Myth Exposed: ALL of the expansion players were already NBA players

Early 90's was definitely a transition period for the NBA. There were some great players from the decade, especially bigs, but not many [B][I]great[/I][/B] teams.

I'm not sure the modern NBA has many [B][I]great[/I][/B] teams either, but there are certainly a lot of [B][I]very good[/I][/B] teams. I've been watching the NBA since the late 80's, and I've never seen anything like the modern day Western Conference.

[QUOTE=bdreason]

I've been watching the NBA since the late 80's, and I've never seen anything like the modern day Western Conference.

[/QUOTE]
You memory is short or doesn't extend back far enough - today's WC has 5 teams that won 55+ gamees.

1998 WC also had 5 teams that won 55+ games including Utah Jazz, Popovich's Spurs with Duncan/Robinson, Payton/Kemp/Schrempf Sonics, Shaq's 4 all-star Lakers, and McDyess/Jason Kidd's Phoenix Suns.

For Utah to make the Finals in 1998, they had to beat Hakeem's Rockets, Popovich/Duncan/Robinson Spurs, and Shaq's Lakers (his most stacked team ever).. No team has ever had to defeat this much talent JUST TO MAKE the Finals (Utah defeated three top 10 all-time players - Shaq, Duncan, Hakeem.. and faced a 4th in the Finals).
.

[QUOTE=3ball]You memory is short or doesn't extend back far enough - today's WC has 5 teams that won 55+ gamees... And those teams happen to also be the 5 teams that would be considered "good".

1998 also had 5 teams that won 55+ games including Utah Jazz, Popovich's Spurs with Duncan/Robinson, Payton/Kemp/Schrempf Sonics, Shaq's 4 all-star Lakers, and McDyess/Jason Kidd's Phoenix Suns.

For Utah to make the Finals in 1998, they had to beat Hakeem's Rockets, Popovich/Duncan/Robinson Spurs, and Shaq's Lakers (his most stacked team ever).. No team has ever had to defeat this much talent JUST TO MAKE the Finals.
.[/QUOTE]


My memory is just fine. I was in high school in the late 90's and basketball was my life. The modern Western Conference has 9 teams capable of 50+ wins. The late 90's Western Conference was a 4-horse race.

[QUOTE=iamgine]

It's because guys who were getting 0 minutes suddenly gets 30 minutes.

[/QUOTE]
It's just not true - expansion has nothing to do with the number of bad teams - today's game has more really bad teams with very low win totals:


Teams with less than 25 wins in 2015 ([I]teams with less than 20 wins highlighted in red[/I]):

[COLOR="Red"]MIN: 15 wins
NYK: 17 wins
PHI: 18 wins[/COLOR]
LAL: 21 wins
ORL: 25 wins


Teams with less than 25 wins in 1989:

[COLOR="Red"]MIA: 15 wins[/COLOR]
CHA: 20 wins
LAC: 21 wins
SAS: 21 wins


[I]Were MIN, NYK, and PHI expansion teams in 2015???... Nope - just really bad teams.. As you can see, 2015 has more teams with less than 20 wins and more teams with less than 25 wins.. Expansion has nothing to do with the number of bad teams.[/I]
.

[QUOTE=bdreason]

The 2015 Western Conference has 9 teams [B][SIZE="3"]capable[/SIZE][/B] of 50+ wins. The late 90's Western Conference was a 4-horse race.

[/QUOTE]
Capable??... Who decides if they're capable... You???... In reality, there were 7 teams with over 50 wins in 2015 WC, not 9.. There were 6 teams with over 50 wins in 1994 WC too.. So what's your point?...

Btw, the 2015 western conference was ALSO a 4-horse race.. Teams like Portland had no chance (but you're clearly biased, so you probably counted them as a contender).

Also, in 1998 - the year we were comparing to 2015 - there were 10 teams TOTAL that won 55+ (counting both conferences), which is the same as 2015... And there were 5 teams that won 55+ in the WC, which is the same as 2015.

Btw, the Utah Jazz defeated three top 10 all-time players just to MAKE the Finals in 1998 (Hakeem, Shaq, Duncan)... Then they faced a 4th in the Finals (MJ).. No team has ever defeated three top 10 all-time players on a playoff run, and no team has ever faced four top 10 all-time players - that's a testament to how many great players and good teams there were at that time.
.

[QUOTE=3ball]It's just not true - [B]expansion has nothing to do with the number of bad teams[/B] - today's game has more really bad teams with very low win totals
.[/QUOTE]
Um yes it does. Bad teams creation can happen in many ways, expansion is one of them. It can also happen via: tanking (PHI), bad management (Sac, Min, NYK), injuries, etc.

[QUOTE=iamgine]Um yes it does. Bad teams creation can happen in many ways, expansion is one of them. It can also happen via: tanking (PHI), bad management (Sac, Min, NYK), injuries, etc.[/QUOTE]
[COLOR="Blue"]There were less bad teams during the expansion years than 2015, which proves you wrong:
[/COLOR]

Teams with less than 25 wins in 2015 ([I]teams with less than 20 wins highlighted in red[/I]):

[COLOR="Red"]MIN: 15 wins
NYK: 17 wins
PHI: 18 wins[/COLOR]
LAL: 21 wins
ORL: 25 wins


Teams with less than 25 wins in 1989:

[COLOR="Red"]MIA: 15 wins[/COLOR]
CHA: 20 wins
LAC: 21 wins
SAS: 21 wins


[I]Of course, we know that MIN, NYK, and PHI were expansion teams in 2015 - just look at their horrible records... Oh wait.. Nope - they were just really bad teams.. As you can see, 2015 has more teams with less than 20 wins and more teams with less than 25 wins.. Expansion has nothing to do with the number of bad teams.[/I]

[QUOTE=3ball]Teams with less than 25 wins in 2015 ([I]teams with less than 20 wins highlighted in red[/I]):

[COLOR="Red"]MIN: 15 wins
NYK: 17 wins
PHI: 18 wins[/COLOR]
LAL: 21 wins
ORL: 25 wins


Teams with less than 25 wins in 1989:

[COLOR="Red"]MIA: 15 wins[/COLOR]
CHA: 20 wins
LAC: 21 wins
SAS: 21 wins


[I]Were MIN, NYK, and PHI expansion teams in 2015???... Nope - just really bad teams.. As you can see, 2015 has more teams with less than 20 wins and more teams with less than 25 wins.. Expansion has nothing to do with the number of bad teams.[/I][/QUOTE]
[B]Bad teams creation can happen in many ways, expansion is one of them.[/B] It can also happen via: tanking (PHI), bad management (Sac, Min, NYK), injuries, etc.

Yeah sure expansion draft players were nba players but not rotation players or top young prospects.

Pick 8 guys each team would save now and do the same type draft for 2 new teams and then see if those teams look good on paper

[QUOTE=iamgine]

Bad teams creation can happen in many ways, expansion is one of them.

[B]Bad teams in today's era happen via: tanking (PHI), bad management (Sac, Min, NYK), injuries, etc.
[/B]
[/QUOTE]
Ah yes, the sweet smell of excuses (in the trolling game, that means victory).

So we've established that today's league has more bad teams than the expansion years - but instead of conceding my point that 450 NBA players in each era means that it's all equal, you decide to make excuses for WHY today's league has more bad teams:

Apparently, the super-tough, post-expansion era has "[I]tanking, bad management, and more injuries[/I]".. That could be a thread - you should start it.

:roll:

3dongs is an expert of not addressing anyone else's point

[QUOTE=ShawkFactory]3dongs is an expert of not addressing anyone else's point[/QUOTE]
What point do you want me to address?

I just got iamgine to say that today's so-called tough era has "[I]tanking, bad management, and more injuries[/I]" - this was his excuse for why today's league has more bad teams then the expansion years.. I gotta tell ya, I'm quite satisfied with this.

[QUOTE=3ball]Ah yes, the sweet smell of excuses (in the trolling game, that means victory).

So we've established that today's league has more bad teams than the expansion years - but instead of conceding my point that 450 NBA players in each era means that it's all equal, you decide to make excuses for WHY today's league has more bad teams:

Apparently, the super-tough, post-expansion era has "[I]tanking, bad management, and more injuries[/I]".. That could be a thread - you should start it.
[/QUOTE]
I'm not sure of your point. Excuse about what? And why would anyone create a thread about that?

I'm just pointing out that expansion create bad teams. Just like some other factors. To say otherwise is just false.

[QUOTE=iamgine]

I'm just pointing out that expansion create bad teams. Just like some other factors. To say otherwise is just false.

[/QUOTE]
Expansion didn't create more bad teams than there are today.

Infact, the win-loss records show that there are MORE bad teams today than the years the league expanded, probably because of what you said - tanking, bad management, and more injuries (i.e. more fragile, less-resilient, pampered players).

[QUOTE=3ball]Expansion didn't create more bad teams than there are today.
[/QUOTE]
Now that would be a nice start for discussion. But to say:

"[I]expansion has nothing to do with the number of bad teams[/I]"

is just plain wrong.