defense: 80s vs today

[buduan]

Originally posted by <b>SkywalkerAC</b>!


thank you voice of reason.

bud,
please don't tell me that you think the mavs and the kings are just teams of chuckers. they are probably the two most exciting teams to watch right now and are two of the only teams that are playing the style that you are (rightly) enamoured with. at the same time, sacramento has really turned up their level of defense in past years and dallas is trying to follow suit (with some results). i know you're not a hater like golgor.

so, are you still not convinced (its a damn hard job) that today's defense is a little stronger on average? that today's players (especially wings) are better defenders on average? if not, please explain how the defense was better and how the defenders were better (naming off a few defenders isn't going to cut it) instead of trying to come up with reasons to explain the astronomically high scoring.

I'm still waiting for you to respond to my post from page 2. I obviously can't convince you with the evidence I have provided, so why don't you try and convince me? And yes, compared to the teams from the 80's the Kings and Mavs are chuckers. The 2 best teams would be a far cry from the Lakers, Celtics, Sixers, etc...of the 80's. They may be trying harder, but they still fall far short of those teams in terms of defense.

[SkywalkerAC]

Originally posted by <b>buduan</b>!


I'm still waiting for you to respond to my post from page 2. I obviously can't convince you with the evidence I have provided, so why don't you try and convince me? And yes, compared to the teams from the 80's the Kings and Mavs are chuckers. The 2 best teams would be a far cry from the Lakers, Celtics, Sixers, etc...of the 80's. They may be trying harder, but they still fall far short of those teams in terms of defense.

so you're now only comparing the best teams of these eras? what does defense have to do with being "chuckers"? or am i misinterpreting that word.

[SkywalkerAC]

Originally posted by <b>buduan</b>!



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.





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.



There will always be players fighting for 10 day contracts, I can't believe you even said that.




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.



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.




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.



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.

you did a decent job of arguing why scores may have been higher. i just don't see good defenses allowing over 100 points per game, i'm sorry. perimeter defenders have come a LONG way since the 80s but the center position is probably defensively weaker. however, there are still many good defensive big men in the game. the style of the game has changed- less fast breaks, more halfcourt, a greater dedication to defense.

[buduan]

Agree to disagree I guess then Skywalker? You and I have blown up a couple of threads arguing now, haven't we?

Catch you on the next one

[SkywalkerAC]

agreed. till next time.

[Showtime84']

This is how I'm gonna close this argument.

The present NBA team with the best record are the Dallas Mavericks, a team with virtually NO INSIDE GAME(Van exel is their best post player), the weakest front line defense I've seen in my years of watching basketball, their perimeter D maybe even Worse. Aside from Michael Finley this team is one of the most unathletic in the last 10 years and they play a fast break game that many times settles for shooting bad 3 pointers.

What are their averages???

103ppg and allow 93ppg!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If this soft as tissue paper team can pull this off, there is no DOUBT that the 80's teams would absolutely OWN the present NBA.

Nuff said.

[Scuall]

I think that we need to take off our Member's Only jackets, unroll our pants, loosen the skinny leather tie and turn off the Duran Duran Greatest Hits CD. The 80's NBA was an amazing time, one that shall probably never be matched. The 80's were exciting, no matter which side of the country you lived on. The NBA had pretty much lost its market, and thankfully Magic and Bird came along to save it. Comparing different eras is fruitless, the 87 Lakers will never face off against the 01 Lakers (well, only in a video game).

[SkywalkerAC]

Originally posted by <b>Showtime84'</b>!
This is how I'm gonna close this argument.

The present NBA team with the best record are the Dallas Mavericks, a team with virtually NO INSIDE GAME(Van exel is their best post player), the weakest front line defense I've seen in my years of watching basketball, their perimeter D maybe even Worse. Aside from Michael Finley this team is one of the most unathletic in the last 10 years and they play a fast break game that many times settles for shooting bad 3 pointers.

What are their averages???

103ppg and allow 93ppg!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If this soft as tissue paper team can pull this off, there is no DOUBT that the 80's teams would absolutely OWN the present NBA.

Nuff said.

again with your individual comparison.

this team is reknowned by all to play weak defense and still they allow under 93 ppg. they allow their opponents comparable #s of possessions to 80s clubs, play poor defense compared to the rest of the league and STILL they allow less points than was commonplace in the 80s. i don't like the small sample comparison but if you want it, there you have it.

[SkywalkerAC]

Originally posted by <b>Showtime84'</b>!
This is how I'm gonna close this argument.

The present NBA team with the best record are the Dallas Mavericks, a team with virtually NO INSIDE GAME(Van exel is their best post player), the weakest front line defense I've seen in my years of watching basketball, their perimeter D maybe even Worse. Aside from Michael Finley this team is one of the most unathletic in the last 10 years and they play a fast break game that many times settles for shooting bad 3 pointers.

What are their averages???

103ppg and allow 93ppg!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If this soft as tissue paper team can pull this off, there is no DOUBT that the 80's teams would absolutely OWN the present NBA.

Nuff said.

and you keep on trying to take this argument in different directions, it's about DEFENSE.

[Showtime84']

And you just proved my point of how AWFULL the offenses are in the present NBA. In the 80's these cream puffs would be getting lit up for 110 at least!!!

The freakin Bad Boy Pistons, a team was 10 times better defensively, better offensively and a lot more athletic could only hold the league to 99ppg while putting up only 105 in 1989!!!

The Mavs are a WEAKER team than the 80's Nuggets in both offense and defense and they still keep teams down to 93ppg while putting up 103!!!

Oh they are also 43-12 and likely the only team on pace for 60 wins!!!

That alone tells you he story about the present NBA.

If this weak as! team is the best the present NBA can offer then my friend the modern league isn't even on the level of the 90's, 70's or 60's NBA.

[Da Grinch]

Originally posted by <b>Showtime84'</b>!
This is how I'm gonna close this argument.

The present NBA team with the best record are the Dallas Mavericks, a team with virtually NO INSIDE GAME(Van exel is their best post player), the weakest front line defense I've seen in my years of watching basketball, their perimeter D maybe even Worse. Aside from Michael Finley this team is one of the most unathletic in the last 10 years and they play a fast break game that many times settles for shooting bad 3 pointers.

What are their averages???

103ppg and allow 93ppg!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If this soft as tissue paper team can pull this off, there is no DOUBT that the 80's teams would absolutely OWN the present NBA.

Nuff said.

van exel isn't the mavs best post up player ....its nowitski hands down ...and has anyone ever wondered if the defenses in the 80s were so much better .....why were the pistons of the late 80s the reason basketball is in its state today , with slow down offenses and pyhsical grinding defenders it would appear to me that the league wouldn't have changed at the end of the decade and throughout the 90s until today for an inferior style of play

the truth is there is much more of an emphasis on defense today then lets say 1985 andf there have been a lot of reasons for the lowered ppg in addition to the improved defense (iso off., coaches calling plays on virtually every trip , etc.)

i believe the league today is every bit as talented as yesteryear the league has more teams but also more resources for talent (where were the 7'6 chinamen in 1982?), better coaching, far more advanced scouting and better medical treatments and its deeper

and while people overly fall over themselves remembering the good ol' days remember they are extinct for a reason the 15 ft. shot is there but the defenders are different, they cover more ground , no one wants their shot smoked by by a 7'1 small forward because they weren't smart enough to know he was coming on a rotation as opposed to the mid 80's when 6'4 small forwards like Adrian dantley ruled avg. 30 a game ...does anyone here honestly think if he was in his prime he would get 30 game like he did in the 80s as a post up player as he did then?

or mark aguirre drop 30 a game or even a kelly tribuka who was a 20+ a game scorer for a decent stretch of time

i have no doubt that some of the stars in the 80s would be stars now but the undersized unathletic ones who thrived in the 80s(x-mcdaniel ring a bell)

how does bob macadoo get the pt at 6'9 210lbs to play center(and avg.30ppg.) ...today he is a small forward and a thin one at that nowadays he was a good jumpshooter but a glen rice(who entered the nba at 6'8 220) he isn't

so get back to actual topic of the thread i'll ask it again if the defense in the 80's was so good compared to todays why didn't it survive? why have defensive techniques and style of play change which they didn't do in the previous 20 years before the 80s

the answer is simple like the dinosaurs it became extinct because they just couldn't cut it anymore

[Showtime84']

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!

[SkywalkerAC]

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!

not only is this crap, it's crap that has NOTHING to do with this defense argument.

[Showtime84']

The argument I put up was fact!!! You want me to put up the lineup of all those teams so you can see how infinetely better they are?

The argument for better defense is basically that athletes are better now because of athletisism and that 80's teams would'nt be effective in today's league because of it.

Well my man I looked at the best team in the present NBA, one of the worst defensive teams I've EVER seen and one of the most unathletic too and how they are toying with the opposition to the tune of 43-12, averaging 103points while allowing 93!!!

My argument is this:

If the league is so "advanced defensively" then why can't they keep this interior offensively challenged and unathletic squad under 102 points???

By the same token, why can't opposing teams score even 94 points against this soft as! bunch?

The answers are simple:

1.They can run, they can shoot and they are very deep compared to the rest of the league!!! The 80s' teams could run, shoot, had deph and more athletisism than these Mavs.

2. The league as a whole SUCKS OFFENSIVELY!!!!

In closing, the present Mavericks prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that 80's teams would absolutely WAX the present competition.

[SkywalkerAC]

whatever, i'm fairly confident that the mavs would be one of the best teams in the 80s and may have been seen as a solid defensive team compared to the lack thereof in the 80s.