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>happygrinch</b>!
are you honestly trying to say the avg. teams of the 80s are better or equal to the current dallas mavs?
:rofl:
lets pick a team at random to prove how silly this is
i know the mavs of the mid-80's the 1984-85 mavs (they had an avg. record of 44-38)
who was on that team that is as good as the current core of Dirk nowitki ,raef lafrentz, Mike finley , steve nash, nick van exel,
ro blackmon sure he was good but who else a rookie sam perkins i dont think so the immortal brad davis (uh uh)
dale ellis,? he avg. a mighty 9.3 a game in the run and gun 80's so so probably not
derek harper ?...you must be kidding the often claimed best player never to make an all star team was so far from all-star calibur play they might not even have let him watch the game let alone play in it (9. pts 4 asts )
brad davis ....led this team in assists at 7 with 10 points a game
mark aquirre was good but at 6'6 he couldn't have anywhere near the success he had then in today's nba (picture him posting up dirk or KG and these 2 are just in his own division)
the current mavs would eat this team alive and leave their carcus for vultures
who amonst this group of supposed modern day world beaters can guard Dirk?...aquirre ? he was one of the worst defenders the 80's had to offer
sam perkins ? ...highly doubtful and that would leave the aforementioned aquirre guarding ol' raef...the mighty jay vincent perhaps? could have done the job
who was the center on that team...uwe blab? it wasn't donaldson he came midway next year oh wait it was the mighty sam perkins the 6'9 rookie
just admit this was a silly idea this woas lucky to win as much as it did back then ....and to think you actually reffered to the dallas pgs as midgets when nash is 6'3 and harper is 6'4 and brad davis is only 6'3 himself
if you want to call anything puny try the the old dallas front line6'6 6'8 & 6'9 and not bruiser in the bunch
and while you are doing that you can answer why if the 80's defense was so great why did they change the way they play defense throughout most of the league ?
actually i didn't make up the premise i was answeringOriginally posted by <b>buduan</b>!
First of all, if you're going to compare teams across eras at least compare the best team of today to the best team of that era. The Celtics and Lakers would kill the current Mavs, Kings, or Lakers squad. You have no argument there.
Mark Agguire couldn't score against players today? Sorry, but he was doing his thing against bigger and more athletic players back then also. I'm guessing that you and Skywalker were about 5-10 years old in the 80's making the arguments you are making.
Originally posted by <b>Showtime84'</b>!
I'm talking about the 1988 WCF Mavs:
C-Donaldson, Bill Wennington
PF-Perkins, Tarpley
SF-Aguirre, Shremph
SG-Blackman, Alford
PG-Harper, Davis
I'm sorry dude, but that team would absolute ABUSE the present Mavs, the 1988 Mavs frontline would leave the present puss!es Black and Blue.
Mark Aguirre used to get his points against Scottie Pippen(greatest defender of all time) who the hell on the present Mavs is gonna stop him, Najera? Please, Nowitzky? HELL NO!!!, Bell? LOL!!!
And nobody has to guard Nowitzky, that dude guards himself! A 7 footer shooting fade aways and 20 footer at 48% The 88' Mavs would live happily with that.
That team had 3 all-stars in the starting lineup and 2 horses in Roy Tarpley and Detlef Shremph coming off the bench.
Again, NO CONTEST!
Originally posted by <b>Showtime84'</b>!
I' say this again, the Dallas freakin Mavericks are the best team the present NBA has to offer and they would be just an average team by 80's standards.
They can run, shoot and SCORE on anybody in the present NBA and with what:
1. 3 offensive ONLY midgets a PG
2. The weakest front line for a contending team maybe in HISTORY with Bradley, Nowtzky and Lafrentz. All of them are allergic to the paint on BOTH sides of the ball.
3. A 2-guard in Finley that is one of the worst defenders in the league.
4. And finaly role players like Najera, Bell and Griffin who can only score on the fast break or open jumpers.
The 80's Hawks, Cavs, Jazz, Nuggets and Mavs were ALL better than this sorry team and they didn't even get close to sniffing a title.
Face it the league is WATERED DOWN, WHY?
29 teams, high salaries, weak drafts and a HARD CAP!
you act as if kwame brown tyson chandler and eddy curry push jerry west out the game in his primeOriginally posted by <b>Showtime84'</b>!
Go check out the first and second year stats of guys like Magic, Bird, Jordan, Shaq, Duncan, Isiah, Kareem, Dr.J etc.. all of whom went at least 2 years to college.
Then check out the same stats for Kobe, Garnett, T-mac, O'neal,Chandler, Curry and Brown and then tell me if at least 2 years of college doesn't make a difference.
Jumping early only benefits the players but it sure as hell doesn't benefit the NBA. Why do you think David Stern is in favor 20 year old age limit??? He's a smart man and he knows that one of the main reasons for the quality of ball that triggered the Golden Age of the NBA was that EVERYBODY went to college for at least 2 years. He wants to and WILL see that happen again.
In the late 80's, early 90's small market teams like Cleveland, Milwakee and Golden State all had 3 all-stars a piece!!! Do you think with the present HARD CAP those franshises could field that firepower? HELL NO!!!
There are only 2 teams in the NBA with that kind of talent, Dallas and Sacramento, and their owners are freaking BILLIONARES!!!
The present NBA climate has 30 teams, WEAK DRAFTS, every mediocre player thinks he's worth the max and finally a freakin HARD CAP!!!
In the 80's there were 23 teams, DEEP DRAFTS, low salaries and a SOFT CAP! EVERY team had at least 2 to 3 all-star caliber players.
It's obvious what league was deeper.
The people you listed all started at around the age of 22. Go check out the stats of Bryant, McGrady, Jermaine O'Neal, Shawn Kemp, Amare or Garnett at the age of 22. Not much different.Go check out the first and second year stats of guys like Magic, Bird, Jordan, Shaq, Duncan, Isiah, Kareem, Dr.J etc.. all of whom went at least 2 years to college.
it will never happen because what you said was trueOriginally posted by <b>theWanker</b>!
I've listed some extremely good reasons why the NBA has fiercer competition than ever before. I'd like to see somebody refute my arguments with something other than anecdotes and speculation.
This is easily arguable. First off, as great Aguirre was when he faced Pippen as a Mav, Pip was still a young player and 88' was only his second season. Let's look at that lineup versus today's Mavs.Originally posted by <b>Showtime84'</b>!
I'm talking about the 1988 WCF Mavs:
C-Donaldson, Bill Wennington
PF-Perkins, Tarpley
SF-Aguirre, Shremph
SG-Blackman, Alford
PG-Harper, Davis
I'm sorry dude, but that team would absolute ABUSE the present Mavs, the 1988 Mavs frontline would leave the present puss!es Black and Blue.
Mark Aguirre used to get his points against Scottie Pippen(greatest defender of all time) who the hell on the present Mavs is gonna stop him, Najera? Please, Nowitzky? HELL NO!!!, Bell? LOL!!!
And nobody has to guard Nowitzky, that dude guards himself! A 7 footer shooting fade aways and 20 footer at 48% The 88' Mavs would live happily with that.
That team had 3 all-stars in the starting lineup and 2 horses in Roy Tarpley and Detlef Shremph coming off the bench.
Again, NO CONTEST!
Baseball but is all steroids.Originally posted by <b>theWanker</b>!
Let's ask a different (but related) question: name for me a team sport that's actually seen an INCREASE in scoring over a 30 year span. I doubt you can.
Whether you are talking baseball or basketball, the natural evolution is to have some all-star studs in the earlier years of the sport and some really, really terrible players placed with them. The all-stars completely abuse other teams' terrible players, resulting in Babe Ruth and Wilt Chamberlain-like dominance. You get hundred point games and RBI records.
As a league matures, it grows in popularity and the pool of talent grows with it. There may not be a lot more all-star studs, but there are far more pretty darned good players attracted to the game. Teams can play better defense because they no longer have to field really aweful players. All star studs no longer can completely abuse the really bad players, and scoring predictably falls.
The only major MLB record that's been fought over in the past few years has been home runs. Why? Because it's a one-on-one statistic. (A really great hitter only has to beat one other guy, the pitcher, and pitching has always been a specialty position where no team could afford weakness.)
Watch an NBA Classic game on NBA tv from the 70's. Notice how many half-court passes they throw? People haven't forgotten to throw them now, they just know that some 6-11 small forward with superhuman speed is going to intercept it.
Nobody realizes how good defense has become from 1-12 because there are precious few statistics to document it.
Actually, I will concede the one point that younger players in certain instances (i.e., when they're forced to play 40 mpg) drag down the quality of play on certain teams temporarily. They drag down the quality of play in the NBA until they get up to speed. (I don't think Minnesota regrets nabbing KG though, nor LA in getting Bryant.)Those guys came into the league at 20, 21 and 22 ready to kick as! and take names while ENHANCING the quality of the NBA because they,re already seasoned in what competitive basketball is all about.
I would think you were sophisticated enough to understand the difference between competition and marketing.Originally posted by <b>Showtime84'</b>!
In the late 80's early 90's the NBA was the HOTTEST league around, NCAA basketball was on par with College Football and superstars like Larry Bird, Magic Johnson and Michael Jordan were thranscendant stars.
I mean if what you guys say is true, the NBA would be in the midst of new Golden Age.
Guess what? It's NOT.
Refute that bro's.
who in the 80's could really stop dirk norwitski? really, i mean... he's basically unstoppable NOW, who could stop him back then? Dennis Rodman is one guy who would give Dirk fits but even then he wouldnt be able to alter his shots because at 7 feet, Dirk can get his shot off of anyone, and if you put a center at him, he'd just dribble around him. Dirk would really dominate the 80's.Originally posted by <b>Showtime84'</b>!
Yep a 7foot freak that CANNOT play defense, mediocre passer, no power post up game and shoots 46%FG!!! Yeah 80's teams would be shaking at the tought of facing this bulldozers, LOL!
Do you realize that a 36 year old Larry Bird with a shot back put up better numbers than Irk across the board in 1992 ??? Larry Bird was a REAL FREAK!
Also remember, Karl Malone at 6'8, 40 years old, against the supposed "big man, athletic, freakish" heavy west is still putting up 21ppg, 8rebs, 4assts, 2stls on 46%FG!!!
What this man would do to the present suck filled NBA if he was in his prime would be CRIMINMAL! That goes for the entire 80's as well.
So True.Originally posted by <b>theWanker</b>!
I would think you were sophisticated enough to understand the difference between competition and marketing.
The NBA as it stands now is in a huge marketing slump. The fact is that all the defense is not nearly as fun to watch as the more free flowing game of the 80's. Nobody in the current NBA has that personability that Magic, Bird and Jordan had. And there are far more media choices, with the Internet, play stations, DVD's, and competing sports.
I actually enjoyed 80's baskeball much more than the current version. But I don't mistake it to be superior basketball.
DEFENSE IS NOT DEFINED BY PPG!Originally posted by <b>Showtime84'</b>!
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.