LeBron James Rattles the Rim with the One-Handed Jam

[BuffaloBill]

He barely got off the ground on that one


old man bran

[CavaliersFTW]

It is as if you take logic, and completely disregarded it with this post.

Teams are taking longer because it is easier to score?
If it is easier to score, and easier to find better shots, you would do it at a quicker pace.

The handchecking rule was put in because it was already getting easier to score? That isn't how it works.
When something in a system or product becomes bolstered down or is struggling, you alleviate elsewhere to return it as a whole to the original state. Hence defenses were becoming too advanced, had too many advantages, hence it was time to take away some of them due to the progress they had made on a tactical level.

Even now, with rule changes, it is harder to score, and offenses are having to slow down, take their time, and find the right shot just to put up a comparable FG%.

I think you need to read up on all the rule changes that happened say, from the 1990's to the present game that is played now, and why some of them were thought of and what the NBA's objectives were in creating these rule modifications.

The NBA eliminated physicality of perimeter players so that ball handlers had more freedom with the ball. They predicted before the rule had even been in effect, that this would decrease turnovers, increase shot accuracy, and decrease the number of shots taken because the players were more "free" to move about, draining clocks and playing half court sets or whatever. In tandem with the slew of other defensive rules such as 3 seconds, more value was additionally placed on perimeter shooters on the offside. A ball handler today has more freedom to handle the ball, take his time free of physical defense, and choose to either drive, or set a man up on the perimeter. Today's shooters are more accurate, and today's offenses take longer on their offensive sets, and take more careful shots, because it is exactly what modern defense has been designed to give them. The way the modern game is played, you get open looks from the 3 point line and open layups. That's what the modern game's rules were tweaked to showcase, by comparison to say the 1990's game which was thought to be getting too difficult to score (averages in ppg were down to 95, but with lousy team field goal %'s around 45).

Go back to the 1960's, players weren't forced to take quicker shots playing at a high pace, with less chances of the ball going in the basket each given shot because it was "easier". The defensive pressure was more physical. The lanes were not as open. The ball handlers were not free to roam the court without being touched, and shooters and offensive players were never widely spaced. This on top of other gradual rule changes that gave more modern ball handlers more freedom in the modern game (carry/palming violations going to the wayside to allow a wider array of players to dribble securely). You're fooling yourself if you think shooting lower percentages reflects easier offense. You don't chuck up a low percentage shot unless there is pressure forcing you to do so.

[plowking]

I think you need to read up on all the rule changes that happened say, from the 1990's to the present game that is played now, and why some of them were thought of and what the NBA's objectives were in creating these rule modifications.

The NBA eliminated physicality of perimeter players so that ball handlers had more freedom with the ball. They predicted before the rule had even been in effect, that this would decrease turnovers, increase shot accuracy, and decrease the number of shots taken because the players were more "free" to move about, draining clocks and playing half court sets or whatever. In tandem with the slew of other defensive rules such as 3 seconds, more value was additionally placed on perimeter shooters on the offside. A ball handler today has more freedom to handle the ball, take his time free of physical defense, and choose to either drive, or set a man up on the perimeter. Today's shooters are more accurate, and today's offenses take longer on their offensive sets, and take more careful shots, because it is exactly what modern defense has been designed to give them. The way the modern game is played, you get open looks from the 3 point line and open layups. That's what the modern game's rules were tweaked to showcase, by comparison to say the 1990's game which was thought to be getting too difficult to score (averages in ppg were down to 95, but with lousy team field goal %'s around 45).

Go back to the 1960's, players weren't forced to take quicker shots playing at a high pace, with less chances of the ball going in the basket each given shot because it was "easier". The defensive pressure was more physical. The lanes wer e not as open. The ball handlers were not free to roam the court without being touched, and shooters and offensive players were never widely spaced. This on top of other gradual rule changes that gave more modern ball handlers more freedom in the modern game (carry/palming violations going to the wayside to allow a wider array of players to dribble securely). You're fooling yourself if you think shooting lower percentages reflects easier offense. You don't chuck up a low percentage shot unless there is pressure forcing you to do so.

Again, logic out the window.

Sure, if something is easier, I will take longer to do it, and generally do it worse.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/...NBA_stats.html

Look at when Jordan was playing, and prior. From 75-95, the lowest it got was 45.8% from the field. That is the lowest. from 95-current, the highest it got was 46.1%. The absolute highest. So the worst from before is as good as the best today, all while a significantly larger amount of points were being scored back in the day too.

And as we can see, from about 96-05 where the league was saying defenses were getting the upper hand, and players were struggling to score due to tactics being more advanced and physical play being at an all time high, something had to change. Hence they took away some of the physicality. Even now, offenses still don't get the looks and easy shots they did prior to the period of 98-04 (probably the best defensive era ever).

Tactics and defenses are just better today. How is that hard to believe or understand?

[inclinerator]

lol that lane can't get any emptier. I could have finished that play. B..b..but defenses are more advanced today!

na brah u probably would have bricked the layup cuz of gasol's presence

[CavaliersFTW]

Again, logic out the window.

Sure, if something is easier, I will take longer to do it, and generally do it worse.

..No, more freedom results in players taking longer (because they can dribble more easily and have the time necessary to correctly set up their plays or get to their spots), to generally score better (more efficiently).

Do you still not get it? Do you play basketball? What happens when an offensive ball handler and and his teammates gets put under pressure in the game of basketball... A shot tends to get rushed, as a result the likelyhood of the shot going in goes down. Do this over the course of 48 minutes and "pace" increases, and "efficiency" decreases. What happens when there is much less pressure applied to an offensive ball handler and his teammates? More time is taken to set up for a more accurate shot.

This is very simple. Less pressure, few but more careful shots are taken. More pressure, more shots, but less accurate ones are taken.

[sportjames23]

lol that lane can't get any emptier. I could have finished that play. B..b..but defenses are more advanced today!

LOL, beat me to it.

I would love to see Bran play in the 80s/90s when shot-blocking centers could park in the lane and power forward tanks would knock guys on their asses.

[plowking]

..No, more freedom results in players taking longer (because they can dribble more easily and have the time necessary to correctly set up their plays or get to their spots), to generally score better (more efficiently).

Do you still not get it? Do you play basketball? What happens when an offensive ball handler and and his teammates gets put under pressure in the game of basketball... A shot tends to get rushed, as a result the likelyhood of the shot going in goes down. Do this over the course of 48 minutes and "pace" increases, and "efficiency" decreases. What happens when there is much less pressure applied to an offensive ball handler and his teammates? More time is taken to set up for a more accurate shot.

This is very simple. Less pressure, few but more careful shots are taken. More pressure, more shots, but less accurate ones are taken.

So more defensive pressure will result in a higher FG%?

You keep regurgitating the same argument and adding nothing new to it. I literally proved what you are saying is wrong with stats, yet you continue on the same path.

No, I've clearly never played basketball, hence I'm basing my argument out of thin air and no visible proof, unlike you, right?

[oarabbus]

Looks like Bran may have copped an extra step in there... but hard to tell since he's flurrying his feet like the Road Runner.

[3ball]

It is as if you take logic, and completely disregarded it with this post.

Teams are taking longer because it is easier to score?
If it is easier to score, and easier to find better shots, you would do it at a quicker pace.

The handchecking rule was put in because it was already getting easier to score? That isn't how it works.
When something in a system or product becomes bolstered down or is struggling, you alleviate elsewhere to return it as a whole to the original state. Hence defenses were becoming too advanced, had too many advantages, hence it was time to take away some of them due to the progress they had made on a tactical level.

Even now, with rule changes, it is harder to score, and offenses are having to slow down, take their time, and find the right shot just to put up a comparable FG%.

ball movement is more effective WITH spacing than without...

since today's game has spacing, ball movement generates better looks than it did in previous eras when there was no spacing... consequently, teams spend more time moving the ball to get these better looks, which results in slower pace and less scoring today than in previous eras.

in previous eras when there was no spacing, teams wouldn't waste time moving the ball to get a better look, because that better look wasn't coming.

ultimately, spacing enhances the effectiveness of ball movement, which incentivizes teams to spend more time moving the ball for higher quality shots... but the thing that creates the spacing to begin with - the 3-point shooting - is equally responsible for slowing the game down: 3-pointers need to be open shots, so you have to run more offense to get them.

a higher level of contest is acceptable on paint and mid-range shots, since they maintain their efficiency better in the face of a contest than 3-pointers do.

without the need for as much daylight, paint and mid-range shots (the only shots taken in previous eras) were obtained without running as much offense... teams didn't need to get bogged down setting up spacing and running offense for 22 three-point looks per game (27% of all shots today), so the pace was much faster and teams scored more.

without having to abide by rigid floor-spacing requirements (including keeping the 3 seconds lane clear) or a stricter level of pre-planned cuts and actions, players in previous eras could pass, cut and make plays more naturally and instinctively.

[CavaliersFTW]

ball movement is more effective WITH spacing than without...

since today's game has spacing, ball movement generates better looks than it did in previous eras when there was no spacing... consequently, teams spend more time moving the ball to get these better looks, which results in slower pace and less scoring than previous eras.

in previous eras when there was no spacing, teams wouldn't waste time moving the ball to get a better look, because that better look wasn't coming.

ultimately, spacing enhances the effectiveness of ball movement, which incentivizes teams to spend more time moving the ball for higher quality shots... but the thing that creates the spacing to begin with - the 3-point shooting - is equally responsible for slowing the game down: 3-pointers need to be open shots, so you have to run more offense to get them.

a higher level of contest is acceptable on paint and mid-range shots, since they maintain their efficiency better in the face of a contest than 3-pointers do.

without the need for as much daylight, paint and mid-range shots (the only shots taken in previous eras) were obtained without running as much offense... teams didn't need to get bogged down setting up spacing and running offense for 22 three-point looks per game (27% of all shots), so the pace was much faster and teams scored more.

without having to abide by rigid floor-spacing requirements and a higher level of pre-planned cuts and actions, players could pass, cut and make plays more naturally and instinctively in previous eras.

You said it better than I could explain, thanks. And if you read some of the press reports and league statements at the time of some of these rule changes they specifically state their goals were to free up ball handlers to give them more time to take careful higher percentage shots

[jstern]

Didn't the NBA publicly stated that they were changing the rules to make it easier for perimeter players, and then the following year a bunch of guards, including Kobe, 30+ year old Iverson all had career seasons. With Nash winning two MVPs?

[plowking]

You said it better than I could explain, thanks. And if you read some of the press reports and league statements at the time of some of these rule changes they specifically state their goals were to free up ball handlers to give them more time to take careful higher percentage shots

You agreed with 3ball, so you automatically lose.

Somehow you are also trying to push the notion that less points on a lower FG% indicates the defenses were somehow better. Keep fighting that fight. I'm done here.

[AirFederer]

A pedestrian dunk for a nba superstar...

[bdreason]

I agree that defenders were allowed to be more physical in the 90's, but I don't think using the physicality of 90's NBA basketball is a good argument against LeBron James.


LeBron would have no problem playing in the 90's. In fact, his strength and ball-handling skills would only be highlighted in the 90's. It's all these 6' 180lb PG's, who seem to get wherever they want on the court, whenever they want, that would really be effected by the physicality on the perimeter and around the paint.

[bdreason]

Looks like Bran may have copped an extra step in there... but hard to tell since he's flurrying his feet like the Road Runner.

Seems like they all take 3 steps these days, doesn't it? I swear to god every time Harden goes to the hoop it looks like a travel. He really pushes the limit with that Eurostep move.