovic is 6 -7 1/2 listed at 6- 10
Some others I know from reliable sources
Duncan 6 - 10 1/2 they list him at 7 - 0
Garnett same
Novitzki 6 - 9 1/2 listed at 7 feet
Sabonis 7 - 1 listed at 7 -3 or even 7-4
Shaq 6 - 11 listed at 7 -1
You aren't really that stupid to believe listed height of players?
And about Woolridge, that was my point. He was a very big athletic guy who could score at his team's expense. Just like most players today. One exception, he did shoot around 55% in his prime, better than 99% of players today.
Athleticism is required for perimeter defense at least. Back in the 80's if you were a horrible athlete and defender but a great shooter you were in the rotation, that's not the case today. Half a dozen centers that are better than Shaq defensively? We are going to disagree on that one. Clifford Robinson is the only one I can think of.Originally posted by <b>buduan</b>!
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.
.. :clap:Originally posted by <b>MemphisX</b>!
Really. Other than the top 4-5 teams name these teams that had 3 players with solid mid range jumpers.....
You guys need to watch some ESPN Classic...80% of the players in the 80's would be in the CBA. Just look at the heights of the starters in the 80's. A player like Mashburn would be elite in the 80's.
Another big difference is the coaches are more controlling now. Call to many plays and that means fewer possesions and fewer fast breaks.
Originally posted by <b>golgor</b>!
And what the hell are you applauding for?
I listed more than enough crappy teams with more than 3 good shooters.
Or is your reading ability on par with Shaq's free throw shooting?
You do know that your token black guy Tim Duncan has won 2 MVPs in the last 4 years right?Originally posted by <b>golgor</b>!
Today if you are a horrible shooter, passer, athlete, as long as you can Tatoo yourself and rap they give you MVP
Originally posted by <b>Showtime84'</b>!
If Garnett were truly a fundamental player, he would be dominating in the paint and shooting 55%FG like a real 7 footer is supposed to do instead of shooting fade aways, 20 footers and 3 pointers!!!
It's not a good endorsment for the present NBA when the defending 3 time world champions, aside from Shaq and Kobe, have probably the weakest lineup EVER for a championship team.
Horry, Fox and Fisher would be bench players in ANY ERA!!! and yet they're starting for the present "dominant team", PATHETIC.
In the 80's there were 23 teams, low salaries, better drafts and no cap!!! So teams were definetely deeper with quality than they are now.
Today you have a hard cap, sky rocketing salaries, weak drafts and 29 teams!!!
Do the math bro.
i think it has more to do with officiating then anything, the officials back then were 'honest' and called the game right, today they slow the game down and call fouls every other trip down the court, its sad. Superstars get superstar treatment these days more then ever since Jordan. The team with the Superstars will get all the calls and will win the game because the refs are really screwed up these days.Originally posted by <b>Showtime84'</b>!
That shows you how weak the league has become, that a team with 1 or 2 stars combined with 10 or 11 role players can win multiple championships, that was unthinkable in the 80's.
In the 80's you needed multiple stars and DEPHT!!!
but now we're seeing depth rise to the top again. lakers are the ONLY team that can pull off not having a good all-round team. they can do so only because they have two of the best...putting them in 8th. your argument here is flawed. you still need multiple stars on successful teams. the lakers roleplayers, as bad as they look nowadays are your fundamental stiffs that would have flourished in the 80s because they can also play good defense.Originally posted by <b>Showtime84'</b>!
That shows you how weak the league has become, that a team with 1 or 2 stars combined with 10 or 11 role players can win multiple championships, that was unthinkable in the 80's.
In the 80's you needed multiple stars and DEPHT!!!
nonetheless, they would have been great players in the 80s even if not on the championship team. they are sad when compared against the players of today.Originally posted by <b>Showtime84'</b>!
Wrong again.
In the 80's one on one defense was the norm and player needed to have the ability to create their own shots.
Guess what? neither George, Shaw, Horry, Fox, Fisher or Walker can create their own shot. You put a hand in their face and they become USELESS!!!
And in the 80's were defenders could hand check, elbow, grab, claw, FLAGRANT FOUL!!! these scrubs would've been even more useless.
None of the Lakers 3-12 stiffs could crack the lineups of ANY 80's champion or finalists!!! Not even the 81' or 86' Rockets.
Originally posted by <b>Jemel Irief</b>!
Half a dozen centers that are better than Shaq defensively? We are going to disagree on that one. Clifford Robinson is the only one I can think of.
Nobody told me that teams and coaches didn't watch tape back then. I said coaches barely did and players rarely did. That's a fact. The scouting today is MILES ahead of what it was back then.