What NBA Era WASN'T a "Weak, Watered-Down" Era?

[bwink23]

"Nutrition" ... biggest load of shit people say on IH.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilyFh1gOUjY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_aYfPsneDM

Junk food. Major problem in the U.S.... has only increased since prior decades not decreased... NBA players of today grew up on Pepsi and McDonalds. Most NBA players have horrible diets. But yah okay, "nutrition" makes older era's weaker...

Great logic.

You honestly think Pau Gasol goes home and gives a flying f_ck what he snacks on from his fridge? You think players prior to the 1980's were "starving" or something!? Instead of Dorrittos, Taco Bell and Big Macs some of those "starved" vintage players probably had to settle for actual grocery store foods like chicken, eggs, potatoes, vegetables and all that other prehistoric terrible food that you can't put in your microwave for instant-calorie-satisfaction.

i think the appropriate words he was looking for was "performance-enhancing" supplements....

[I.R.Beast]

Athletes are bigger and stronger these days because they don't play as fast as a pace as they did back in the days such as the 80s. You had to be in better running shaped or conditioned to play in NBA games and seasons back then than in today's game. That is why players were lighter back then and that is why they weren't as strong as they are now.

It has nothing to do with the evolution of the game or athleticism, that is garbage.

you sound like a fool.. Evolution of the game does have alot to do with it.

[CavaliersFTW]

i think the appropriate words he was looking for was "performance-enhancing" supplements....

Not sure if the NBA tests for steroids (I would assume they do... pro sport in the 21st century... right??? - Team U.S.A. def has too). But even if 'roids aren't around, I bet at least a small small % of players have once used HGH, which you can't test for IIRC.

HGH would def be something vintage players didn't have your right - I'll def buy into that before I'll buy into nutrition being any sort of "improvement". I wonder about HGH and a few players sometimes, like Dwayne... and his ever expanding jaw... lol

Also, surgeries, much much better orthopedic inserts and shoes, and new things like Kobe's enriched platelet formula or w/e he underwent in Germany are all new things that seem to help treat injuries better.

But nutrition itself? nah, that isn't even relevant unless you can find an NBA player born and raised during the great depression in a shanty town that suffering from long stretches of malnourishment... A diet of foods all made from Milk, Eggs, Pastas, Chicken etc etc is honestly probably >>>>>> than half of the modern NBA players diets. It doesn't matter though, because from the ages of 18-30 your diet isn't really going to perceptibly effect you unless it's pretty awful.

[CavaliersFTW]

you sound like a fool.. Evolution of the game does have alot to do with it.

I don't think he sounds like a fool, part of the point he made is right, unless your strictly pointing out that he's sort of missing the link with "evolution of the game".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iS1GJ5wxyTc
This basketball is a full court game, sprinting basket to basket with agility on the fast break. Their wiry gymnasts physique is absolutely necessary for that era. Not too heavy, incredible cardiovascular system, high-end top speed, some quickness, and some noteworthy acrobatics as a result of their lighter weight frames. They aren't weak, they just can't afford to add much mass to their frames.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYzoN2do63Y
...Today is a half-court game, the offense usually doesn't start until the players jog to their positions while the point guard also takes more time to bring the ball up to the 3 point arc and than develop a play. It's a slower game, and as a result weight lifting and mass for establishing position, and also for generating a rapid "explosion" to the basket has become favorable. They are heavier and stronger. But he's right in that they are NOT more athletic. They've only molded their physique to fit what the game's trend/rules/whatever has now demanded from them. So yah, the game's evolution in that sense, had to have contributed to this.

[SlayerEnraged]

"weak and watered down" is just some B.S. made up by detractors of Jordnan's reign....League expansion only hurts if there isn't enough talent to fill the spots. Obviously, 23 teams vs. 30, the talent will get spread a little thin. But this is the United States, and there is no shortage of basketball talent here.

Nope. most over rated and hyped up player in nba history. True media product.

[Deuce Bigalow]

[SwooshReturns]

Why is everyone hating on this GIF? For it's time, this was unheard of and truly innovative.

As pertains to ERA ... everyone is different. The game style changes and adapts to his operating parts.

The only way to compare players across eras is to view them within the scope of how well they dominated THEIR era.

The only people I've ever heard call MJ an over-hype, "media creation" is lunatic Laker fans.

Their sheer jealousy of arguably having the best franchise in the sport ... a lineage of outrageously gifted talents, and the largets all-time roster of HOF players.

Yet they don't have the one player that is almost unanimously considered GOAT.

It's also why they were on LeBron so hard from 2008 - 2010. The guy from an individual perspective was show casing MJ / Bird / Magic esque transcendant qualities.

[NumberSix]

The only people I've ever heard call MJ an over-hype, "media creation" is lunatic Laker fans.

Their sheer jealousy of arguably having the best franchise in the sport ... a lineage of outrageously gifted talents, and the largets all-time roster of HOF players.

Yet they don't have the one player that is almost unanimously considered GOAT.

It's also why they were on LeBron so hard from 2008 - 2010. The guy from an individual perspective was show casing MJ / Bird / Magic esque transcendant qualities.

As much as this sounds like a legit argument, we all know god damn well that this isn't what's going on.

It's not "lunatic Laker fans". It's the army of clueless 15 year old Kobetards. Laker fans aren't jealous that LAL didn't have MJ. The attempt to discredit Jordan is just a pathetic attempt by an army of raging Eric Cartmans trying to scream louder than everyone else that Kobe is the best player ever.

It's the exact same reason why they do it to LeBron, Shaq and Duncan. To try to brush away the player's of Kobe's own era that are blatantly better than him.

Tim Tebow is the only player I've seen that to even more of extent than Kobe, is an example of a player that people for some reason desperately want to prop up to a level they are completely undeserving of.

What is it about these particular guys that makes people so desperate to propel them to a stature far beyond what they are?

[Deuce Bigalow]

As much as this sounds like a legit argument, we all know god damn well that this isn't what's going on. What about these particular guys makes people want to propell them beyond what they are?

Tim Tebow is the only player I've seen that to even more of extent than Kobe, is an example of a player that people for some reason desperately want to prop up to a level they are completely undeserving of.

It's not "lunatic Laker fans". It's the army of clueless 15 year old Kobetards. Laker fans aren't jealous that LAL didn't have MJ. The attempt to discredit Jordan is just a pathetic attempt by an army of raging Eric Cartmans trying to scream louder than everyone else that Kobe is the best player ever.

It's the exact same reason why they do it to LeBron, Shaq and Duncan. To try to brush away the player's of Kobe's own era that are blatantly better than him.

[SwooshReturns]

LeBron in 2008, 2009, and 2010 was more dominant and more impactful than any of the best versions of Kobe Bryant.

That's what he means.

[STATUTORY]

Why is everyone hating on this GIF? For it's time, this was unheard of and truly innovative.

As pertains to ERA ... everyone is different. The game style changes and adapts to his operating parts.

The only way to compare players across eras is to view them within the scope of how well they dominated THEIR era.

The only people I've ever heard call MJ an over-hype, "media creation" is lunatic Laker fans.

Their sheer jealousy of arguably having the best franchise in the sport ... a lineage of outrageously gifted talents, and the largets all-time roster of HOF players.

Yet they don't have the one player that is almost unanimously considered GOAT.

It's also why they were on LeBron so hard from 2008 - 2010. The guy from an individual perspective was show casing MJ / Bird / Magic esque transcendant qualities.

not really making fun of cousy or the gif but jlauber for saying with a straight face that the guys from the 60s could be transplanted to modern day and be great or that 90s guard would not made the roster if he was transplanted back to the 60s

jlauber delusional old man or more likely young pup that's in love with the myth of wilt.

[kileer7]

http://arturogalletti.wordpress.com/...ll-in-the-nba/

Measuring the Quality of Basketball in the NBA Posted on 07/17/2010 by Arturo Galletti (Wages of Wins Journal)

Excerpt:

To create an objective measurement of the quality of basketball in the NBA, a good place to start is how we measure the quality for each player productivity (WP48 and Wins Produced). So by calculating the average team [productivity], I can objectively conclude: 1985-92 was the best basketball the NBA has seen since the merger; 1992 was the Apex and 1999 the nadir (lowest point) for quality."

His analysis is very interesting because of the predictive nature of WP48.

[jlauber]

This is hilarious. Russell also said Wilt would average 60-70 ppg in the 90s. Older players deserve more credit then they get from certain people but they don't help their case when they say deluded stuff like this.

HILARIOUS???!!!



So, when Russell says that Paxson would have been watching the game from the stands in the 60's, he ultimately argued that Paxson would not have been among the top-100 players in the league.

Now, instead of rushing to judgment, and making a ridiculous response, how about actually taking the time to understand what Russell was actually saying.

There were 27 NBA teams in the league in 1993.

Now, take a look at the Bulls roster that season...

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/CHI/1993.html

59 GAMES played. 17.5 MPG. 4.2 PPG. .451 FG%.

Paxson was somewhere around their 8-10th best player...in a league of 27 teams. He was NOWHERE NEAR a Top-100 player that season. Russell's INTELLIGENT point was that, in a league of EIGHT teams, players like Paxson would not have playing at all. I don't see how ANYONE can argue that point.

[Deuce Bigalow]

HILARIOUS???!!!



So, when Russell says that Paxson would have been watching the game from the stands in the 60's, he ultimately argued that Paxson would not have been among the top-100 players in the league.

Now, instead of rushing to judgment, and making a ridiculous response, how about actually taking the time to understand what Russell was actually saying.

There were 27 NBA teams in the league in 1993.

Now, take a look at the Bulls roster that season...

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/CHI/1993.html

59 GAMES played. 17.5 MPG. 4.2 PPG. .451 FG%.

Paxson was somewhere around their 8-10th best player...in a league of 27 teams. He was NOWHERE NEAR a Top-100 player that season. Russell's INTELLIGENT point was that, in a league of EIGHT teams, players like Paxson would not have playing at all. I don't see how ANYONE can argue that point.

[Living Being]

Right after the Grizzlies and Raptors were added to the NBA, the league was like a glass of water with one sugar particle.