-
Local High School Star
Re: NBA might be less 'physical', but its certainly more physical
Originally Posted by BoutPractice
Damn, Karl Malone had a tiny head.
-
Future NBA G.O.A.T
Re: NBA might be less 'physical', but its certainly more physical
i swear i saw this same thread a year or so ago
-
Reign of Error
Re: NBA might be less 'physical', but its certainly more physical
Those photos remind me that Thurmond might be the most intimidating looking player ever.
-
There will be plaster
Re: NBA might be less 'physical', but its certainly more physical
NBA is less physical now because it is skill what sets best players apart from the rest. There's barely anybody who bullies his way to points.
Blame the rules.
-
Since 1974
Re: NBA might be less 'physical', but its certainly more physical
It's all about speed these days. That and a sweet jumpshot. I prefer the old days... less highlight reels, and more dominating in the paint.
-
3-time NBA All-Star
Re: NBA might be less 'physical', but its certainly more physical
Originally Posted by BoutPractice
Anthony Davis (will be) >>> Malone though
-
NBA Legend
Re: NBA might be less 'physical', but its certainly more physical
-
NBA Legend
Re: NBA might be less 'physical', but its certainly more physical
Originally Posted by LAZERUSS
I have said it before, but how many 7-3+ players have ever led the NBA in rebounding? ZERO. And yet a 6-5 Barkley did it once, a 6-7 Wallace did it twice, and a 6-8 Rodman accomplished it seven times.
And Rodman and Wallace were dominating players like Shaq, Robinson, and Ewing. Hell, an old Barkley was killing Hakeem when they were teammates.
And how come James White, Gerald Green, and Ryan Hollins haven't come close to being great players. Hell, in three years of college ball, Hollins averaged 6 ppg and 4 rpg for cryingoutloud.
And how come the 7-4 340 lb Priest Lauderdale couldn't make an NBA roster?
Rodman was about 6-6 without shoes, I say this because you refered to Barkley and Wallace by their without shoes heights, Rodman was shorter than Wallace, but taller than Barkley
-
NBA Legend
Re: NBA might be less 'physical', but its certainly more physical
Originally Posted by DonDadda59
Top 5 Scoring Leaders 1993-94
1. David Robinson
2. Shaquille O'Neal
3. Hakeem Olajuwon
4. Dominique Wilkins
5. Karl Malone
Top 5 Scoring Leaders 2013-14
1. Kevin Durant
2. Carmelo Anthony
3. Lebron James
4. Kevin Love
5. James Harden
Which group would you say overall is bigger, stronger, faster, etc?
Who would win in a weight lifting competition?
/thread
-
I brick nerf balls
Re: NBA might be less 'physical', but its certainly more physical
Last edited by La Frescobaldi; 03-01-2014 at 07:34 PM.
-
-
The Magic are a trash
Re: NBA might be less 'physical', but its certainly more physical
Originally Posted by DonDadda59
Top 5 Scoring Leaders 1993-94
1. David Robinson
2. Shaquille O'Neal
3. Hakeem Olajuwon
4. Dominique Wilkins
5. Karl Malone
Top 5 Scoring Leaders 2013-14
1. Kevin Durant
2. Carmelo Anthony
3. Lebron James
4. Kevin Love
5. James Harden
Which group would you say overall is bigger, stronger, faster, etc?
Who would win in a weight lifting competition?
-
NBA Legend
Re: NBA might be less 'physical', but its certainly more physical
Originally Posted by BoutPractice
Those photos remind me that Thurmond might be the most intimidating looking player ever.
And yet Chamberlain used to throw him around like a rag doll. As physically as imposing as Thurmond was, NO ONE at the time claimed he was even remotely as strong, nor as athletic, as Wilt. Even Nate, himself, was in awe of Chamberlain.
-
Decent college freshman
Re: NBA might be less 'physical', but its certainly more physical
maybe i should of used an earlier time frame, early nineties is a bit too close, but i find it funny people are posting pics of clearly roided up anomalies (for the time) as proof
Go watch a youtube video or two and the difference is night and day, dat denial
-
NBA Legend
Re: NBA might be less 'physical', but its certainly more physical
Originally Posted by theaussieguy
maybe i should of used an earlier time frame, early nineties is a bit too close, but i find it funny people are posting pics of clearly roided up anomalies (for the time) as proof
Go watch a youtube video or two and the difference is night and day, dat denial
A Thurmond or Lanier like center in the 60's and 70's was the norm there buddy... without a 3 point shot that was the absolute golden age of the center, and every team was desperate to put a highly skilled bruising big man in the middle to protect the basket, grab rebounds, score high percentage points, and enforce physical punishment when needed. The 90's produced great centers as well and was the 2nd golden age of centers, but even then the league had 'relatively' less of them than the 60's and 70's, as many teams didn't have any.
But no matter how you look at it, TODAY is much less physical, there are rules that deliberately were put in place to make it such. That's why idiots on here bitch about Roy Hibberts verticality defense, or Dwight Howard's goal tending, or Andrew Bynum's body block like they just committed murder. That shit was NORMAL at one point in time and fans wouldn't bat an eyelash at any of that crap. Younger fans today never experienced defense like that, and they act like perimeter players are entitled to not be breathed on when driving the lane because... well... that's what the NBA wants now a days. Uninhibited drives. I'm glad at least some big men get away with playing defense, particularly in the playoffs, like Hibbert. Honestly, I wish the NBA had more of that but it just isn't the product they want to sell anymore so rules and calls often go the other way (to the little guys driving, not the big guys enforcing).
Last edited by CavaliersFTW; 03-02-2014 at 03:27 AM.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|