"Back in the 90's, the game was more tough and physical"

[NBAGOAT]

Your not allowed playing defence anymore so of course its harder. It has nothing to do with players being better from 3 or teams having better offence. The reason why players are getting so many open 3's and drives is because defenders arnt allowed fighting through screens anymore. So now instead of being able to fight through the screen and defend your man teams have to pick there poison. They can either switch and have a mismatch or they can double the the screener or the ball. Either way the defence is screwed because its either gonna create a mismatch or an open shot or drive. Thats pretty much every teams offence right now. Just pick any game and watch.

pnr offense worked well at times in the 90's and early 00's if you had the personnel. On the flip side illegal screens werent called often. Most teams just preferred to play through the post however or using isolation. And yes it's obvious players are better from 3 now, a lot of contested ones are made. Compare wat percent of guards who had the ability to shoot like 35% on 3+attempts 15 years ago even to the percent now.

Edit: and it's hard to figt through screens consistently. teams had similar dilemma back then but you could pretty easily go to a 3v2 defense because there was one or two guys on the court who you're happy talking a 20 footer.

[Bronbron23]

pnr offense worked well at times in the 90's and early 00's if you had the personnel. On the flip side illegal screens werent called often. Most teams just preferred to play through the post however or using isolation. And yes it's obvious players are better from 3 now, a lot of contested ones are made. Compare wat percent of guards who had the ability to shoot like 35% on 3+attempts 15 years ago even to the percent now.

Edit: and it's hard to figt through screens consistently. teams had similar dilemma back then but you could pretty easily go to a 3v2 defense because there was one or two guys on the court who you're happy talking a 20 footer.

Yes the 3 ball is used more now so players aobviously work on it more and are better st it. Theyre also open more though because of the fact players cant fight through screens anymore. I cant believe some of the foul couls refs make now when players try to fight through screens. Its so bad the defenders dont even try anymore. Its ridiculous.

[Micku]

Been watching basketball since 1988 (and no that's not the year I was born). There goes your argument.


Go field a team with 0 3pt shooters. Put them against an NBA team and watch how all of a sudden that NBA's team defense starts looking suffocating. Today, iIt's easier to blow by someone 1 on 1 and a defensive breakdown is far more devastating than it used to be. But likewise, the defense has to be a lot smarter than what the bird brained 80's teams were running and it has to be able to stretch further out. No more 1-dimensional goofy big stiffs who do nothing but bang for boards.

Well, it's that and the 3 defensive sec. Sometimes the refs don't call it.

There are more info on players now, but they still do things back then that is more "complex" than what your analysis talk about on TV. They would notice players are good at going to their right, so they would force them to the left. Or if they are too good in the baseline, they would force them to the middle so they can trap them in the paint. They would know which player at which area would like to take the shot.

But the amount of 3pt shooting now really does improve on the spacing. So, it gives more breathing room for the perimeter player. The defense has to work a lot harder to guard now. Depending on which system you play, the offense could be complex or simple. Like with the Rockets, they just drive and kick. Sometimes they would do picks to get mismatch. That isn't as complex as the triangle or Kerr hybrid or Pop's motion offense.

It's a mixture of things thing. While the rules definitely help offense to flow better, increase the pace, and make offense easier as intended by the NBA; the coaching has something to do with it too with the emphasis on 3pt shooting.

[DMAVS41]

Well, it's that and the 3 defensive sec. Sometimes the refs don't call it.

There are more info on players now, but they still do things back then that is more "complex" than what your analysis talk about on TV. They would notice players are good at going to their right, so they would force them to the left. Or if they are too good in the baseline, they would force them to the middle so they can trap them in the paint. They would know which player at which area would like to take the shot.

But the amount of 3pt shooting now really does improve on the spacing. So, it gives more breathing room for the perimeter player. The defense has to work a lot harder to guard now. Depending on which system you play, the offense could be complex or simple. Like with the Rockets, they just drive and kick. Sometimes they would do picks to get mismatch. That isn't as complex as the triangle or Kerr hybrid or Pop's motion offense.

It's a mixture of things thing. While the rules definitely help offense to flow better, increase the pace, and make offense easier as intended by the NBA; the coaching has something to do with it too with the emphasis on 3pt shooting.

I think it really matters what the comparison actually is.

Is it easier now for teams on offense than it was in 03? Yes, I don't see how anyone could deny that.

However, what gives me pause would be a comparison of now to like 87.

Like, the average offensive rating and pace in 87 is very close to what it is now...and they weren't taking anywhere close to the optimal amount of 3's back then...teams were taking like 5 threes a game.

In no way is that even close to optimal and makes a team so much easier to defend.

So, if offense was clearly suboptimal back then...and the argument is that defense was better back then...it is hard to understand how that logically adds up when the amount of points produced per 100 possessions for the teams in the league is so similar to what is going now.

Again, I think the pace is virtually identical and the current ortg for the league is less than 1 point per 100 possessions different.

I don't know...just something to think about before we start saying none of this stuff counts vs all other eras.

[NBAGOAT]

Yes the 3 ball is used more now so players aobviously work on it more and are better st it. Theyre also open more though because of the fact players cant fight through screens anymore. I cant believe some of the foul couls refs make now when players try to fight through screens. Its so bad the defenders dont even try anymore. Its ridiculous.

i dont it's that bad on screens personally. Also on the flip side, few more illegal screens are getting called now. It's pretty undisputable that there are less fouls now however.

[72-10]

stop it. Of course a 90s player would glorify their own era by saying how tough it was back then. Stop exaggerating it, defense was not tough or physical back then like these old heads keep saying it was.

if that were the case why did players get laid on their ass half the time they drove the paint

[DMAVS41]

Your not allowed playing defence anymore so of course its harder. It has nothing to do with players being better from 3 or teams having better offence. The reason why players are getting so many open 3's and drives is because defenders arnt allowed fighting through screens anymore. So now instead of being able to fight through the screen and defend your man teams have to pick there poison. They can either switch and have a mismatch or they can double the the screener or the ball. Either way the defence is screwed because its either gonna create a mismatch or an open shot or drive. Thats pretty much every teams offence right now. Just pick any game and watch.

Here is my problem with this.

Current league ortg...109
1987 league ortg...108.3

Current league pace...101
1987 league pace...100.8

Current average 3's team attempts per game...34
1987 average 3's team attempts per game...5

So, if defense was so much better back then...why were they getting torched like they defenses are today? Even worse, back then, you didn't even have to worry about the 3...the offenses were very clearly playing a suboptimal strategy based on basic math.

We can argue rules and specifics...and I'll agree with a lot of what you'll likely say, but zooming out...it is kind of hard to argue that you can't play defense now, but back in 1987...they were playing real defense...while getting lit up by a laughable offensive strategy compared to now.

I guess you could argue that players were much better offensively back then, but ugh...that seems like a tough sell.

That is why I just think we have to just be specific about it being "easier now"...it is important to note that has to be relative to a specific era...because it sure as hell was a lot harder to score in 2003 than it was in 1987 and 2019.

[72-10]

look at this disillusioned loser who thinks these shots are easy

i.e. he gets his own rebound and then makes a fallaway from like 18 feet

[NBAGOAT]

I think it really matters what the comparison actually is.

Is it easier now for teams on offense than it was in 03? Yes, I don't see how anyone could deny that.

However, what gives me pause would be a comparison of now to like 87.

Like, the average offensive rating and pace in 87 is very close to what it is now...and they weren't taking anywhere close to the optimal amount of 3's back then...teams were taking like 5 threes a game.

In no way is that even close to optimal and makes a team so much easier to defend.

So, if offense was clearly suboptimal back then...and the argument is that defense was better back then...it is hard to understand how that logically adds up when the amount of points produced per 100 possessions for the teams in the league is so similar to what is going now.

Again, I think the pace is virtually identical and the current ortg for the league is less than 1 point per 100 possessions different.

I don't know...just something to think about before we start saying none of this stuff counts vs all other eras.

ortg was inflated in the 80's because of a strategic choice to focus hard on offensive rebounding. Compared to now where teams like running back on defense as soon as a shot goes up. The shooting percentages arent fantastic so an argument can made it's still a bit harder to score back then.

[NBAGOAT]

if that were the case why did players get laid on their ass half the time they drove the paint

it's the case because what your claim is bs. Guys were not getting laid out on half of their drives

[72-10]

it's the case because what your claim is bs. Guys were not getting laid out on half of their drives

please give me a quarter

[DMAVS41]

ortg was inflated in the 80's because of a strategic choice to focus hard on offensive rebounding. Compared to now where teams like running back on defense as soon as a shot goes up. The shooting percentages arent fantastic so an argument can made it's still a bit harder to score back then.

I guess, but defending against teams shooting only 5 threes a game is for sure easier to defend against.

I agree there is a lot to consider here, but one thing that I hope we can all agree on is that shooting only 5 threes on average per game as a team was clearly a suboptimal offensive strategy.

[NBAGOAT]

I guess, but defending against teams shooting only 5 threes a game is for sure easier to defend against.

I agree there is a lot to consider here, but one thing that I hope we can all agree on is that shooting only 5 threes on average per game as a team was clearly a suboptimal offensive strategy.

absolutely agree there. it's pretty remarkable that's not even widely accepted here however.

[Micku]

I think it really matters what the comparison actually is.

Is it easier now for teams on offense than it was in 03? Yes, I don't see how anyone could deny that.

However, what gives me pause would be a comparison of now to like 87.

Like, the average offensive rating and pace in 87 is very close to what it is now...and they weren't taking anywhere close to the optimal amount of 3's back then...teams were taking like 5 threes a game.

In no way is that even close to optimal and makes a team so much easier to defend.

So, if offense was clearly suboptimal back then...and the argument is that defense was better back then...it is hard to understand how that logically adds up when the amount of points produced per 100 possessions for the teams in the league is so similar to what is going now.

Again, I think the pace is virtually identical and the current ortg for the league is less than 1 point per 100 possessions different.

I don't know...just something to think about before we start saying none of this stuff counts vs all other eras.

Yeah.

The offense and general mindset was different back then. Compared to now, they weren't running the most efficient way, but it was harder to really penetrate then. They focused on the mid-range. 3pt shot was really a bad shot. Back then, it was more who could outrun their opponent and execute the offense in the half court by having good post play. The top teams were stacked, so they had options.

The pace started to slow down once the Pistons and the Bulls showed that they could do that. Teams started to copy them. Pistons revolutionized first.

[quote]

[DMAVS41]

Yeah.

The offense and general mindset was different back then. Compared to now, they weren't running the most efficient way, but it was harder to really penetrate then. They focused on the mid-range. 3pt shot was really a bad shot. Back then, it was more who could outrun their opponent and execute the offense in the half court by having good post play. The top teams were stacked, so they had options.

The pace started to slow down once the Pistons and the Bulls showed that they could do that. Teams started to copy them. Pistons revolutionized first.



https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-...723-story.html

The late 80s and 90s is when it started to change. As you can see by the ppg, the pacing, the fg% and everything. But the Pistons weren't the only team doing this. Jazz had it. Rockets did something similar. The Celts also had this too. One of the best front lines in NBA history. It just that the Pistons weren't as talented, but they still won the chip. When they won, they were either the last or lowest pace teams in the league. they slowed the game down and not allow the teams to outrun them. The Lakers would destroy you due to their talent. Not to say defense didn't exist, cuz obviously it did. But the pacing was different.

It's basically the same throughout across eras. Once Shaq/Kobe started to win, teams wanted to copy them. Slow down the pace and all. Once the Suns started winning, teams were like maybe we can do this too. Then once LBJ did the whole superteam thing, players started to team up with each other. The Spurs took what Mike D'Antoni and P.Jax, mixed it together and had their run. The GSW did something similar.

Right, but clearly part of why it was harder to penetrate in 1987 had to do with the 3 point shot not being used appropriately.

Put it this way...if you transported the current offenses to 1987...I'd expect them to do better than they currently are doing now. Conversely, if you transported the 1987 offenses to now...I'd expect them to do worse.

So, my point, is that we have to be specific about which eras are "harder" or "easier"...huge difference between early 00's and mid 80's...

Completely agree about the progression over time...and it reached a breaking point in the early 00's...where defense had clearly won based on the rules and the game had shifted too far in that direction...hence they made the decision to free up players and change the rules...