Reply With Quote
the guy is a savant on offense mid/paint area. and an excellent playmaker. sucks on defense - lacks instincts and most times effort. but he would be good/great in any era. he is big physically and not a puss about contact
Demar is way better..
the guy is a savant on offense mid/paint area. and an excellent playmaker. sucks on defense - lacks instincts and most times effort. but he would be good/great in any era. he is big physically and not a puss about contact
He would be regarded as better than Jordan if he played in the 90s, tbh... think about it, extremely limited players like Avery Johnson, Dennis Rodman, Bill Laimbeer or Charles Oakley were de-facto starters back then, integral parts of championship teams...
Nostalgia fans just don't want to admit how much better the NBA is today...
put down the el pipe-o
what's wrong with what I said, tbh? pointy elbows was regarded as a highly sought after attribute back then... nothing to do with basketball. If you were 'tough', it didn't matter you couldn't shot for ...
oh look, a 'rebounding specialist'!
He held his own against the likes of Kawhi, PG and Pat Beverly, it's pretty safe to say that against Bruce, he would be dominant at times the way Kobe was.
I'm sure he wishes he played back when the 3 was an anomaly and dunking and fancy dribbling was all the rage.
i wish i could be a multimillionaire decades ago so i wouldn't have the option of paying attention to social media
"I hate it," DeRozan reiterated. "If it wasn't a need in 2019, I wouldn't have it."
DeRozan couldn't carry Vince Carter's jock, much less MJ's.
Look, I have a lot of love for both Vince and TMac, extremely gifted and entertaining players, but that's a lot closer to the 2000 era (IIRC, VC debut in the NBA was in '98).
Pretty true. , even prime Manu Ginobili would make Dejounte Murray look like Pistol Pete.
OK, Penny Hardaway
Not sure if that's better or worse than he looks now tbh
DJ needs a 3 point shot, tbh... that's what the modern NBA is all about.
if DJ would be playing in the 90's he would be a lock for the All Star game.
I disagree. A lot of the modern era NBA "stars" rely on getting to the rim, getting a ticky tack foul (or selling a non-foul as a foul with a flop) and getting FTs. When is the last time someone got their head split open for driving to the rim? Now you have little PGs doing it over and over.
Agreed. You had to have a strong upper body to get your shot off in midrange back then and you were going to take a beating when you drove to the basket. You could still get to the rim but doing that over and over as your prime move would definitely get you injured.
I wish he played in the ing 90s too
While I agree that like baiting fouls is not basketball (and I'm at least glad the league took the steps to make it a foul on the floor), having your head split open is not basketball either. Charles Oakley being deemed a basketball player is a joke. He was a body bruiser, whose sole job was to destroy and disrupt talented athletes from actually playing basketball. It's like playing hockey and throwing half a dozen puppies in the rink, it severely increases the difficulty level, makes for some gore spectacle, but it's not hockey anymore.
To that extent, the NBA is million years ahead of the 90s, tbh...
the nba has been unwatchable the past few years. i used to enjoy seeing the occasional non-spur game but not anymore. it is an ugly chuckfest deaignwd to yield 2-3 instagrammable momenta per game so casuals can pretend they like basketball
But we aren't talking about which era had better basketball. We're talking about being successful in another era. Whether or not it's "basketball" to split someone's face open doesn't detract from the fact that these players today who are stars for their red carpets to the rim and stat padding regular season antics would not be as successful in a more physical league.
If you took the best players of that era and somehow brought them into this league with the same type of mentoring and training, knowing the rules of today, I think many of the same top level guys then would be top level guys now simply due to their uncommon genetics and physical abilities.
However, even the worst team in the NBA today would bury the MJ Bulls in points by halftime using today's rules and tempo/shooting abilities.
Last edited by DMC; 11-30-2019 at 06:35 PM.
How? He definitely isn’t a better scorer or defender than Stack. Not even close.
I really wish you guys would stop repeating you hear other people say. Oakley was one of the league’s best rebounders in his prime. Could also hit the 15 foot jumper. Y’all act like he was solely out there as Zara to injure players. People also act like there were no long range shooters in the 80s. There were just no players shooting 12 threes per game
Doubt it. MJ and Pippen would still be great perimeter defenders in this era which would make them even more valuable. The reason for example why the Spur suck so bad is not because of lack of 3 point shooting but more so lack of good perimeter defenders and rim protection. Bulls would have none of those problems.
Lakers for example are 21st in 3 pointers made but they have the best record in the league because their defense is the best in the league. Too many of you guys make a big deal of 3 point shooting when it comes to winning when the real issue is defense.
What I'm pointing out is that this is a lot closer to basketball than the WWE wrestling you had back then. It's true that MJ would've been even better if he didn't have to put up with dirty s like John Starks, etc.
And that is the point, under rules that enhance the game of basketball, and talent over dirty antics, these guys would absolutely over the compe ion from back then. No elite team right now can afford to have a 'rebounding specialist' on the court. If you can't shoot or dunk the ball, you can't see the floor, or your team is going to suck.
Most of us that are old enough have seen 90's basketball. Outside the Jordan hype, it was absolutely terrible basketball.
There were good shooters (Kerr comes to mind), nobody is denying that. Oak was definitely not on that list, and he would be a bench player at best in today's league.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
