Welcome To aBlackWeb

Register

2022 NBA Finals: Golden State Warriors vs Boston Celtics (WARRIORS WIN 7️⃣th NBA TITLE)

Who wins?

  • Total voters
    60
  • Poll closed .
When you gotta use cacalytics
artworks-sX1hcszYJKZbyk4b-u6zkEA-t500x500.jpg
 
The Lonious Monk said:
What do you mean? I'm asking a question because I don't see it, but I freely admit I don't watch much NBA now. If you agree with those analysts, in what facets of the game do you believe today's players are more skilled. It's not a gotcha. It's an honest question.
Click to expand...

In almost every asset fam.

Players are bigger, stronger, faster, and smarter.

Offensive schemes are more advanced nowadays. Alot more moving without the ball, alot less iso.

Defensive schemes are better, players actually play defense without grabbing your hand and clotheslining you.

Physicality is the only asset the nba pre 2000 has over today
 
AZTG said:
In almost every asset fam.

Players are bigger, stronger, faster, and smarter.

Offensive schemes are more advanced nowadays. Alot more moving without the ball, alot less iso.

Defensive schemes are better, players actually play defense without grabbing your hand and clotheslining you.

Physicality is the only asset the nba pre 2000 has over today
Click to expand...

lol No. I'll give a lot of ground, but no. People in this league don't play consistent defense. That's why a team like Boston stands out. And you're not going to tell me that the offensive schemes are better across the board when Boston is in the Finals and their whole offensive strategy is to fake a penetration and kick out for the three. Like that's 90% of the plays they run. Now the Warriors are a different story. Their ball movement is absurd and I'm sure there are other teams that are like them, but let's not act like that kinda play is the average and not standout.
 
People really overrate the defense and physicality in 90s and 2000s basketball as some sort defensive skill without realizing that majority of the coaches and players were terrible offensively.

Like Steve Kerr and John Paxson were 6'3 White guys that stood around the perimeter and shot 3s and that's all they did. They weren't flying off screens going 100 miles an hour and hitting leaning 3 pointers.

A motherfucker like Bruce Bowen could only shoot from the corner.

Players would routinely take 18 footers on fastbreaks. Like what the fuck is that?

You couldn't double team anybody without a hard double or play zone so you would watch a guy like Michael Jordan go one on one against a 6'3 guard and torch him.

Go actually watch a couple of 90s and 2000s games on YouTube and it's a totally different sport. Don't go watch some marquee games either, watch a random one.

You'll realize how bad it is outside of a couple of star players. They had zero skill, zero understanding of basketball principles and did shit that made no sense.

You throw Marcus Smart into the 90s and early 2000s, he would average 20.
 
Sony Montana said:
How can a guy who admits he doesn’t watch the NBA outside of occasionally say anything about offensive schemes league wide?
Click to expand...

I just pointed out that we have a team that is in the Finals and isn't using a any complex offensive schemes, so clearly that is not an absolute truth. Only one counterexample is necessary to call a statement into question.
 
ZMaKEa said:
Like Steve Kerr and John Paxson were 6'3 White guys that stood around the perimeter and shot 3s and that's all they did. They weren't flying off screens going 100 miles an hour and hitting leaning 3 pointers.
Click to expand...

Lol What the fuck? Steve Kerr was a role player not a star. He did what he was supposed to do so why are you bringing him up? Those two got wide open shots because they were playing with Michael Fucking Jordan who was getting double and triple teamed throughout the games and still scoring.

Ya'll got it man. I was really just asking a question and I got some good answers. I ain't going back and forth with a bunch of niggas making comments that ignore all context.
 
The Lonious Monk said:
I don't think you fully appreciate the difference in how defense was played. I'm not simply talking about how much people hammered each other. I'm talking about hand checking and the ability to use your body to knock people out of rhythm. That would make a difference against a player like Curry. A lot of what he does is predicated by his opponents having to give him space. They wouldn't have to had to do that back then. Him being faster doesn't mean as much when someone can physically push him and keep him from goin where he wants to go.



We're talking about Curry. He's not bigger and stronger, so yes I do believe someone like him cold be bullied back then.
Click to expand...

I know the difference. I'm 36 so I vividly remember many of those games. And with Currys skillset there's only but so much hand checking can do when you got a player who can pull up from 30 ft and let it go
 
The Lonious Monk said:
I agreed with all that about the bigs though. I'm just saying that somebody like Hakeem would work all them dudes in the post, and likely score more consistently. Also, stepbacks and eurosteps probably would have been called traveling back then. I'm not saying they are traveling, but there has been a transition in the rules that allow shit like that to happen. Remember, when Tim Hardaway and them brought the crossover to prominence, refs was calling that traveling for a while until the league told them to back off and let it ride. So again, some of this shit isn't a matter of players back then couldn't do it. So of it is that the game simply didn't allow for it.
Click to expand...

And I am not saying the bigs wouldn't get them in the paint, especially someone like jokic who isn't known for his defense...

He still will have his own arsenal that Hakeem would have to deal w..the shooting from 3. The dribble, the dribble then the step back for the shot.


And it's hard to even debate when the rules have changed, just keeping it at the skillset is good enough. But I am not saying the bigs of today are better than the bigs of the past especially when you talking about Hakeem, Ewing...I mean they are top 50 players of all time..

Just saying the ball players of today have developed more...

The bigs today seen Hakeem and added durk, with a little bit of god shamgod to their game...
 
BlackRain said:
I know the difference. I'm 36 so I vividly remember many of those games. And with Currys skillset there's only but so much hand checking can do when you got a player who can pull up from 30 ft and let it go
Click to expand...

Which is why I said he'd still be a star. It's not like I said dude would be a bum, but in this era his name is put on the top 75 players of all time list. I'm not sure if he looks quite that good when he plays in the 90s.
 
oldman_Ghost! said:
And I am not saying the bigs wouldn't get them in the paint, especially someone like jokic who isn't known for his defense...

He still will have his own arsenal that Hakeem would have to deal w..the shooting from 3. The dribble, the dribble then the step back for the shot.


And it's hard to even debate when the rules have changed, just keeping it at the skillset is good enough. But I am not saying the bigs of today are better than the bigs of the past especially when you talking about Hakeem, Ewing...I mean they are top 50 players of all time..

Just saying the ball players of today have developed more...

The bigs today seen Hakeem and added durk, with a little bit of god shamgod to their game...
Click to expand...

I get what you're saying. I got no arguments against that. It would be interesting to see how different playstyles work, but leagues tend to just copy whatever is hottest and run with it.
 
We’re better physically but their IQ is better. I personally hate the 3 point shots on the fast break when it’s a 2 on 1
 
The Lonious Monk said:
lol No. I'll give a lot of ground, but no. People in this league don't play consistent defense. That's why a team like Boston stands out. And you're not going to tell me that the offensive schemes are better across the board when Boston is in the Finals and their whole offensive strategy is to fake a penetration and kick out for the three. Like that's 90% of the plays they run. Now the Warriors are a different story. Their ball movement is absurd and I'm sure there are other teams that are like them, but let's not act like that kinda play is the average and not standout.
Click to expand...


Yea...I don't think the schemes are more advanced..modified some...but not advance...

Bball plays are plays that just get past around from coach to coach in a sense. With modifications depending on the players...IMO.

I have seen some of Pops plays, and alot of it are plays Euro teams have been using for years...

A team like GS just has their players running off screens cuz..they have shooters..thats it,

Same ish Reggie was doing w the Pacers...


Now it's modified..the ole "elevator ". I see AAU teams do it a lot..have the inbounder flash to the corner where 2 bigs will create the wall for them to shoot once they get the ball..
 
DMorgan said:
@BlackAx410 yall can still win it but yall fucked up my Celtics in 6 pick.

So far Wiggins has proven me wrong. He is maintaining a very good level of play. I didn't think he could do it.
Click to expand...
Yeah the turnovers and missed free throws have been hurting us. We shot better then them and won the rebounding battle just simple mistakes
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top