Reply With Quote
Again, those attributes have improved as specialized training techniques have improved, but not at this "exponential" level you claim.
The same can be said about the NBA. There's also skill and technique involved in scoring and playing defense. Players can be big and strong but if they don't learn the proper fundamentals and hone their skill then what does their athleticism matter in the long run? You keep referencing the Tim Grover article and saying that more players today are training like Jordan and Pippen used to. Jordan and Pippen also worked on their craft and became complete players along with getting stronger and muscular. I'm not seeing that in today's NBA. I see a lot of athletic knuckleheads taking long jumpers more often than not. The midrange and low post games are lost arts. That's the reason people say players of the past could compete today. Their skill level and fundamentals were simply simply better to go along with their athleticism. That's why someone earlier in this thread had the perception that Kawhi isn't nearly as athletic as Pippen was. Kawhi is athletic for sure but Pippen's skill level showcased his overall athleticism much more. His ball-handling skills are superior so he's more explosive off the dribble and had the quicker first step. There's no question Pippen's leaping ability off one foot or two feet is much better...gets off the ground quicker and jumps higher. Pippen had post moves and counters coming out of his ears which allowed him to showcase his quickness and agility with a variety of moves. Kawhi doesn't really have that kind of combined skill/athleticism yet and honestly when you look at the best SG/SFs today not many have that combination either.
Again, those attributes have improved as specialized training techniques have improved, but not at this "exponential" level you claim.
Teams are adapting with those kind of players because of rule changes, not because athleticism has magically gotten better in the past decade. Big, low post bruisers had their place in the "Grit and Grind" defensive era (1996-2006), where going "small and athletic" was a recipe for disaster since you'd get killed on the boards and teams could easily pack the paint with their bigs and shutdown penetration. Since the rule changes, speed and spacing is what kills now, so roster building has adapted appropriately.
Of course. But you act like all perimeter players of the 80's were built like Kurt Rambis with comparable athleticism. Yes, they were leaner (think the bodies of James Worth, Alex English, George Gervin), but one of the reasons they were comparatively leaner is because the game was played at a much higher, up-and-down pace, so muscle mass was sacrificed for better stamina. And I don't care how "advanced" modern training methods are, they won't overcome the laws of physics, and more muscle mass will ALWAYS translate to reduced stamina. Now, I do agree that modern players train better to enhance those specific attributes you keep mentioning, but it doesn't give them some kind of figurative super power that would render a great past player ineffective. A great scorer of the era would still be able "to get his shot off," and likely get near his averages. Basketball, above all else, is a game of skill. It's why Duncan has had such a long career despite being athletically underwhelming. Same goes for Nash, Kobe, Ray Allen, etc, etc.Two bodies of equal weight are not the same if they are achieved through different methods of training. Dragic is 190lbs, Bledsoe is 190lbs, are they the same physically? no. Guys have different body structures, different genetics, different muscles they've built through these workouts. If you are doing these workouts you are trying to build muscle/strength without gaining bulk, fast twitch muscle fibers, which these workouts help greatly.
Parker is almost 33 years old with a great deal of miles on his body. Of course he is going to struggle now that he's lost some of his athleticism. Such is the fate of all point guards, unless you happen to be a great shooter (Nash, Stockton, etc). I still disagree with your premise, though. Chris Paul lost a great deal of his explosiveness following his knee injury, measures 6'0", 175lb in shoes, is not particularly quick anymore, and is still averaging 17ppg and 9.5apg on 47% shooting. He might be a choker, but he has no problem "getting his shot off." And then you have literal midgets by NBA standards, like Isaiah Thomas, a threat to score 20 any given night.Most PG's these days are stupid explosive, Parker can't even get his shot off against most of them because he's too small physically just like most old NBA players and has lost his speed. He used bodily separation against Napier, 170lbs, he couldn't use it today against Lowry, and we see the result. This is how many old NBA players would fare.
But yeah, a past PG like this would "struggle to get his shot off" against Fat Lowry:
Last edited by midnightpulp; 02-09-2015 at 12:18 AM.
Would Zach Randolph struggle in today's NBA, tbh? He's an unathletic 6'9 guy that lives in the paint. With today's modern athletes being taller and faster, with access to new training such as Eastern Bloc, would Z-Bo even be able to get his shots off if he played in today's league?
look at his highlights:
in today's league, he'd just be an undersized, unathletic big, but back when he was playing, he was one of the best big men in the league. Just shows how far the NBA has gotten and how outclassed guys like Randolph are. In today's NBA, athletes are just able to reach new levels with training like this.
Would a guy like Randolph even crack a roster in today's game, tbh?
The premise behind this thread is beyond stupid. Guys like McHale, Duncan, Stockton, Zbo, etc. have made careers out of clowning players who were faster/stronger/quicker/more explosive than them.
All of the the plyometrics training in the world won't allow you to defend a crafty, fundamentally sound player. Obviously the gaps that we're discussing can't be too wide, but many-most of the players from the 80s/90s were at least comparable athletically. They had height, they had speed, and they had stamina. That's enough to score on someone if you know what you're doing.
And even if players of today could have an easier time getting their shot off, it doesn't mean jack if you can't make the shot due to poor fundamentals/lousy touch (see Jordan, Deandre, etc.).
Of course they're much more agile and athletic but the sport is obviously about more than that. The fact that every team carries the ball on just about every possession (PGs especially) to change direction shows how they're able to exploit that athleticism in the modern game. Combine this with handchecking and you're basically inviting perimeter players to the rim untouched. That said, I couldn't see any team in history beating last years Spurs.
Would anybody say the Hawks starting 5 is super Athletic. Korver,Millsap,Caroll,Hortford don't strike me as super athletes but they have the best record in the league.
The stupidity, damn.
If Z-Bo is around today, guess what workouts he's using? Workouts tailored by strength and conditioning coaches. Where did these coaches learn these teachings from? Eastern Bloc methods that weren't used by the NBA in the past up until the late 80's by guys like Jordan.
Z-Bo is 270+lbs and is agile/strong as , he has benefited from these workouts. If you surround an athlete such as Z-Bo among other athletes that are also explosive, he's going to look average. I know many of you guys like to think of Bonner as being some big weak slow guy, but he's not, he'd look like Jordan against any of you guys or non NBA players, even in the Eurol eague he could do some damage. Any non athlete you can think of in the NBA, is an insane athlete lmao.
Stockton and McHale and much of the opposition they played against did not benefit from these workouts, what is so hard to understand?
Z-Bo, Duncan, Bonner, Davis, Diaw, all these guys have. Jordan didn't benefit from it until the the 90's because these methods were not being used, I used a real life example of this lmao.
People looked athletic, powerful, big, back then because guess who they were playing against? Other non explosive agile athletes.
Deandre can't get his shot off because guess who he's playing against? Other athletes at every position that have too benefited from these teachings such as Duncan.
Have you not heard of NBA size? You cannot make it in the NBA if you lack the size/agility/strength. The majority of NBA players back then wouldn't have NBA "Size" to make it in today's game.
Really? Like Jordan didn't benefit from it? Duncan, Leonard, all modern NBA/NFL athlete? They're bigger, stronger, more agile.
I don't think you realize how much weight/agility affect the game of basketball. The play does not begin right away, guys are battling for position, using their strength/agility/quickness to guard each other, gain favorable position to score or rebound, distribute with slight hip/back/leg bumps. If you don't have that NBA "size" which is REAL, combined with that quickness, you cannot make it in today's game. You need to create shot separation. I actually pay attention to player weights and matchups, how they're built, how stable they are on defense, how fast they can move laterally/shift their feet, how agile/big they are.
Separation in the NBA is everything, it is not hard to understand. It is a massive part of the game on both sides of the ball.
Were you born during the 90's?
I would, because they're around other athletes that make them look average, agile/large/strong guys that have become this way due to these new training methods.
Yes. It's probably why I can look back at the old game of basketball without nostalgia affecting my memory like it has so many of you. I look at the game as unbiased as I possibly can in order to judge how good players/team truly are.
That's cute. But what you failed to provide is any type of hard evidence that NBA players are superior athletically to the point that a past NBA player "wouldn't be able to get his shot off."
And the problem is, you'll never be able to provide the evidence, because what you're claiming is pretty much an impossibility. No training method in existence nor PEDs will grant such a significant advantage to a modern athlete that an athlete of 20-30 years ago would be overwhelmed by his "explosiveness." Exponential athletic leaps like that just don't happen.
Now if you want to say a modern NBA player would out skill a past NBA player, then your argument makes much more sense and is grounded in reality. That's where we've seen the biggest leap in the game, on the skill/strategy side of things. Athletically, players have pretty much peaked over the past 25-30 years. You're correct that the talent pool has dramatically grown and players are more athletic on average because of that fact, but past athletic freaks like Wilt, Russell, Oscar, Dr. J, David Thompson, Dominique, Worthy, Drexler, etc, etc would have no problem keeping up athletically with modern players. They probably get out-skilled, but that's another argument, and the argument you should pursue rather than just employing handwaving appeals to "Eastern Bloc" training.
Pippen would shut LeHype down without a double team.
This is really terrible trolling. Essentially he's just repeating the same unproven claim: that in the 1980's soviet era fitness gods came to save the NBA and it's sissy athletes. Because plyometrics is the only way to train. God help those kids that grew up just practice basketball. (FWIW, basketball itself is a great workout that aides in functional strength, cardio, and explosiveness).
Good trolling does not require so much effort. If you sincerely think you are correct, that modern training makes a superior difference, then congratulations on having an opinion. I don't think anyone disagrees with the basic premise that better training produces greater athletes. But you set the burden of proof much higher and really didn't bring more than speculation. It's been fun and all, but i don't see where this thread accomplishes anything.
What are you talking about? I used numerous real life examples, it is what made Jordan, Jordan. Barkley, Pippen, players all started using these methods and benefiting from them, gaining much more lean muscle, fast twitch muscle fibers, weight, without sacrificing speed and improving balance. From then on it was applied by almost every development program. Please read what the bloc methods are. Don't you realize how important recovery is, proper weight lifting and training is to developing a body properly and avoiding injury? These studies helped to perfect these things and they weren't applied in the old NBA.
These studies had an impact on physical sports that required players to make physical contact with each other, it revolutionized all sorts of training programs through time.
The real life examples are all around you lmao. Parker being able to use bodily separation vs a 170lb guard creating passes/scoring opportunities, to not being able to use it against a 190lb guard the next day. That 170lb guard also having trouble running through his 260lb Center's screens, allowing Parker to go 1v1 at the rim. I actually pay attention to these things, you should too. Separation which is most commonly created through body contact is everything in the NBA. Agile/large athletes benefit from this the most. Why do you think rookies like Anderson have so much trouble? Even though a guy like Anderson would've had more than enough size/athleticism to thrive in the old NBA.
Why do you think I was calling Leonard the Spurs' MVP since '12? The separation he creates makes the game easy for him due to his size, as well as his defense, most teams simply lack the personnel with size/agility to guard him. The Raptors, who had several 6'9 250lb PF agile enough to inhibit Leonard's body separation heavily affected his game, yet another real life example. Start paying attention to player match ups, muscle types, etc. He also benefited from these workouts in the off season and it's why he's the best perimeter defender.
There are all sorts of bumps/hands/body contact which affect a player's ability to create separation, being agile/explosive/strong in combo with size is a must to create separation in today's NBA, to remain on balance, remain stable on defense and offense, gain position etc.
Pippen was a 200lb stick before using these methods. Jordan couldn't handle Detroit's physicality before using these methods. The examples of it are all around you.
Plyometrics are just a small part of the eastern bloc methods, you clearly did not read about them.
You're still missing the crux of my rebuttal.
As I've already said, numerous times, I agree that NBA players have improved those attributes through modern training methods. What I DISAGREE with is this re ed idea of yours that these "magical" Eastern Bloc methods unlocked some kind of hidden superpowers in modern athletes that give them such a SIGNIFICANT edge over a past NBA player to the point where a past athletic freak of similar athleticism would be rendered useless. Nothing supports that premise. I don't give a how "modern" your training methods are, human athletic ability is not a limitless well of potential, and we've pretty much tapped it out. A modern NBA player would only have a marginal advantage, at best, over a past player athletically. This can be quantified through past scouting reports that measure vertical, sprint speed, and other such attributes.
And quit using Parker as an example. It actually hurts your case more than helps it, since Parker is probably the best finishing point guard in league history and would use his body to create separation against shot-blocking bigs. And this was during a time when the league was filled with more shot-blockers.
I'm familiar with Eastern Bloc training methods. I don't need to familiarize myself with any of it. What you don't understand is that no training methods, no matter how modern, advanced, or novel is going to grant exponential gains in athletic ability. Sure, they'll improve those aforementioned attributes by maybe a fraction of a percent, which is an edge worth having and can be the difference between an All Star and a very good player, but come off the fantasy that we're watching some kind of super athletes that would totally overwhelm (athletically) players from the 70's and 80's.
He wouldn't be able to create separation against Fat Lowry
Last edited by midnightpulp; 02-10-2015 at 12:52 AM.
Not sure why you're posting Kevin Johnson's pic...
- Athletic ability improved by a ton around mid 80's
- The game in general evolved in the Miami-Spurs era..
None of these ISO 90 players stand a chance in today's team oriented basketball.
Because he was a rookie in 1988. And he's of the era OP keeps claiming would be athletically outmatched.
And again, that's an era OP thinks would be overwhelmed by today's supermen. Nothing supports that idea. And I wouldn't say athleticism improved "a ton."- Athletic ability improved by a ton around mid 80's
This is Oscar Robertson in 1960.
His musculature is just as impressive as any modern day player's, his vertical is easily in the 36-38" range, possibly higher, and to do the splits in that manner (while jumping 3 feet in the air) would require an extraordinary amount of flexibility and body control. And this was achieved by doing rudimentary exercises by today's standards and eating a eggs and steak for your "nutrition."
Now it's debatable whether or not Oscar would be an all-time great player in today's era. I guess not, since he would lack some essential skills, but he sure as wouldn't get bullied athletically by player's reamed on "Eastern Bloc" training.
Athletic freaks are athletic freaks, and no training method is going to grant the kind of significant advantage over the other that KL is implying. Slight advantage? Sure. I agree with that.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
exactly
