Hand checking one of the biggest myths in sports
Working on it, BRB
Hand checking one of the biggest myths in sports
and you are saying he is not underrated ? slightly better than Ewing ? oh boy
Hakeem is better..
Shaq is better..
David from that era is about 3rd correct?
I'll give it to him over Ewing but it is close. Ewing had to deal with MJ and the Bulls..
BTW Ewing is very underrated historically.. Big Time..
not sure what people have with Ewing.. mostly overrated
David is head and shoulder above Ewing and no.. its not even close
Who overrates Ewing LOL?? He was 37 with David at 24 on the ESPN List.. Did you watch him play? Gutting out injuries, with lousy talent and dealing with MJ and the Bulls was not fun.
"He made the Knicks le contenders despite never truly having a second superstar to play alongside him in his prime. With one of the best fallaway jumpers a big man has ever had, Ewing led the Knicks to 13 straight postseasons. The 7-footer just couldn't deliver a championship during an era ruled by Michael Jordan."
Spot on IMO..
https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/...-all-nos-40-11
I don't think that either, and I could even agree that Robinson might not win in 2003 as the top dog, but that was never what I argued, tbh. I said that if roles were reversed, Robinson would probably be ranked ahead of Duncan in the all-time list, not that Robinson would have won the same as Duncan as a top option.
Let's say Duncan gets to the Spurs in '89, to me there's no way he rings with all those subpar supporting casts, but just for the sake of argument, let's say he pulls a magic run and wins 1 ring without Robinson. Then David comes in '97. Let's say he can't duplicate Duncan's historic 2003 run and doesn't win that year, he would still win more rings in the following years as Manu and Tony get better. Which means Robinson wins more rings as the main option than Duncan. That would be enough for people to rank David over Tim in the all-time list.
Just to clarify, are you saying hand checking never happened (or was inconsequential), or that it still happens despite the rule change?
Hand Checking for sure a thing in the 90's.. But Jordan for example really got a ton of whistles even for the era that was more physical. That's a bit of a myth with MJ regarding the physicality of the 90's.. Watching even some old games recently against the Knicks, and Pacers, he is barely touched and going to the FT line.. Superstar Treatment obviously always been a thing..
average ppg in 1995-96: 99.5
average ppg in 2019-20: 111.4
So yes, the 90s were a more defensive era and currently we're in a more offensive era. This isn't controversial.
Let me know ASAP so i can get in touch with most peoples dads around here and let them know its best they get a blow job instead.
Because the offense is also much better today
90s offense
Hey if you want to swing that way, that’s your right , free country
He had ROY Timmay in ‘98 but got locked up by Greg Foster
Because he was a professional and didn't act like a jackass.
your previous post had me confused.
Na you got this pop those lips baby.
By that logic, offense was at its best in the 1960s
Rk Season Lg PTS
1 1961-62 NBA 118.8
2 1960-61 NBA 118.1
3 1966-67 NBA 117.4
4 1969-70 NBA 116.7
5 1967-68 NBA 116.6
6 1965-66 NBA 115.5
7 1962-63 NBA 115.3
8 1959-60 NBA 115.3
9 1970-71 NBA 112.4
10 1968-69 NBA 112.3
11 2019-20 NBA 111.4
12 2018-19 NBA 111.2
13 1963-64 NBA 111.0
14 1984-85 NBA 110.8
15 1964-65 NBA 110.6
The simplistic assumption that "more ppg = better offense" ignores other factors. The NBA has fluctuated between favoring offense and favoring defense throughout its history.
90s Robinson > 90s Shaq
Shaq didn't peak until 2000-01.
Agreed. And with the exception of one season DRob>Hakeem. DRob won the scoring le during hakeem’s dream season (pun intended) so it wasn’t like there was a big gap during that year.
True, and if I remember correctly, The Admiral was the MVP runner up in that season as well.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)