Old School vs. today...you can't be serious

[The 24th Letter]

Re: Old School vs. today...you can't be serious

There's more of an emphasis on training/conditioning than ever before....

I have no doubt a lot of current players could adjust to a more physical game....

[st0rmb11]

Re: Old School vs. today...you can't be serious

If we're talking about just hopping in a time machine, going back to the 50s, 60s, & 70s, grabbing 20 players, and bringing them to today's league and telling them "play", I don't see it working so well.

If we're talking about Hal Greer, Billy Cunningham, John Havlicek, Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, etc. being born in 1985, growing up with the advances in conditioning and teaching that we have today, all of those guys had the physical make up to be able to learn how to play in today's league, no problems.

[ZB9]

Re: Old School vs. today...you can't be serious

shooters and ball handlers would translate well imo

the basket height is 10 feet now, same as it was then..the rim is the same size as it was then..if you can shoot, you can shoot, regardless of era

[ggsimmonds]

Re: Old School vs. today...you can't be serious

shooters and ball handlers would translate well imo

the basket height is 10 feet now, same as it was then..the rim is the same size as it was then..if you can shoot, you can shoot, regardless of era

Shooters, yes. Ball handlers not so much. Ball handling has improved drastically since the 70's. A pg from that period would not make it today.

[Dice]

Re: Old School vs. today...you can't be serious

This is my take on past players playing in today’s game. I’m an old timer and big fan of 80’s basketball BUT I agree that most of the guys you bring from that era into today would have some issues in today’s game. There are very few players that you could transfer just as they are into today’s game and they would be fine. Guys like Magic Johnson, Isaiah Thomas and Moses Malone would probably be a few. However, a guy like Larry Bird would have to adjust his game if he was to put up the some production as he did in the 80’s. Meaning, he probably couldn’t play small forward in today’s game due to the number of athletes at the wing. Bird would either have to be a full time power forward or we’d have to get him at 18 years old and put him in 2003 and let him do about 2 years in college and give him the advanced training and conditioning so he can at least be adequate athletically today. If he got today’s training and conditioning, Bird would have no problems being Bird.

James Worthy would have to go through an adjustment as well. Not because he wasn’t athletic enough. He was one of the very few players that could compete athletically in today’s game. His issue was more of long range shooting. Worthy during his prime was not a very good 3-point shooter. It wasn’t until the end of his career when he lost his explosiveness that he got a long range shot. In today’s game, most small forwards can knock down the 3-point shot. This would hurt his perimeter game because all defenses would have to do is not guard him at the 3 point line and just have the defense collapse on him when he drives to the hole. It would be too easy to game plan for him if he was playing at SF. Worthy would actually make a great power forward in today’s game. He had the size. He had an excellent post game and would be faster than most PF’s today. He wasn’t ‘cock-diesel’ strong but Worthy carried enough strength to hold his own even against guys today.

The comparing players of different eras is a real touchy and difficult subject. Old timers would tell you one thing. New schoolers would tell you another. I try to look at it from a neutral point of view, even though I’m an old schooler in heart. BUT I do try to rationalize the comparisons and compensate the era adjustments.

So yes, I do think that players even before 1980 could play in today’s game. However, if you bring them as is, they’re going to have issues. NOW compensate for era, like giving them the same advance training and scouting tools that today’s modern day players have now, and they become superstars just as they were in their era.

[AlexBrady]

Re: Old School vs. today...you can't be serious

This is my take on past players playing in today’s game. I’m an old timer and big fan of 80’s basketball BUT I agree that most of the guys you bring from that era into today would have some issues in today’s game. There are very few players that you could transfer just as they are into today’s game and they would be fine. Guys like Magic Johnson, Isaiah Thomas and Moses Malone would probably be a few. However, a guy like Larry Bird would have to adjust his game if he was to put up the some production as he did in the 80’s. Meaning, he probably couldn’t play small forward in today’s game due to the number of athletes at the wing. Bird would either have to be a full time power forward or we’d have to get him at 18 years old and put him in 2003 and let him do about 2 years in college and give him the advanced training and conditioning so he can at least be adequate athletically today. If he got today’s training and conditioning, Bird would have no problems being Bird.

James Worthy would have to go through an adjustment as well. Not because he wasn’t athletic enough. He was one of the very few players that could compete athletically in today’s game. His issue was more of long range shooting. Worthy during his prime was not a very good 3-point shooter. It wasn’t until the end of his career when he lost his explosiveness that he got a long range shot. In today’s game, most small forwards can knock down the 3-point shot. This would hurt his perimeter game because all defenses would have to do is not guard him at the 3 point line and just have the defense collapse on him when he drives to the hole. It would be too easy to game plan for him if he was playing at SF. Worthy would actually make a great power forward in today’s game. He had the size. He had an excellent post game and would be faster than most PF’s today. He wasn’t ‘cock-diesel’ strong but Worthy carried enough strength to hold his own even against guys today.

The comparing players of different eras is a real touchy and difficult subject. Old timers would tell you one thing. New schoolers would tell you another. I try to look at it from a neutral point of view, even though I’m an old schooler in heart. BUT I do try to rationalize the comparisons and compensate the era adjustments.

So yes, I do think that players even before 1980 could play in today’s game. However, if you bring them as is, they’re going to have issues. NOW compensate for era, like giving them the same advance training and scouting tools that today’s modern day players have now, and they become superstars just as they were in their era.

Bird liked to post, drive, and three ball. He was also adept at reversing the ball and feeding the post. Stronger than he looked, he was an effective rebounder and team defender.
In the modern game, the likes of Glen Rice and Wally Szczerbiak were All Stars and high scorers. Thats right, loose-handling statues that couldn't guard a fire hydrant were All Stars. Bird would fill his statline with admirable numbers if he played today, and he would do whatever it took to win a ballgame.

Worthy was much less effective in a slowed down game, so hooking up with a running team would be key. Worthy's weaknesses were always defense and rebounding and that would still be the case today. But hey, the likes of Stoudamire, Boozer, Love, and West play no 'D' either.

[Dice]

Re: Old School vs. today...you can't be serious

Bird liked to post, drive, and three ball. He was also adept at reversing the ball and feeding the post. Stronger than he looked, he was an effective rebounder and team defender.
In the modern game, the likes of Glen Rice and Wally Szczerbiak were All Stars and high scorers. Thats right, loose-handling statues that couldn't guard a fire hydrant were All Stars. Bird would fill his statline with admirable numbers if he played today, and he would do whatever it took to win a ballgame.

Worthy was much less effective in a slowed down game, so hooking up with a running team would be key. Worthy's weaknesses were always defense and rebounding and that would still be the case today. But hey, the likes of Stoudamire, Boozer, Love, and West play no 'D' either.

That's the problem. Bird won't be facing Glenn Rice and Szczerbiak because they're not playing right now. Bird in today's game would be facing guys like LeBron James, Gerald Wallace, Andrea Iguodala, Tony Allen and Thabo Sefolosha. All guys who are excellent perimeter defenders. I don't see him driving against any of those guys. Which takes something away from his perimeter game. He'll still knock down shots if he gets open on screens BUT the only option he has in creating his own shot would be in the post.

That's why his scoring numbers would take a hit if he didn't upgrade his physical athleticism to today's game. He was barely average athletically in his own era. He would be well below average in today's game. NOW, upgrade his athleticism and give Bird a good first step and you restore his drive game. He doesn't need to be super quick but with Bird just give him an average first step and he can work from there. You take his athletisicm from the 80's and try that first step and he's not going anywhere.

When the Lakers slowed their game down in 91, I thought Worthy had a solid season. I think Worthy can adjust to a slow down game because he always had an excellent post game throughout his career. His defense wasn't as good as I'd like it but he wasn't a liability. Rebounding is the same.

[Sam Marlowe]

Re: Old School vs. today...you can't be serious

Bird got off against the likes of Pippen and Wilkins even as he was aging. He'd would be fine today. Steph Curry is a good example of why.

[Dice]

Re: Old School vs. today...you can't be serious

Bird got off against the likes of Pippen and Wilkins even as he was aging. He'd would be fine today. Steph Curry is a good example of why.

When Bird started to decline in 1988, Pippen was not yet the great defensive player we know for him today. And even in 1991, when Bird was on his last legs and Pippen just started to become a solid defensive player, Bird put Pippen in the post. I remember their first matchup of the 1990-91 season. The Celtics had beat the Bulls at home and dropped the Bulls to 0-3 that year. The first year of the championship. Chris Ford, who was the Celtics coach at that time, started using Bird more in the post than on cuts and curls like he did before. Ford actually got away from a lot of the perimeter game that Boston used in the mid-80’s and started just posting Bird, McHale and Parish all day long. So Bird basically took Pippen in the post. At the time, even though he became a great defensive perimeter player, Pippen was still learning how to play defense overall. The thing about the early 90’s Pippen was if you got physical with him, he’d back down. Pippen didn’t sharpen his post defense until later in his career. Bird knew that and took advantage. He knew that he wasn’t going to drive by Pippen or beat him on the perimeter so he went to his strength. Matter of fact, Bird(nor the entire Celtics team) attempted a 3-point shot that game.

Loved watching Dominique Wilkins but he was a bad defensive player. Nique would rely too much on his athleticism to play defense. So yeah, Bird would kill him just on smarts alone. BUT the difference between Nique and say a guy like LeBron James is that James doesn’t go for as many head fakes as I seen Nique. James is actually a good defensive player BUT only when he wants to. Yes, James falls asleep on defense at times BUT if he tries he’s a beast to score on. Wilkins would try and he’d still be a bad defensive player.

Steph Curry is quick. When I talk about athleticism, I’m not just speaking about your vertical leap. Speed and quickness comes into the equation as well and Curry definitely has the quickness to compete athletically.

[Sam Marlowe]

Re: Old School vs. today...you can't be serious

The majority of teams dont have the kind of athletic defenders you mentioned before so its not like Bird would be facing that kind player every night. Secondly the only player in that group who has the size to bother him in the post is LBJ and his post D isnt what I would call elite. None of those other players has anything offer defensively or otherwise to deal with Bird in the post. He would be fine.

[Sam Marlowe]

Re: Old School vs. today...you can't be serious

On the Curry front, most every good guard in the League is quick. When he was being evaluated pre draft the fear was that he didnt have the explosiveness to go along with that quickness (ie Westbrook, Rose, Harden, Jennings ect). He's been effective in spite of that fact because of perfect fundamentals (excellent shooter, ballhandler and knowledge of how to use his body) and an excellent iq for the game.

[Sam Marlowe]

Re: Old School vs. today...you can't be serious

Now that I watch him again, Bird in his prime wouldn't have problems getting himself a good shot even off the dribble today. At 6'9 with good size combined with today's hands off rules I dont see how he would. He had the kinds of shots he would need to be perfectly effective.

[Dice]

Re: Old School vs. today...you can't be serious

The majority of teams dont have the kind of athletic defenders you mentioned before so its not like Bird would be facing that kind player every night. Secondly the only player in that group who has the size to bother him in the post is LBJ and his post D isnt what I would call elite. None of those other players has anything offer defensively or otherwise to deal with Bird in the post. He would be fine.

I never said Bird would be bad, I just say he'd have to adjust his game if he was to have the same production.. Bird would not be able to play SF if he came into the league today as is. That's all I'm saying. If he wanted to play SF, he'd have to train himself to modern day standards. I didn't even mention him trying to guard LeBron or even Iggy. Those guys would make Bird into a defensive liability where as in his era, although Bird was never a great defender, he was able to keep in front of his man long enough before the help got there. 'As Is' Bird trying to guard SF in today's game would be a statue. That's why if you brought him in 'As Is', he be more suited for PF.

[Sam Marlowe]

Re: Old School vs. today...you can't be serious

I also think this debate should be narrowed to guys from the 80s and 90s. Some of them see their production soar higher just because of the rules changes and differences in todays roster. Guards lik KJ, Tim Haradway ect would find it even easier to get to the basket and 90s bigs would the time of their lives dominating todays smaller fronlines.

[Sam Marlowe]

Re: Old School vs. today...you can't be serious

Aside from LBJ (arguably the best player in the game) I dont see anyone abusing Bird to point of having to sit him because of it. Iguodala is not in that class.