Proof: Basketball today>>>>> Old era ball

[SpanishACB]

i got a proof! *continues OP with a bunch of quotes of opinions and personal appreciations*

How can you not feel retarded, OP?

[LAZERUSS]

It's less about the increase in population and more about the access, viewership and global reach of the game. How many people would you say considered basketball their favorite sport in the 1950s compared to today? Players today (especially the elite) are known across the world.

Also.. how old are you? I highly doubt you're over 40.. f outta here.

I am so sick-and-tired of this same RIDICULOUS nonsense. If this population explosion were really valid, wouldn't we see Shaq's and Magic's all over the place? The rest of the world has contributed a HANDFUL of truly GREAT players. Dirk being the most notable. But where are the THOUSANDS, or even MILLIONS of them?

Even two of the "what-could-have-been's", Sabonis and Yao, became broken down almost immediately in their careers. And the REALITY was, a PRIME Sabonis was not even as good as a YOUNG David Robinson. That MYTH was blown apart years ago.

And how is it a playr who shoots .368 is even in TODAY's NBA? Yet, we have the great Euro, Ricky Rubio doing just that.

And how about US College basketball? The best players play for one year, and even if they put up Zach Lavine's paltry numbers, they get drafted. The rest of college is comprised of players with very little talent. How do I KNOW that? A couple of years ago Tyler Hansborough was the CPOY. I believe he even holds some records at North Carolina, which is amazing considering the players who have gone there. Now, the REALITY is,... the man cannot shoot, pass, dribble, rebound, or play defense. The only quality he brought to the Pacers was his ability to draw offensive fouls.

With this "population explosion"...wouldn't the colleges be overflowing with talented kids waiting for an opportunity to play in the NBA? Nope...instead a player who averaged 9 ppg on a .441 FG% is the 13th player taken in an NBA draft. He may be a super star down the road, but the odds are overwhelmingly against that.

But with this "population explosion", and modern technology, and genetics, etc...how come the league is not filled with 7-5 players with Magic Johnson's skills? The fact is, there has only been ONE Magic, and he played 25 years ago. How come?

[Psileas]

It's less about the increase in population and more about the access, viewership and global reach of the game. How many people would you say considered basketball their favorite sport in the 1950s compared to today? Players today (especially the elite) are known across the world.

Also.. how old are you? I highly doubt you're over 40.. f outta here.

It is absolutely about the increase of population. You are talking about talent, do you know what talent is? Do you really think there's such a thing as a "basketball gene", that humans have actually and naturally become more talented in basketball, just because basketball is only a bit more than a century old? Where the F is your evidence?
The 60's (not 50's, as you mentioned) was an era when someone like Nate Thurmond or Willis Reed (listed as a C) might not even make an All-league 3rd team, yet, you really think there are hundreds of leagues today whose players would be going to keep someone like Reed out of their all-league 3rd team? Lol, you stick Willis Reed in any modern league except the NBA and he's winning MVP in every single one, unless he plays for some scrub team - and even in the NBA, he's easily an All-Star.

The vast majority of people today still don't call basketball their favorite sport. And it doesn't matter, basketball isn't a game that every kind of athlete can play and dominate. Most people who had basketball talent in the 60's, at least in the US, were not ignorant about the sport.
Also, I've come across articles from the 60's that have called Wilt Chamberlain arguably the best athlete in the world, I've seen comparisons to Pele and I remind you that Wilt himself visited and played basketball in more countries than most basketball players ever have or will, as a member of the Globetrotters. Hundreds of thousands of people have watched him play worldwide, in the late 50's.

[LAZERUSS]

That's why there are no kids playing chess, right? By your logic, heavyweight boxing is a more advanced sport than American Football, since kids can't do it.

You're such a fool, unbelievable. Until now I just thought you're some delusional, maybe semi-autistic/OCD impaired Wilt d*cksucker. But with that comment, it looks like you're just another brainless troll. You've jumped the shark, old man

Ok clown, give us YOUR take on the OP. I want solid "proof" as to why the current NBA is better than previous decades.

Are players taller today? NO. Absolutely NOT.

Do players shoot better today? Take a look at FT%'s. They were the SAME in 1959 as they were just LAST YEAR. BTW, had the 3pt line existed back in the 60's and 70's, and coaches used it as regular ly as they do today, and I can guarantee you that the best shooters of that period would be every bit as good as they are today. I still recall watching Jerry Lucas make some 20 straight shots between the circles during a pre-game warmup. Someone else here commented that Chris Mullin made something like 49 out of 50. Bird probably could still win a three-point contest.

And at the opposite end of the spectrum...DeAndre Jordan and Andrew Drummond, who can't shoot from five feet. Or Rubio shooting .368 from the floor.

Are today's players better athletes? You are kidding, right? How do explain a 6-8 Kevin Love leading the league in rebounding (running away with it actually, and in only 35 mpg)? Or a 6-11 stumblebum like Andrew Bogut leading the league in blocks per game? Or a 37 year old Steve Nash, playing 33 mpg, and leading the league in apg?

And even if athleticism is a must, how come Jame White was a complete bust? Or a 7-0 Ryan Hollins, who couldn't even start in his four year career at UCLA, and has been a washout in the pros?

Same with height. How come a 7-4, 350 lb. Priest Lauderdale, who would have dwarfed Shaq, couldn't make it in the NBA? And look at the laughingstock that Roy Hibbert has become.

And do you think that tall players in the 60's and 70's were automatic stars? Look up the 7-3 Swede Halbrook's NBA "career." Or how about the 7-4 Steve Turner, who played for Vanderbilt in the early 70's? The reality was, there were a TON of legitimate seven-footers in the 60's and 70's, who either were flops in the NBA, or didn't even make a roster.

Now, give me YOUR take...

[dr.hee]

Ok clown, give us YOUR take on the OP. I want solid "proof" as to why the current NBA is better than previous decades.

Are players taller today? NO. Absolutely NOT.

Do players shoot better today? Take a look at FT%'s. They were the SAME in 1959 as they were just LAST YEAR. BTW, had the 3pt line existed back in the 60's and 70's, and coaches used it as regular ly as they do today, and I can guarantee you that the best shooters of that period would be every bit as good as they are today. I still recall watching Jerry Lucas make some 20 straight shots between the circles during a pre-game warmup. Someone else here commented that Chris Mullin made something like 49 out of 50. Bird probably could still win a three-point contest.

And at the opposite end of the spectrum...DeAndre Jordan and Andrew Drummond, who can't shoot from five feet. Or Rubio shooting .368 from the floor.

Are today's players better athletes? You are kidding, right? How do explain a 6-8 Kevin Love leading the league in rebounding (running away with it actually, and in only 35 mpg)? Or a 6-11 stumblebum like Andrew Bogut leading the league in blocks per game? Or a 37 year old Steve Nash, playing 33 mpg, and leading the league in apg?

And even if athleticism is a must, how come Jame White was a complete bust? Or a 7-0 Ryan Hollins, who couldn't even start in his four year career at UCLA, and has been a washout in the pros?

Same with height. How come a 7-4, 350 lb. Priest Lauderdale, who would have dwarfed Shaq, couldn't make it in the NBA? And look at the laughingstock that Roy Hibbert has become.

And do you think that tall players in the 60's and 70's were automatic stars? Look up the 7-3 Swede Halbrook's NBA "career." Or how about the 7-4 Steve Turner, who played for Vanderbilt in the early 70's? The reality was, there were a TON of legitimate seven-footers in the 60's and 70's, who either were flops in the NBA, or didn't even make a roster.

Now, give me YOUR take...

Are you brain damaged? Where exactly did I say that the current era is better than past ones? Maybe I don't even believe that? I only quoted one ridiculous sentence by a ridiculous poster. You. And laughed at your stupidity. Some old bum thinking basketball is simple. Which means that in all the years you're already vegetating on this planet, rambling about a dead basketball player for a daily job, you've never played a second of competitive basketball. You're a joke, that's all I wanted to say. Basketball is simple? F*ck off

And not a single f*cking sentence in your essay is related to me. Is your short term memory that messed up already? I'm neither OP nor any other poster trolling fans of old players. I like old school ball myself. I only pointed out that some idiot acted like bball is simple. And laughed at him.

Let me laugh again.

[MiseryCityTexas]

Not one single player in the 70s/60s would start on any team in today's league. Not one.

Meanwhile you take our top 40-50 current players and they will be top 10 in the old era.

Wilt would easily dominate in today's era of weak centers. Who's Wilt's competition at center in today's league? Dwight? Cousins? Noah? Pekovic? Prime Wilt's better than all these players.