OT: Is larry bird the most overrated all time great of all time?

[Killakobe81]

The % decline of Black American players in 2015 is negligible, tbh..just 2 seasons ago, in 2013-2014, 76.3% of the NBA was Black Americans, an increase, actually..it's fair to say that this year's number is anomalous..

I don't know why you guys are so offended by the decline of the White American basketball player..I know it hurts your nostalgic memories, but sorry, there's no denying that a league with 25% of it's players being of an inferior breed hurts it's credibility, tbh..

I am starting to wonder if I got sucked in to a race war because I am not sure anything I said was a diminishing of Bird's greatness. I guess since bird is considered the GOAT white player anything less of saying he would absolutely still dominate in today's game is slap in the face of of white guys everywhere?

But I am NOT calling whiteguys an "inferior breed" i'll let you run with that .... But I do watch as my son plays hoops for his middle school in Frisco and they have no shot against the kids from South Dallas so there is ...that. some have a great hoops IQ etc. But still get destroyed by south Dallas ... my son included. And he is mixed ... (spanish-African Belizean mix)

[midnightpulp]

European/International players are much more skilled than White American players, tbh..they played a progressive style of basketball well before today's NBA diverted to the current style of shooting/spacing/ball movement, etc..they learn to play in more compe ive, better organized leagues vs. veteran players, rather than the NCAA and it's terrible style of basketball..at a young age, they also learn the necessary skills to off-set the lack of athleticism in comparison to their Black counterparts(and aid longevity), unlike White American players that generally peak in college-style ball that doesn't translate well to real basketball..

White American players are not only unathletic for the most part, but they're also lacking in skills outside of spot-up shooting..

Ironically, that was actually prompted by American coaches/basketball people teaching the then "modern" game over there through camps and such in an effort to grow the game globally. Ex-pats like Bob Morse and of course Mike D'Antoni also played big roles in European basketball's development. Basketball was always about passing and shooting until our favorite period of the 90's that de-emphasized team play in favor of creating stars.

I don't think 25% of the league being white Americans devalues a specific time period. White American players were just better back then. The NCAA system was tougher (most players stayed 4 years, even black players, meaning you played against more developed players throughout your 4 year career). No AAU. In 1988, the Celtics did a tour of Europe and crushed the top European Club Team (Real Madrid) and Yugoslavia, who was the top International team (they were without Drazen, though, who was on the Real Madrid team in that tourney). Larry Bird was the MVP and outplayed Drazen in the Finals: 29-12-6 vs. 22-6-6.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_M...s_Championship

The NCAA system is just awful for player development today.

[Spurtacular]

IMO, whites were discriminated against the most the 90's and early 00's. I'd say the decreased numbers are a reflection of that. Some remnants of that have survived; but it's noticeably better now.

[Spurtacular]

Fair enough, I agree. Who are the best white american players right now? Hayward? Love? Arguably not even top 20.

I'd probably put those guys top 20. But there's a pretty significant drop-off between top 10 and 20 as it relates to ulative performance.

Though, people conveniently overlook that Blake Griffin is half-white. I guess people decide not to count that. And I would not be surprised at all to find out that Curry has some significant white genetics on his mother's side. He and/or the media doesn't seem to be too eager to advertise that though. Also for that matter, Klay Thompson is half white.

[ambchang]

My thoughts above ...

I think we agree more than disagree. I still maintain the offensive gains of those two in this day and age will negate their defensive drops. And I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

[ambchang]

The % decline of Black American players in 2015 is negligible, tbh..just 2 seasons ago, in 2013-2014, 76.3% of the NBA was Black Americans, an increase, actually..it's fair to say that this year's number is anomalous..

I don't know why you guys are so offended by the decline of the White American basketball player..I know it hurts your nostalgic memories, but sorry, there's no denying that a league with 25% of it's players being of an inferior breed hurts it's credibility, tbh..

How does that math work? It was nothing but Americans in the 80s. It's now Americans and foreign players. Foreign players make up 24% now, white Americans lost 14%. Therefore black Americans lost 10%. Or is it leaps in mathematical modelling in the last 30 years changed that basic math?

Did math get eastern block training methods too?

[lefty]

midnightpulp

Have some mercy

[Killakobe81]

I think we agree more than disagree. I still maintain the offensive gains of those two in this day and age will negate their defensive drops. And I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

No worries not worth debating the minor parts we disagree on.

[Kawhitstorm]

I'd probably put those guys top 20. But there's a pretty significant drop-off between top 10 and 20 as it relates to ulative performance.

Though, people conveniently overlook that Blake Griffin is half-white. I guess people decide not to count that. And I would not be surprised at all to find out that Curry has some significant white genetics on his mother's side. He and/or the media doesn't seem to be too eager to advertise that though. Also for that matter, Klay Thompson is half white.

The reason they are All-Stars is because of their "African" genes. All of them had fathers who were black & athletes, what a coincidence! If Jimmer had JR Smith's athleticism he would be have been an All-star but alas his Neanderthal genes are holding him back.

[KL2]

Boit "counts," but he's not portending the next stage of sprinter/athletic evolution as much as David Robinson didn't advance 7 foot basketball players to all look and play like him. Bolt is not the norm. He's 1 in a billion, like Robinson. We haven't seen another David Robinson from an athletic/size/height standpoint. Closest we have is probably Lebron.

There are a ton of guys that have breakneck speed at 6'5, Bolt is not the only guy out there, a lot of these guys are playing other sports like the NBA or NFL. Runners are generally smaller because that's the optimum size for running, NFL players are large and agile because that's the optimum size for their sport the same way NBA players are large and agile. Running in a straight line, jumping over hurdles, high jumps, these do not really apply to basketball or football. Especially not now that the game is perimeter oriented and requires much more mobility.

Robinson was a genetic freak and he played in the 90's not 80's, he looked stronger than he actually was. When he was playing with the Mens basketball team playing against players like Sabonis he was barely 227lbs. It took him like 10+ years to fill out his body completely.

If you're going to make these claims, I want data, not qualitative "eye test" examinations of what you believe is "cutting edge" athleticism. For you to make such a claim would have to assume some giant leap in innate human athleticism over 2/3 decades. Sports science can only take human biomechanical limitations so far, and from what I've read on the subject, we've peaked a while ago. I would say the biggest gains in the sports medicine area have to do with prolonging careers. If what you say is true, then running back 40 times should be averaging 4.2. They're not. They're still at about their 4.4/4.5 averages as they were in the 80's and 90's (no handpicking on my part needed). Herschel Walker, Bo Jackson, Deion Sanders, any top tier great from the 80's/90's is top athlete in today's game. Walker, for instance, ran the 100m in 10.10 at 6'1" 225 and held the 55m world record. If you want to credit his athleticism to "Eastern Bloc" methods, fair enough, but your contention that NFL athletes are FAR superior today is re ed. I'm sure there's been a gain, but it's less than 10%. If it were anything more, we'd see players running sub-4 40s and having 50" verts as the norm across the league.

The NFL started to use strength and conditioning coaches in the 70's one of the first being Marv Marinovich, they are much more advanced and have a richer history when it comes to proper nutrition and weightlifting, the NBA didn't start to employ S&C coaches until the 90's after Grover transformed Jordan, Pippen and the whole Bulls team.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marv_Marinovich

This is the guy that would help revolutionize American sports by introducing european sports science, because at that time, we were pretty much re ed on the whole subject and they had it mastered.

When you ignore a player's size, in relation to their skill set or how they move, you're ignoring their athleticism. Julius Peppers can run a 4.68 at 6'7 287lbs, is it as fast as Walker's? No, but he's got 6 inches and over 60lbs on him and is considered a finesse player, there are a ton of guys like that in the NFL, a lot that don't even get drafted because it is so rich with athletes.

NBA rookies now weigh more or the same size as most 80's and even 90's players at their peaks of physical development, yet they're playing a more perimeter oriented game that requires them to be agile and explosive. A game that forces them to make quick cuts, move without the ball, fast close outs on 3pt shooters, stay in front of superior ball handlers despite no hand checking, make the proper rotations, guard switches deep on the perimeter, etc.

Most 80's players could run in a straight line fast, could jump high, however most lacked the sheer explosiveness today's league has, they just were not as mobile. They relied on physicality, the ability to back down their man using their body but as I posted, NBA rookies are now larger than most of these men at their physical peak.

Private coaching and more kids playing all translates into an skill evolution, not an athletic one. And like I said, when we look at sports history, the players from the previous era typically transition into the "new and improved" era without much problem, provided they're still relatively young. You talk like google and proper diet are magical or something. It's not turning a 5.0 40yd runner into a 4.3 runner.

Private coaches not only help them work on their skills, but their bodies as well, there is no such thing as "natural" talent in the NBA, every single player has worked hard and has gotten that time in the gym to build their bodies to what it needs to be. Players may act like bags and whiny brats, but don't let that fool you, they got to that point with a ton of work.

Durant has been working on his body since he was 16 thanks to private coaching sessions with a S&C coach, they have been vital to players like Curry, Leonard, Gasol, Lebron, Howard, almost every player in the league has had a private coach early in their careers.



Don't you remember the fat that was Gasol before strength and conditioning coaches got their hands on him?

We've had this misunderstanding in the past, and you ignore it when I point it out to you every time. Your REVOLUTION is my SLOW LINEAR progress. I've demonstrated, despite how "advanced we are," that human athleticism has only generally improved by about 10% over the past 120 years. Bolt did not cut the 100m time in half from when it was first ran in compe ion in 1891. The most cutting edge runner the world has ever seen has only improved on that 10.8 1891 time by 1.2 seconds. And that guy no doubt had poor technique. Transport him to today, spend a month with him showing him modern sprinting technique (you don't even need to give him modern training), and he probably breaks 10 easily. And given the fact he wasn't a sub-saharan African, he probably wasn't the "fastest man in the world." And when you break that progress up into a per year basis, and it's ungodly slow. Same progress and even stagnation has occurred in other athletic events. We've peaked.

They didn't electronically start timing the 100m dash until 1912, but again, NBA players do not run in straight lines, you're using Olympic sports that do not relate to the NBA in any way, sports without any sort of physical contact. Some of the training methods may be the same, but the sports aren't at all.

The World record for the 100m dash was originally in the 10.8 range, this speed can now be achieved by most athletes such as former 6'5 260lb rugby player Jonah Lomu or 6'7 287lb Julius Peppers. That is the difference. Athletes as a whole may not be breaking that record, but they are coming close to it and they're not even training for it.

And guess what, during that transition from 80's leaness to the 90's lean bulk, Bird still averaged 20, 10, 7 on .466 shooting. Watch videos of '92 Bird and he can barely move, his back was gone, and that was the year Jordan was at his all-time peak. First game against Chicago, Bird dropped 30 on 13-22 shooting. I await some silly excuse from you ("uh, it was only Jordan and Pippen who were working with Tim Grover. It hadn't yet gone league wide, so that was why Bird was able to do well."). He even had a 49 point game against Drexler and the Blazers, who had the long and lengthy 6'10" Cliff Robinson (something of a cutting edge player in 92) at SF. And '92 was a year (following the success of the Bulls) that the league seemed to get really athletic. An old Bird adjusted fine. But in this era he'd be Ryan Kelly because reasons and Willie Cauley-Bust being able to move like a guard.

The players drafted near '85 such as Olajuwon, Pippen, Jordan, Barkley, Malone, etc. took years and years to fill out their bodies and were heavily inexperienced. Jordan became Jordan thanks to Tim Grover, same with Pippen, in fact he transformed the whole Bulls team:

http://www.livestrong.com/article/40...kout-programs/

Teammates, including Scottie Pippen, began to join the morning strength and agility sessions. Jordan’s chef would cook the players breakfast afterward, and thus they became known as the Breakfast Club. The results were especially clear at the foul line, where Bulls players displayed some of the most developed biceps and deltoids in the NBA, and in the scoreline, as the team became capable not only of defeating the rival Pistons and Celtics with superior strength but also besting the Western Conference champs in the NBA Finals.



Jordan and the whole Bulls roster barely started lifting weights in the 89-90 off season, after that, the rest is history, it's not a coincidence they started owning the league when their whole roster started to work out with Grover. Their progress was gradual, but after years of training they eventually filled out in the late 90's. Grover also trained Olajuwon and Barkley, he had a huge impact on the NBA. Bird never played against these guys when they were filled out.

Jordan said he was 213 in the off season of '92, he wasn't 213 during the 91-92 season playing Bird, nor was Pippen anywhere close to filling out.

Don't you realize that it takes time for players' games and bodies to mature? You have to give the new generation time. Duncan used to own players like Jordan, Cousins, Aldridge, etc. when they were young but not anymore, they've been getting the better of him.

It's like Leonard vs Gay, Durant, Melo etc. you can show early clips of these players owning him, but after years of honing his skill and developing his body, he's on another level. Cliff Robinson was a 225lb rookie against Bird, he would later fill out to 240, you're comparing young guns to heavily experienced vets.


You've been assuming players entered the league at the weight they were listed or in their primes, that's false. Malone was significantly bigger and better in the 90's compared to the 80's. Most mid 80s players like MJ, Pippen, Robinson, Malone etc. are listed at their peak weights, not rookie.

You probably think I'm arguing with you out of nostalgia. No. I'm an "evidence" guy, and your silly contentions (Bird would a 15th man in today's league or Adam Morrison) don't hold up to scrutiny. Now, if you want to be realistic and say "if 80's Bird played exclusively in this era, he's probably not top 10. More like top 20-30." That's an idea that makes sense. You can even eye test this . Bird's offensive game is much better than the Ryan Kellys and Adam Morrisons. Light years better in the midpost. Better release point on his jumper (note how Chip has rebuilt Leonard's jumper to have a higher release point more behind the head instead of the common "natural release" point from in front of the face/forehead. Bird had a similar release. And it's one that is pretty much unblockable, especially if you're 6'9"). Could finish with the left and right equally as well. Better passer. And quicker. Bird's first step was actually very quick.

Bird relied on physicality like most 80's players, it's not going to work when you're 6'9 220lbs, even Durant is 240lbs and his perimeter handles are light years ahead of Birds as is his first step. Leonard can get off his shot because he's big as , he's at least in the 240lb range, he can actually use his physicality.

Did you see how much bigger Leonard was than Jimmy Butler yesterday? Jimmy Butler weighs 235lbs and Leonard made him his in the post.

http://www.stack.com/a/how-jimmy-but...marred-seasons

"He's up to 235 pounds from 220, while lowering his percentage of body fat to a measly 4 percent."



A player's overall athleticism and skill is relative to the players around them. A guy like Marjanovic can pass and post beautifully in the Euroleague, Splitter was able to knock down jumpers in the Spanish league and post up at will, Simmons looks like Jordan in the D league, Huertas looked like the 2nd coming of Nash in the Euroleague etc.

If you played basketball, those are unblockable jumpers for players 6'5"-6'9". You'd have to jump at the exact same time as the shooter (which is nearly impossible to do) and then no-step vert to about 10 feet instantly.

And your examples of players gaining weight proves my point about the ability of players evolving to suit the times (though, they're starting to shed again).

-The talent pool is far greater than Bird's era, it's not even close, I made a post about it earlier, the talent pool is now in the MILLIONS, not the tens of thousands Bird competed with lol. Even the Euroleague and international play is vastly superior, look at the sheer amount of international players today.

Ginobili, Mills, Ibaka, P. Gasol, M. Gasol, Nowitzki, Parker, Diaw, Porzingis, Pekovic, Vucevic, Splitter, Pachulia, Nurkic, Mozgov, Varejao, Gobert, Fournier, Mirotic, Marjanovic, Valanciunas, Mahinmi etc.

Compare that with the 80's where you had guys like Sabonis getting outplayed by a 227lb rookie D-Robinson and failing to lead his team to a win against the Greeks and the mighty Niko Gallis who dropped 40 on his team lol. Now that guy is overrated, the Euroleague has also come a very long way and is pumping out pros.



-Players are significantly bigger lol. Most SF's are in the 230-250+ range like Butler, Anderson, Leonard, S Johnson, Gay, Melo, George, KD, J Johnson, Bron, Winslow, Giannis, J. Parker, etc. look at how small Butler is yet he weighs 235 and he's probably the smallest guy out of everyone I listed.

You have centers at 270+lbs like M. Gasol, Drummond, Jordan, Cousins, Nurkic, Mozgov, Whiteside, Howard, Hibbert, Pachulia, etc.

You have PF's easily at 260+ like Aldridge, Diaw, Favors, Love, Griffin, Okafor, Davis, Allen, etc. even a player like Chris Bosh weighs 250lbs, however it hasn't been updated (google it).

[apalisoc_9]

KL2 with the knockout punch.

[midnightpulp]

There are a ton of guys that have breakneck speed at 6'5, Bolt is not the only guy out there, a lot of these guys are playing other sports like the NBA or NFL. Runners are generally smaller because that's the optimum size for running, NFL players are large and agile because that's the optimum size for their sport the same way NBA players are large and agile. Running in a straight line, jumping over hurdles, high jumps, these do not really apply to basketball or football. Especially not now that the game is perimeter oriented and requires much more mobility.

Robinson was a genetic freak and he played in the 90's not 80's, he looked stronger than he actually was. When he was playing with the Mens basketball team playing against players like Sabonis he was barely 227lbs. It took him like 10+ years to fill out his body completely.

There you go again with that "but the NFL and NBA don't employ the same type of athleticism! So citing Olympic records is irrelevant!" Athleticism is athleticism. If you have the kind of natural athleticism that allows you to run 10 second 100m and jump 40", you'll have/or can have elite lateral movement. And there you also go again with your qualitative observations, "Robinson looked stronger than he was!" Guess who was about the only guy who could defend Shaq 1-on-1 in those days and not get 50 dropped on him? David Robinson. At DeMonkey, Dwight, Marc Gasol, etc being stronger because we live in the magical era of 2015.

The NFL started to use strength and conditioning coaches in the 70's one of the first being Marv Marinovich, they are much more advanced and have a richer history when it comes to proper nutrition and weightlifting, the NBA didn't start to employ S&C coaches until the 90's after Grover transformed Jordan, Pippen and the whole Bulls team.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marv_Marinovich

This is the guy that would help revolutionize American sports by introducing european sports science, because at that time, we were pretty much re ed on the whole subject and they had it mastered.

When you ignore a player's size, in relation to their skill set or how they move, you're ignoring their athleticism. Julius Peppers can run a 4.68 at 6'7 287lbs, is it as fast as Walker's? No, but he's got 6 inches and over 60lbs on him and is considered a finesse player, there are a ton of guys like that in the NFL, a lot that don't even get drafted because it is so rich with athletes.

What you ignore is that the two leagues are not much bigger than they were 20-30 years ago, and NBA players are once again starting to go leaner.





We've pretty much flatlined with the exception of O-lineman getting bigger and receiver height increasing a bit. No "revolutionary gains" have been made. And yes, they were just as athletic. Again, I appeal to the very HARD evidence of older, "less cutting edge" players adapting to the modern era. Take Jerry Rice or Emmitt smith. They both seamlessly adjusted. Your evidence is spouting weights.

NBA rookies now weigh more or the same size as most 80's and even 90's players at their peaks of physical development, yet they're playing a more perimeter oriented game that requires them to be agile and explosive. A game that forces them to make quick cuts, move without the ball, fast close outs on 3pt shooters, stay in front of superior ball handlers despite no hand checking, make the proper rotations, guard switches deep on the perimeter, etc.

This is just another development of many over the course of NBA history. NBA players have had no problem adjusting to the new eras over their careers. Bird adjusted from the lean 80's to your post-Eastern Bloc trained NBA, and he still lit people up, despite having no back and no legs. And this is when all your Tim Grover clients were at their basketball peaks (Jordan, Pippen, Barkley, Drexler). Magic came in at the height of that era, when all your Tim Grover experiments (according to you) "filled out their bodies." And he put up strong numbers from the PF position after a 4 year layoff, with HIV, and no knees. But this is era is magically different, right?

You pretty much have a kind of reverse nostalgia bias toward it because you're young and get tired of all the old school fans telling you how much better basketball was back then. I get that. And I agree with your sentiment (of course basketball is more advanced today) but it's not advanced to the Superhero-level degree (with regard to athleticism and skills) that you think it is. To make such an extraordinary and dumbass claim that Bird (or Magic or Kevin Johnson or any 80's/90's star) would be a 15th man today requires extraordinary evidence. And talking about weights and Willie Cauley-Bust's mobility isn't evidence. My evidence is simply stated: A declining Bird still put great numbers against an NBA that was more athletic and skilled than ever (at that point). You reply to that with moving the goalposts ("t-t-their bodies weren't filled out yet!") I can site Magic's comeback, and you'll move the goalposts again.

If you made a reasonable statement, like, "Players are 10-15% better overall today than they were 25 years ago." I wouldn't even argue with you, and you'd still catch your nostalgic fish. But you pretty much worship and overrate today's players like nostalgia fans overrate their heroes.

As for electronic timing, it's error margin can be as high .5 seconds either way, so we don't know to what extent those sprinters were over or under timed. My counter to that is that when electronic timing was introduced, times still progressed at about the same rate, so it looks like those times weren't that off generally.

And lol at the talent pool being in the tens of thousands in Bird's era. Millions of Americans did play and pursue basketball back then too. But like I said, NBA stars haven't had trouble adjusting to larger talent pools in the past, like when the NBA became more integrated and the leagues merged, which was a far, far bigger leap in skill/athleticism gap than from the 80's to your Eastern Bloc/Strength and Conditioning era. That's how progress typically works. In the earlier stages, you get big leaps and then progress slows down to a more linear curve. Now if you want to say George Mikan would be a 15th man, that might hold some merit. But post-merger really is the beginning of the modern NBA and there's been no "leaps." Just progress as usual.

[midnightpulp]

KL2 with the knockout punch.

Yeah, citing player weights and "mobility" is a knockdown argument.

Reverse Nostalgia fans

[midnightpulp]

I do agree that we were re ed and didn't know what we were doing in regards to the Soviets, though. During the whole Soviet era, we got beat hard in the Olympics.

Oh wait.

http://www.medalspercapita.com/#golds-per-capita:1952

http://www.medalspercapita.com/#golds-per-capita:1956

http://www.medalspercapita.com/#golds-per-capita:1960

http://www.medalspercapita.com/#golds-per-capita:1964

http://www.medalspercapita.com/#golds-per-capita:1968

4-1 in favor of the States.

http://www.medalspercapita.com/#golds-per-capita:1972

^But amazingly, after getting beat by 17 golds, the Soviets came back with a 17 gold win themselves and East Germany increased their total golds by over 100%.

Eastern Bloc training More like Eastern Bloc Steroid programs.

You'll cop out and say, "The 70's is when they really perfected it." But Marinovich was over there during the 60's learning about the "methods they mastered," as we were re edly stumbling along, never mind the Soviets only beat us once (per capita, which is a fair adjustment) during that time, and got demolished at Mexico City. Furthermore, the Soviets never dominated the sprinting, jumping, swimming, and decathlon events (quite good at the high jump, though. After Fosbery showed them how re ed their technique was ). They crushed us at the shot put and other strength events, though. But slavs are inherently good at that, like West Africans are at sprinting.

[apalisoc_9]

Yeah, citing player weights and "mobility" is a knockdown argument.

Reverse Nostalgia fans

You never replied on the general consensus among players about the difference between D-League players and NBA players.

Many players have aknowledged that the difference is little
.maybe D league player is 0.2 slower than an nba player. Number wise it looks Small but thats enougb for players to get by you on every posession..the same thing that would happen to..80 player.

Marco bellineli can make 360 dunks in game

If an 80.player did that in the 80s hed be considered the greatest athlete of all time

[daslicer]

How does that math work? It was nothing but Americans in the 80s. It's now Americans and foreign players. Foreign players make up 24% now, white Americans lost 14%. Therefore black Americans lost 10%. Or is it leaps in mathematical modelling in the last 30 years changed that basic math?

Did math get eastern block training methods too?

[midnightpulp]

You never replied on the general consensus among players about the difference between D-League players and NBA players.

Many players have aknowledged that the difference is little
.maybe D league player is 0.2 slower than an nba player. Number wise it looks Small but thats enougb for players to get by you on every posession..the same thing that would happen to..80 player.

Marco bellineli can make 360 dunks in game

If an 80.player did that in the 80s hed be considered the greatest athlete of all time

The difference between an NBA star and a D-league player is huge from a production standpoint. It's not even close. We're talking anywhere from 500% to 1000% gains (ex. D-league scrubs gets called in and averages 3 points 1 board per game off the bench in limited minutes, compared to top players who can average 30 points per game, 10-15 boards, etc). And the difference between a starter/rotation player and D-league scrub is 100% to 500%. My estimate is that 80's players would see about a 10% drop in production and floor impact across the board when compared in a vacuum. That doesn't put them at the D-League level. Nor does their "0.2 less slowness," which actually wouldn't affect things that much, since players typically see their basketball peak after their peak athleticism has declined. Bird was 100% "less slow" in the 90's and still lit people up. In fact, the Bird argument (him playing well as a broken down player into the early 90's when the league was at its athletic peak) pretty much shatters KL2's claim and proves my contention of how players can evolve, even when they're past their primes. And Bird isn't the only basketball, football, etc great to evolve over multiple paradigm shifts.

You guys simply think this era is magically athletic because it's modern. As early as the mid-90s, people were saying Bird and Magic would be too unathletic to compete (despite Magic coming back in '96 as a corpse and putting up 14, 8, 7). It's not a new criticism toward those players, since they played a below the rim game, which doesn't excite reverse nostalgia fans.

And what's this silly obsession with dunking? They didn't really emphasis flashy in game dunks until the mid-90's, so no one cared to attempt them or learn them. For dunking athleticism progression, I typically look at free throw line dunks. Players today can't dunk any further out than they could when Dr. J took off from the free throw line.

Has dunking creativity progressed? A lot. But that's a different thing.

[Cry Havoc]

The difference between an NBA star and a D-league player is huge from a production standpoint. It's not even close. We're talking anywhere from 500% to 1000% gains (ex. D-league scrubs gets called in and averages 3 points 1 board per game off the bench in limited minutes, compared to top players who can average 30 points per game, 10-15 boards, etc). And the difference between a starter/rotation player and D-league scrub is 100% to 500%. My estimate is that 80's players would see about a 10% drop in production and floor impact across the board when compared in a vacuum. That doesn't put them at the D-League level. Nor does their "0.2 less slowness," which actually wouldn't affect things that much, since players typically see their basketball peak after their peak athleticism has declined. Bird was 100% "less slow" in the 90's and still lit people up. In fact, the Bird argument (him playing well as a broken down player into the early 90's when the league was at its athletic peak) pretty much shatters KL2's claim and proves my contention of how players can evolve, even when they're past their primes. And Bird isn't the only basketball, football, etc great to evolve over multiple paradigm shifts.

You guys simply think this era is magically athletic because it's modern. As early as the mid-90s, people were saying Bird and Magic would be too unathletic to compete (despite Magic coming back in '96 as a corpse and putting up 14, 8, 7). It's not a new criticism toward those players, since they played a below the rim game, which doesn't excite reverse nostalgia fans.

And what's this silly obsession with dunking? They didn't really emphasis flashy in game dunks until the mid-90's, so no one cared to attempt them or learn them. For dunking athleticism progression, I typically look at free throw line dunks. Players today can't dunk any further out than they could when Dr. J took off from the free throw line.

Has dunking creativity progressed? A lot. But that's a different thing.

[daslicer]

You guys simply think this era is magically athletic because it's modern. As early as the mid-90s, people were saying Bird and Magic would be too unathletic to compete (despite Magic coming back in '96 as a corpse and putting up 14, 8, 7). It's not a new criticism toward those players, since they played a below the rim game, which doesn't excite reverse nostalgia fans.

Magic's game and his physique in '96 resembled Spurs Boris Diaw granted he had better numbers.

[Spurtacular]

The reason they are All-Stars is because of their "African" genes. All of them had fathers who were black & athletes, what a coincidence! If Jimmer had JR Smith's athleticism he would be have been an All-star but alas his Neanderthal genes are holding him back.

I think the science isn't very advanced yet to say if you're right or wrong.

The point is that Blake. Thompson. etc are half white at the end of the day. Somehow. they don't get counted in the white pool. That's definitely iffy to me.

[midnightpulp]

Magic's game and his physique in '96 resembled Spurs Boris Diaw granted he had better numbers.

Yeah, he was broken down in every possible athletic and physical way, and yet sleptwalk his way to good numbers in an era that was the land of the giants with all the great bigs.

Reverse Nostalgia fans usually falsely perceive size and athleticism as indicators of player ability. To this day, the perception persists (among NBA fans who didn't watch the Spurs that much over the past 20 years) that Shaq dominated Duncan in their matchups. They look at youtube highlights and see this 360lb monster who moves like a cat in the post and conclude that there is no possible way a 250lb Tim Duncan who doesn't really jump all that high or move all that quick (which is false. Duncan has deceptive quickness that doesn't impress on highlight vids like Hakeem's and such) couldn't possibly guard or score on Shaq. Yet Duncan got the best of Shaq usually and was often times the most effective one-on-one defender against him. KL2, Apa, etc jump to the same false conclusions because they over-fetishize athletic traits and size.

I'm not trying to convince them the 80's and 90's were the peak of basketball. I don't agree with that and think basketball has evolved massively on the strategy/player evaluation/game planning side of things. There's also been athletic and skill evolutions, but they're overstated to idiotic degrees.

[gambit1990]

3 mvps, 3 rings, 2 fmvps, 50-40-90 club twice... in 13 seasons. not a bad passer either. tough, clutch. who overrates him? and by how much? i never see people saying he's #1, #2, #3 #4, #5. he's top seven, eight at worse.

[Kawhitstorm]

I think the science isn't very advanced yet to say if you're right or wrong.

The point is that Blake. Thompson. etc are half white at the end of the day. Somehow. they don't get counted in the white pool. That's definitely iffy to me.

If segregation was still legal, none of them would be allowed to drink from the "Whites Only" fountain

[Spurtacular]

If segregation was still legal, none of them would be allowed to drink from the "Whites Only" fountain

Well. thanks for that historical point.

[lefty]

How does that math work? It was nothing but Americans in the 80s. It's now Americans and foreign players. Foreign players make up 24% now, white Americans lost 14%. Therefore black Americans lost 10%. Or is it leaps in mathematical modelling in the last 30 years changed that basic math?

Did math get eastern block training methods too?