76ers: Anti modern day basketball fans...Are they the equivalent of trump s?

[lefty]

tbh this is a major exaggeration, as there are plenty of good post players, mid range shooters, and off-ball players, and that is literally what has separated the very good teams from the champions of the past decade. plenty of teams have been built with comparable or even superior talent and rosters to championship teams like San Antonio, Miami, Golden State (before KD), Cleveland, and Toronto. but all those teams were able to combine elite 3-point shooting with good off-ball play, mid range shooting and post play better than other teams.

regardless, what difference does it make if there is less post play and mid range shooting, if they simply aren't as important or effective as they used to be? why would shaq need the footwork of olajuwon, if hes capable of being more effective than him with less moves? kobe clearly had more moves than mike, but does that make him a more effective post scorer than mike was? absolutely not, because mike didnt need all those extra, unnecessary moves.

i personally am in agreement that there is less post play and mid range shooting. thats obvious. but i also agree that the skill levels today are higher than they used to be, however not because every player knows how to do all kinds of skills. its just the skills they are good at, outweigh most other skills. lets not kid ourselves, its far more effective to have a team of 5 elite 3-point shooters with good ball handling skills who ignore the midrange game, than it would be to have 5 elite midrange shooters who like bully ball but struggle at shooting 3s and dribbling. it might not be what everyone enjoys watching, but its easily a more effective strategy. if no one is a threat from 3, and do all their work in the midrange and bullying in the paint, the defense can just pack the paint and provide help all over the place. but when you have 5 guys spaced out, all it takes is one misstep by a defender and the offensive player either has a wide open layup, or the help comes and its a kickout for a wide open 3, or a baseline dive for an easy layup/dunk.

the strategy may involve a lesser assortment of skills, but its pretty much indefensible. anyone who plays basketball in any kind of compe ive setting knows how much more difficult and frustrating it is to defend teams like that. so its pretty obvious why its become such a common strategy in the NBA. and the teams that win championships in the NBA are ones who combine that, with some effective post play, mid range shooting, and off ball play. just because there are a few teams like houston that build and play the way they do, doesnt mean the entire league plays that way, and not a single team wins championships that way. thats what people who are still living in the 90s fail to see. they look at a team like houston, and think the whole league plays like they do. simply not true.

[Dirks_Finale]

I would add Charlotte Hornets Larry Johnson on your list for athletes. He was a more in shape Zion with even better hops. Pippen was also super athletic. He had like a 40 inch vertical.

Good take.

Grandmama was a beast with Charlotte.

[TDfan2007]

tbh this is a major exaggeration, as there are plenty of good post players, mid range shooters, and off-ball players, and that is literally what has separated the very good teams from the champions of the past decade. plenty of teams have been built with comparable or even superior talent and rosters to championship teams like San Antonio, Miami, Golden State (before KD), Cleveland, and Toronto. but all those teams were able to combine elite 3-point shooting with good off-ball play, mid range shooting and post play better than other teams.

regardless, what difference does it make if there is less post play and mid range shooting, if they simply aren't as important or effective as they used to be? why would shaq need the footwork of olajuwon, if hes capable of being more effective than him with less moves? kobe clearly had more moves than mike, but does that make him a more effective post scorer than mike was? absolutely not, because mike didnt need all those extra, unnecessary moves.

i personally am in agreement that there is less post play and mid range shooting. thats obvious. but i also agree that the skill levels today are higher than they used to be, however not because every player knows how to do all kinds of skills. its just the skills they are good at, outweigh most other skills. lets not kid ourselves, its far more effective to have a team of 5 elite 3-point shooters with good ball handling skills who ignore the midrange game, than it would be to have 5 elite midrange shooters who like bully ball but struggle at shooting 3s and dribbling. it might not be what everyone enjoys watching, but its easily a more effective strategy. if no one is a threat from 3, and do all their work in the midrange and bullying in the paint, the defense can just pack the paint and provide help all over the place. but when you have 5 guys spaced out, all it takes is one misstep by a defender and the offensive player either has a wide open layup, or the help comes and its a kickout for a wide open 3, or a baseline dive for an easy layup/dunk.

the strategy may involve a lesser assortment of skills, but its pretty much indefensible. anyone who plays basketball in any kind of compe ive setting knows how much more difficult and frustrating it is to defend teams like that. so its pretty obvious why its become such a common strategy in the NBA. and the teams that win championships in the NBA are ones who combine that, with some effective post play, mid range shooting, and off ball play. just because there are a few teams like houston that build and play the way they do, doesnt mean the entire league plays that way, and not a single team wins championships that way. thats what people who are still living in the 90s fail to see. they look at a team like houston, and think the whole league plays like they do. simply not true.

I agree that balance is key, but such balance is the exception rather than the norm. As you pointed out, if you look at the nba champions of the past, even this "new" NBA, they all had options for when the game slowed down. Kawhi, KD, LeBron, Timmy, Dirk. Guys who you can give the ball to in isolation to score when the outside shot isn't falling or when you want to give the defense a different look.

My point about the mid-range/post up offense is that most players/teams either don't have it, or don't know how to properly use it (ex. Sixers). What you see from most teams now is high pick and roll and lots of dribbling, with little action off ball. The truly elite teams do more, but they're in the minority.

Basketball is just much more fun to watch when there's variety, imo. I get why the league has transitioned the way it has, but I enjoy people scoring in a variety of ways, and to me hitting open 3s against lazy/non-existent rotations isn't exciting. Scoring against great defense is more fun to watch imo :shrug

[Neo.]

I agree that balance is key, but such balance is the exception rather than the norm. As you pointed out, if you look at the nba champions of the past, even this "new" NBA, they all had options for when the game slowed down. Kawhi, KD, LeBron, Timmy, Dirk. Guys who you can give the ball to in isolation to score when the outside shot isn't falling or when you want to give the defense a different look.

yes, and thats why there are usually only a small handful of true contenders every year, because so few teams truly have that. thats how its always been and always will be. nothing has changed.

My point about the mid-range/post up offense is that most players/teams either don't have it, or don't know how to properly use it (ex. Sixers). What you see from most teams now is high pick and roll and lots of dribbling, with little action off ball. The truly elite teams do more, but they're in the minority.

true and in the 90s, it was simply flip flopped. plenty of teams could score in the midrange and post as well as anyone, but didnt have the shooters/creators to give proper space and make defenses pay for camping in the paint.

Basketball is just much more fun to watch when there's variety, imo. I get why the league has transitioned the way it has, but I enjoy people scoring in a variety of ways, and to me hitting open 3s against lazy/non-existent rotations isn't exciting. Scoring against great defense is more fun to watch imo :shrug

i dont disagree that its more fun to see variety, and everyone is going to have their personal likes or dislikes. but the problem isn't that suddenly defenses got lazy and non-existent as people like to suggest. its that its simply much more difficult to play defense. one misstep, and its almost pointless to even bother trying because either an open 3, a layup, or a shooting foul has already been given up. theres just so little margin for error anymore. its much easier when a team only had maybe 1 legit threat to shoot, so every defender could just sag into the paint and provide help, because giving up wide open 3s simply weren't as big of a deal, when most players were struggling to shoot 33% even when most of the 3s were wide open, and 40% spot up shooters were considered shooting gods. nowadays, anything under 40% for spot up shooters is mediocre.

my personal opinion to fix this, is simply make the court larger and extend the 3pt line 1-2 feet.

[dbreiden83080]

Same regurgitated nonsense

Kobe would score 50 every game
Steph is nothing
Giannis wont surive the 90s

Etc

I’d like to know why the NBA is the only sport in the world where fans cant accept the fact that players have naturally evolved to become better shooters, athletes, better Schemes etcs.

It seems universally accepted that there is a level of skill inporvement over the years in most if not all of sports

Except basketball.

Because the game is wide open, allowing the skills to flourish. You got players being suspended for elbowing someone in the chest.. Morris foul is a love tap in 1987.. And I like Basketball today, and understand why they changed it.. Fans wants offense. But it's the rules more than the athlete..

[TDfan2007]

yes, and thats why there are usually only a small handful of true contenders every year, because so few teams truly have that. thats how its always been and always will be. nothing has changed.



true and in the 90s, it was simply flip flopped. plenty of teams could score in the midrange and post as well as anyone, but didnt have the shooters/creators to give proper space and make defenses pay for camping in the paint.



i dont disagree that its more fun to see variety, and everyone is going to have their personal likes or dislikes. but the problem isn't that suddenly defenses got lazy and non-existent as people like to suggest. its that its simply much more difficult to play defense. one misstep, and its almost pointless to even bother trying because either an open 3, a layup, or a shooting foul has already been given up. theres just so little margin for error anymore. its much easier when a team only had maybe 1 legit threat to shoot, so every defender could just sag into the paint and provide help, because giving up wide open 3s simply weren't as big of a deal, when most players were struggling to shoot 33% even when most of the 3s were wide open, and 40% spot up shooters were considered shooting gods. nowadays, anything under 40% for spot up shooters is mediocre.

my personal opinion to fix this, is simply make the court larger and extend the 3pt line 1-2 feet.

These are all very fair points. Eventually, players would even adjust to that extra distance though, until you hit some sort of physical wall with shot mechanics.

As for the defense, a good deal of it is effort (late or nonexistent rotations), and the fact that it's hard to make an offensive player uncomfortable now. I know when I play, scoring is infinitely harder against a physical defender who has his hand on you, especially if that guy has a solid base.