Reply With Quote
I can dig it. Beats the alternative of a Clipper ring, or, a Bull ring.
Typical.
Why do people hate LeBron. Get over it.
Give props when they are due. Bulls lost a chance to end the Cavs season and they blew it. The king now probably will make a 5th finals appearance in a row now.
I can dig it. Beats the alternative of a Clipper ring, or, a Bull ring.
King.
It rhymes with ring.
I called him the MVP, me..
Dude shot 10-30 in a must win. I'm a huge LeBron fan, but he was ass yesterday.
Not many people looked good that game tBh
He was playing that '90s style of basketball that mainstream fans claim to love so much.
This. But I dont see how he doesnt get credit. I think a better thread question would be why are the expectations higher for Lebron than anyone else? I think all things considered outside of surpassing MJ and maybe being a few les light he has been amazing. Lebron has met or surpassed most realistic expectations for a franchise player ...
No, 3 point chucker ball belongs to your era. That's all players know how to do these days. Drive to the rim or throw up a 3 point heave lol. The skills in this league have ridiculously diminished.
He wasnt playing anything just shows the gap between the eras is not as large as many here have expressed.
i'm sure that sloppy as game had nothing to do with them playing 3 playoff games in 5 days while all the other teams got 3-4 days of rest
Stats typically look worse in the playoffs because the defense is better and because players take more weight on their shoulders. They might stat watch most of the season then in the playoffs they just go all out and let the chips fall where they may. So I wouldn't put too much weight on efficiency in the playoffs, just W/L.
Iso-chucking like the Cavs is literally what '90s basketball was
Also, let's not forget how the league actually moved the three-point line in for a few years in your beloved '90s to inflate DK's career 3PT% and make shooters look unstoppable.
I don't remember that.
They shortened it to basically the college 3-point line from 1994-1997.
By God, you're right.
Efficiency may dip but the numbers should increase because Most of the lame-ass coaches (not just Blatt) rely on their stars even more in the playoffs. and when they don't Lebron scraps the play and Scottie Pippen pouts like a little ...
He's averaging 12 ISOs per game, the most of his career IIRC, and twice as much as 2nd in the playoffs..90s ball..
Iso-chucking like the Cavs is literally what '90s basketball wasfunny how 90s lovers conveniently forget that. Of each decade since the 80s (most everything before the 80s was garbage as crap and isn't worth counting), the 90s era was probably the weakest overall era. Team ball in the 90s was far worse than it is today. I think it is heavily due to an increased level of defensive coaching that hit around the 90s, and it took a while for offense to find counters against real defense, which I believe is why offensive strategy has evolved heavily into basically a layup or 3 game. Midrange scoring is so difficult to do, and usually ends up turning into iso ball and causing a team to lose its natural offensive flow. It may have worked better in the 80s and prior, because no one really played good defense. "Defense" in the 80s was hard fouling, intimidation and dirty play, as opposed to staying in front of your opponent, contesting every shot, and forcing your opponent into the least efficient shot possible.
It's hilarious how people constantly complain that the midrange game is generally gone from today's game, but then complain about "chucking" when fact is, the midrange game is the definition of chucking for 98% of players, as it is statistically proven to be the most inefficient shot in the game. Only a very few players through history truly was able to use the midrange game while also keeping their team heavily involved in an offensive rhythm, and many of them even struggled at times through their careers with it. Most players that were fantastic midrange scorers were also known as "chuckers" and bad team players.
He drained the one that mattered.
The league actually shortened the 3 pt line when Jordan went play baseball, and went back to the 23'9" two seasons after he came back. The shortened three point line actually backfired, and cost teams spacing, allowing defenses to recover much quicker from packing the paint to challenge shooters. 3pt% went up a bit, but overall FG% dropped.Iso-chucking like the Cavs is literally what '90s basketball was
Also, let's not forget how the league actually moved the three-point line in for a few years in your beloved '90s to inflate DK's career 3PT% and make shooters look unstoppable.
My theory is that the packed paint area actually stops players like Jordan from penetrating the lane and create that exciting, crowd-pleasing penetration dunk type of game, and the league suffered as a result, forcing it to go back to the 23'9" line.
The shortened 3pt line experiment wasn't well thought out, and the league learned from that to draft the next set of rules that opens up the lanes and benefit ball movement.
Im not a 90's fan ... but I think like most "theories" on this site things get overblown. The start of the decade (end of the Babdboys start of bulls reign) was on par with the most of the 80's and 2000's . Like i said before, poor drafts at the end of the 80's and early 90's led to less talent ...as the 80's stars faded or retired. But to dismiss a whole decade of hoops because they didnt utilize advanced metrics or complex defensive schemes is foolish and short-sighted. The first Bulls 3peat was more impressive than the 2nd because the league was still pretty strong ...by the mid 90's the NBA dipped in quality ...but by the end of the decade they were ascending again. You guys make it sound like the d-league but when in fact outside of the top 8-10 teams the rest of the today's NBA would be considered ty no matter what decade they were in ...being a better dribbler or taking more 3's doesn't make a ty team good.
It's hilarious how people constantly complain that the midrange game is generally gone from today's game, but then complain about "chucking" when fact is, the midrange game is the definition of chucking for 98% of players, as it is statistically proven to be the most inefficient shot in the game. Only a very few players through history truly was able to use the midrange game while also keeping their team heavily involved in an offensive rhythm, and many of them even struggled at times through their careers with it. Most players that were fantastic midrange scorers were also known as "chuckers" and bad team players.
this year's Lakers would struggle to beat the worst Laker team of the 90's for example ...
That's all you see in the league today is ISO chucking. That's all your fraudulent MVP candidates do is ISO chuckIso-chucking like the Cavs is literally what '90s basketball was
But that's what I'm saying about skills diminishing. Even with the paint being packed and not having that defensive 3 seconds bull Pippen and Jordan could score on the low block because they had actual SKILL. Look at the SGs and SFs today. They play 3 pt chucker ball because they don't have the skill to score any other way.
What SG/SF today can do this on the low block when the paint is packed? They have defenders in their lap and defenders clogging the paint but it doesn't matter when you have footwork and counters. Jordan, Pippen, Penny, his teammate Nick Anderson, Mitch Richmond, Glen Rice, Steve Smith, etc all had post games in their arsenal to go along with their outside games.
They were making the game easier for DK once his gambling suspension expired... they also banned handchecking during DK's suspension
Thanks to Stern, DK went from a 28% shooter from the regular 3-point line to 42.7% and 37.4% in back-to-back years. Then when they brought back the old three-point line, DK shot a pathetic 23.8% from three. MVPippen also had career years from beyond the arc with the shortened line.
The NBA-average FG% actually didn't change that much from right before they shortened the line (it was .466 in 1993-94, while during the shortened line years, it was .466, .462 and .455) and was significantly better than the years following the return of the old line - the league didn't even crack .450 again on average until the 2005-06 season.The shortened three point line actually backfired, and cost teams spacing, allowing defenses to recover much quicker from packing the paint to challenge shooters. 3pt% went up a bit, but overall FG% dropped.
That being said, the stated goal of increasing scoring didn't end up happening (the league average PPG was only 100.8 during the three seasons with the shortened line compared to 105.6 in the three seasons before they shortened it), but let's not pretend like that was the real reason they changed it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
