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

[ZB9]

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

Lebron James is a freak, but there were plenty of freaks in Bird's day as well. Watch some old game tape of 'Nique.

[ZB9]

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

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.

1. ball handling was emphasized even more before the three point line and especially before the shot clock

2. the conditions have improved for ball handlers. The ball, court, shoes...all of those things are all better now. If a player was a great ball handler back in the day, they would probably be a great ball handler now.

[Dice]

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

Bird would be fine. His competitive drive is the reason he was as successful even in the 80's. He would find a way.

I disagree about Worthy too. Grant Hill still can't shoot 3's but that hasn't stopped him from being a key player, even late in his career.

BTW, I think Pierce is a good comparison to Larry Legend.

No question about Bird competitive fire. BUT that wasn't my argument. My point was Bird would have to be a full time PF if he was playing in today's game without the advanced training. The SF of today are too athletic for him to keep up with. Especially on the defensive end.

Grant Hill is a little different from James Worthy. Hill in his prime was more of a point forward where Worthy was more of scoring forward. Hill compensated his lack of shooting because he'd draw defenses to him and pass it to the open guy when the defense collapses on him. Worthy on the other hand looked to score when he had the ball. One of the rules that gave Worthy an advantage back in the day is the 'illegal defense' rule. In guarding Worthy, you'd have to be a certain distance from him. Whereas now, you can sag all the way to the tip of the painted area and let Worthy shoot. It's the same way PG's guard Rondo except the danger with Rondo is he can create offense off his drive because he can find the open man if the defenses collapse. Worthy on the other hand will be looking to score and that's it. That's why I say that if you just put Worthy in the post, he can do damage.

Another thing that makes Grant Hill valuable now at his advanced age is his improved defense. Worthy at best was average defensively.

[Dice]

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

^^^
Thats one of the most hyperbole ridden, BS posts I've ever seen. I'll be home from work in a few hours, I'll adress it fully then. Wow...

You seem to be either a Celtics fan or a huge Bird fan. I gonna assume that you have seen Bird play live and not just on You Tube and ESPN Classic. Am I correct?

And this is not a bash on Bird or anybody else from the 80's. Your making it too personal. OK, I get that you don't agree. That's fine. BUT I'm old enough to see players of that era and players of today and I can make a distinguishable difference on what worked back then and what works today. The styles are totally different. More emphasis is on athleticism at the wing. And whether you want to believe it or not, that's up to you. As I stated, Bird would survive, it's just he's have to play the PF to have the same production.

[wwharton]

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

No question about Bird competitive fire. BUT that wasn't my argument. My point was Bird would have to be a full time PF if he was playing in today's game without the advanced training. The SF of today are too athletic for him to keep up with. Especially on the defensive end.

Grant Hill is a little different from James Worthy. Hill in his prime was more of a point forward where Worthy was more of scoring forward. Hill compensated his lack of shooting because he'd draw defenses to him and pass it to the open guy when the defense collapses on him. Worthy on the other hand looked to score when he had the ball. One of the rules that gave Worthy an advantage back in the day is the 'illegal defense' rule. In guarding Worthy, you'd have to be a certain distance from him. Whereas now, you can sag all the way to the tip of the painted area and let Worthy shoot. It's the same way PG's guard Rondo except the danger with Rondo is he can create offense off his drive because he can find the open man if the defenses collapse. Worthy on the other hand will be looking to score and that's it. That's why I say that if you just put Worthy in the post, he can do damage.

Another thing that makes Grant Hill valuable now at his advanced age is his improved defense. Worthy at best was average defensively.

Still disagree on Bird, though I think he'd be a fine PF. I really don't see why he couldn't play SF. You can name a few really good SFs that are athletic, and then there are a ton that aren't (either good or athletic or both). Like I said, I think Pierce is a good comparison. And the focus I'm assuming is on D, and team D makes up for that like it has for many other poor defensive players (even though it's not as prominent today is it has been or as it should be). Offensively, Bird could play the 1, 2, 3, or 4 and be fine.

Good points on Worthy.

[Sam Marlowe]

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

And this goes back to my original argument of Bird adjusting his game to being a full time PF. Yes, I've seen Bird play and I knew how he got his points. It wasn't the typically, give Bird the ball on the perimeter and get out of the way. Even though he could score on isolation's back then. BUT now he'd either score off of screens, like majority of his points back then OR he's back someone in the post. Bird was a very smart basketball player and he knows when he needs to adjust his game. That's why I gave you the example of the match-up Bird had with Pippen in 1990. I've seen Bird take guys off the dribble in his prime. BUT when he faced athletic wings who could play good perimeter defense, he takes them to the post. That was how he played it. In today's game, he'd be doing it on a regular basis.

The vast majority of games he would play today at SF would not involve players with that kind of capability. That can't be said enough. So he wouldn't have to completely scrap his other scoring options in favor of the post in most of the games he played. The top 3 SF's right now also happen to be arguably in the top 5 all positions included (LBJ, Durant, Melo). LBJ is the only one in that group who has the athleticism and defensive capability to reduce Bird's scoring options. On D he would be in the same boat as most any player in the League right now. At their mercy in one on one isolation situations. But this is the exception, not the rule. Andre Iguodala, Gerald Wallace ect would all have a difficult time keeping Bird from getting the kinds of shots he wanted to take.

And I see you danced around the statement of Bird being a good help defender. The simple fact of the matter is that Bird does nothing for your team defensively. Even in his prime, if the Celtics missed Larry Bird, they would not suffer defensively. Offensively, yes. McHale, Parish and DJ made Bird look great on 'help defense'.

There's a reason I didn't bother. Its the definition of bogus. Guys who "do nothing for your team defensively " don't sniff all-defensive teams or lead the League in defensive win shares. I'm leaving this here.

And as for those five guys I mentioned, your missing the point on that. Depending on what team and division you put Bird on, your going to see those five guys on a regular basis. Yes, go ahead and put Bird on the Bobcats where he has to face LeBron multiple times and watch him get ripped to shreds defensively. Or throw him with the T-Wolves where he's going to have to check Durrant multiple times and watch Durrant bust 50 on Bird every night. Bird's best bet to play close to adequate defense at the SF spot is probably in the Central Division. They don't have as many threats at the SF as other divisions. BUT then again, if your talking about advancing through the playoffs, Bird is going to have to face LeBron or Durrant in a 7-game series. And if you got Bird 'As Is' checking those guys then your in serious trouble.

In a seven game series I'm taking Bird all day over the likes of LBJ or Durant. The former has proved he doesn't have the mental acumen to get it done. And the later would get his point but he'd have a hell of a time stopping Bird from getting his as well. Bird is better in the clutch than both of them as well.

[Sam Marlowe]

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

Hey, I like this. Great breakdown.

BUT I was referring to more of this game: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y19q9478NUo

I couldn't find the whole game but just watching the highlights, you saw that when Grant was guarding Bird, who is a PF, he was able to get that first step on him and drive it to the lane. Check the 2:57 mark. Most of his point off of Pippen where screens. BUT there was an instance at the 5:27 mark when Bird scored on Pippen off a quick release jumper. And at the 1:03 mark when he jab stepped and threw that shot up there. OK, I'll give you a cookie. BUT look how comfortable Bird was in the post at the 1:13 mark. Nice and easy back down and right hand hook.

What worries me about Bird playing the SF is what I saw at the 1:36 mark. And I know it's Scottie Pippen BUT still.

This is not a knock on Bird. One of the greatest players in NBA history and loved watching him play BUT I'm sorry, he'd have to be a full time PF if he's to have the same success as he had when he played.

I love how you completely disregard what happened in that vid he broke down. What Bird did to Pippen there in a greatly diminished state he would be able to do to most any player matched up against him today. There is no Scottie Pippen today defensively at SF and there only three guys who are better than him offensively. They all happen to be superstars with a good look at the HOF.

[Chairman7w]

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

BUT I'm old enough to see players of that era and players of today and I can make a distinguishable difference on what worked back then and what works today. The styles are totally different. More emphasis is on athleticism at the wing. And whether you want to believe it or not, that's up to you. As I stated, Bird would survive, it's just he's have to play the PF to have the same production.

Quoted for truth.

[roadman]

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

To me, it's just too difficult to compare different era's to the present. Just like it was difficult to compare the Cousy era to the Kareem era, the Magic era to today's era.

To many changes in athleticism , rule changes, and the different ways of playing the game.

Same reason it's difficult to compare a Johnny Unitas to a Joe Montana to a Tom Brady/Manning.

[AlexBrady]

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

Hey, I like this. Great breakdown.

BUT I was referring to more of this game: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y19q9478NUo

I couldn't find the whole game but just watching the highlights, you saw that when Grant was guarding Bird, who is a PF, he was able to get that first step on him and drive it to the lane. Check the 2:57 mark. Most of his point off of Pippen where screens. BUT there was an instance at the 5:27 mark when Bird scored on Pippen off a quick release jumper. And at the 1:03 mark when he jab stepped and threw that shot up there. OK, I'll give you a cookie. BUT look how comfortable Bird was in the post at the 1:13 mark. Nice and easy back down and right hand hook.

What worries me about Bird playing the SF is what I saw at the 1:36 mark. And I know it's Scottie Pippen BUT still.

This is not a knock on Bird. One of the greatest players in NBA history and loved watching him play BUT I'm sorry, he'd have to be a full time PF if he's to have the same success as he had when he played.

That matchup you're referring to was interesting, but wasn't unexpected.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEYGfCNrhHo&feature=related

Bird's individual defense was below average. He was aware of his man and where the ball was on the weak side. He did look to box out as well.

Breakdown:
9:18- Bird harasses Cartwright into a missed layup.
11:00- Bird makes no attempt to contest Pippen shot.
12:33- Bird rotates and bothers Paxson into a missed layup.
12:55- Pippen uses Cartwright brush to lose Bird.
16:28- Pippen drives baseline past Bird and converts layup.
16:57- Bird cuts off Pippen baseline drive, Pip curls off down screen and converts open jumper.
17:48- Pippen uses screen to lose Bird and get into lane.
21:09- Pippen uses ball-fake to get Bird in air, pops short jumper.
21:30- Pippen in open court, Bird totally at his mercy, converts layup.
26:28- Bird defending basket, doesn't harass Jordan's drive at all.
41:10- Bird harasses Jordan drive, can't get crowd rebound.
57:40- Grant tries to post Bird, but misses jump hook under some pressure.
1:00:18-Grant tries to post Bird, converts turnaround jumper under zero pressure.
1:07:50- Jordan drives on Bird, spins right and the end play results in a layup for Grant.
1:11:00- Pippen isos Bird, uses reverse dribble and easily gets in lane, end play results in points.
1:13:35- Pippen face to face with Bird, jabs and makes pull-up under zero pressure.
1:36:10-Jordan face to face with Bird, stops on a dime and makes pull-up under zero pressure.

Overall, on plays where Bird was the most important defender, Bulls went 9-13 for 22 points. Bird himself, scored 24 points. Add four more points for an assist pass, and a ball reversal that led to points. Dock Bird two points for a turnover that directly led to a Bulls score. His total production was plus four, below his standards.

Basically, Pippen out-quicked the older Bird but it wasn't enough to swing the game in the Bulls favor. His team defense was good enough to somewhat compensate for his individual defense. On offense, he took Horace Grant out of his comfort zone and used cuts to touch Pippen for points.

A chimerical matchup against LeBron wouldn't be difficult since LeBron is thrown off balance by the slightest fake and is totally mesmerized by the ball, which makes him succeptible to off ball cuts. On offense, LeBron likes to catch the ball stationary up top, which allows the defense to load up and he can be forced to help spots.

Durant's defense is also far below average. Limited strength, doesn't box out, reaches for the ball, and is thrown off balance by any fake. On offense, he has been receiving the ball stationary up top, which gives defenders the advantage.

The ultimate question is, would either of these two players touch Bird's individual defense for enough points to swing the game? Bird would usually be responsible for about 50 points himself.

[DemiGodzillla]

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

First off, this should probably be in the Pro Basketball thread.

Second, not many people would claim that players from the 60s or 70s could dominate today's game. The argument you usually see is that players from the 80s & 90s would dominate today. And I agree that they would.

There are no better athletes in today's NBA than there were in the 80s and 90s. The game (as it is played by the players) was pretty much the same in 1986 as it is in 2011. The only difference is the rules. The game was much more physical (hand checking, less flagrant fouls called, etc.) in the 80s and 90s than it is today.

No one would argue that Bill Russell would average 20+ rebounds in today's league, or that Oscar would average a triple double for a season in today's league. But, you would find people who would (rightfully) argue that Jordan would average 37 points per game in today's league, or that Magic would average 20 points, 8 boards, & 13 assists in today's game.

Not many people ever say that the 60s & 70s was the dominant era of basketball. In fact, any knowledgeable fan would readily admit that 95% of those guys wouldn't excel today. (I feel that Walton, Maravich, Chamberlain, West, Frazier, Havlicek, Kareem & others would have), but the likes of Heinsohn, Tom Sanders, Clyde Lovelette, & Hal Greer would have no place in today's league.
However, not only could Bird, Jordan, Magic, Dr. J, & Moses Malone succeed today, but "lesser" guys like Mitch Richmond, Mark Jackson, Orlando Woolridge, & Horace Grant would also translate over to today's league quite well. Guys like Richmond would be better in today's league, due to the aforementioned "no hand checking" rule.

This is very well said, to add on to it slightly, players from the 80's and 90's had much more well rounded playing styles than player's today. More player's could play off the ball, with their back to the basket, in the high post etc. When you grew up back then you learned more about different facets of the game, a lot of player's today have a guards skillset because they've had the ball in their hands their whole life and when they get to the NBA they have no idea how to play outside that realm of basketball. In the 80's and 90's you had guards all over the league who had better moves down low than half of today's forwards/centers.

[PrettyT11]

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

Bill Russell would average 20 plus boards in today's game. He was a six space rebounder with incredibly quick ups, sinewy strength, and impeccable timing.

Come on now my man. There is no way Bill Russell or anybody else in NBA history would average 20 plus rebounds a game. Just looking at it from a math standpoint will show it is pretty much not possible. There is a reason why it hasn't been done in over 40 years. Rodman is the only guy to get to 16 in the last 30. That doesn't even begin to account for the other factors Russell would have to deal with in today's game. It just wouldn't happen.

[Dice]

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

That matchup you're referring to was interesting, but wasn't unexpected.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEYGfCNrhHo&feature=related

Bird's individual defense was below average. He was aware of his man and where the ball was on the weak side. He did look to box out as well.

Breakdown:
9:18- Bird harasses Cartwright into a missed layup.
11:00- Bird makes no attempt to contest Pippen shot.
12:33- Bird rotates and bothers Paxson into a missed layup.
12:55- Pippen uses Cartwright brush to lose Bird.
16:28- Pippen drives baseline past Bird and converts layup.
16:57- Bird cuts off Pippen baseline drive, Pip curls off down screen and converts open jumper.
17:48- Pippen uses screen to lose Bird and get into lane.
21:09- Pippen uses ball-fake to get Bird in air, pops short jumper.
21:30- Pippen in open court, Bird totally at his mercy, converts layup.
26:28- Bird defending basket, doesn't harass Jordan's drive at all.
41:10- Bird harasses Jordan drive, can't get crowd rebound.
57:40- Grant tries to post Bird, but misses jump hook under some pressure.
1:00:18-Grant tries to post Bird, converts turnaround jumper under zero pressure.
1:07:50- Jordan drives on Bird, spins right and the end play results in a layup for Grant.
1:11:00- Pippen isos Bird, uses reverse dribble and easily gets in lane, end play results in points.
1:13:35- Pippen face to face with Bird, jabs and makes pull-up under zero pressure.
1:36:10-Jordan face to face with Bird, stops on a dime and makes pull-up under zero pressure.

Overall, on plays where Bird was the most important defender, Bulls went 9-13 for 22 points. Bird himself, scored 24 points. Add four more points for an assist pass, and a ball reversal that led to points. Dock Bird two points for a turnover that directly led to a Bulls score. His total production was plus four, below his standards.

Basically, Pippen out-quicked the older Bird but it wasn't enough to swing the game in the Bulls favor. His team defense was good enough to somewhat compensate for his individual defense. On offense, he took Horace Grant out of his comfort zone and used cuts to touch Pippen for points.

A chimerical matchup against LeBron wouldn't be difficult since LeBron is thrown off balance by the slightest fake and is totally mesmerized by the ball, which makes him succeptible to off ball cuts. On offense, LeBron likes to catch the ball stationary up top, which allows the defense to load up and he can be forced to help spots.

Durant's defense is also far below average. Limited strength, doesn't box out, reaches for the ball, and is thrown off balance by any fake. On offense, he has been receiving the ball stationary up top, which gives defenders the advantage.

The ultimate question is, would either of these two players touch Bird's individual defense for enough points to swing the game? Bird would usually be responsible for about 50 points himself.

Yes, I think Durrant and LeBron would definitely score enough to touch Bird's individual defense to swing the game.

And speaking of that Bulls/Celtics match up, that's one of the few game I definitely could directly blamed Jordan for the loss. I remember watching that game live and yelling at the TV and saying, 'You couldn't block out freaking Brain Shaw?'

[AlexBrady]

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

Come on now my man. There is no way Bill Russell or anybody else in NBA history would average 20 plus rebounds a game. Just looking at it from a math standpoint will show it is pretty much not possible. There is a reason why it hasn't been done in over 40 years. Rodman is the only guy to get to 16 in the last 30. That doesn't even begin to account for the other factors Russell would have to deal with in today's game. It just wouldn't happen.

Rodman was coming down with 18 rebounds per game at his peak. An incredible athlete, quick up and down and side to side. He was a six space rebounder at only 6'7. Very rare that you see a six-spacer.
Kevin Love came down with 15 rebounds per game last year and he is 'only' a three-space guy. Dwight Howard is also a three-space guy and he usually grabs 13-14 per game.

Five and Six spacers are so rare, which is why you don't see those unusually high rebounding numbers very often. Russell, Chamberlain, Thurmond were in that five-space territory. Moses Malone could have been a 20 board per game guy if he worked harder on the defensive glass. Skill sets like that only come along every couple generations.

Yes, I think Durrant and LeBron would definitely score enough to touch Bird's individual defense to swing the game.

And speaking of that Bulls/Celtics match up, that's one of the few game I definitely could directly blamed Jordan for the loss. I remember watching that game live and yelling at the TV and saying, 'You couldn't block out freaking Brain Shaw?'

Fair enough. I just see Durant as a great shooter, rather than a great scorer. LBJ doesn't have an in-between game yet. Guys like Kobe Bryant and Paul Pierce are great scorers. They can shoot, post, muscle, cut, spin, and play at the foul-line extended. That puts the defense in a compromising position.

[Dice]

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

Rodman was coming down with 18 rebounds per game at his peak. An incredible athlete, quick up and down and side to side. He was a six space rebounder at only 6'7. Very rare that you see a six-spacer.
Kevin Love came down with 15 rebounds per game last year and he is 'only' a three-space guy. Dwight Howard is also a three-space guy and he usually grabs 13-14 per game.

Five and Six spacers are so rare, which is why you don't see those unusually high rebounding numbers very often. Russell, Chamberlain, Thurmond were in that five-space territory. Moses Malone could have been a 20 board per game guy if he worked harder on the defensive glass. Skill sets like that only come along every couple generations.

I don't know AlexBrady. I'd have to agree that with the pace of the game today compared to the past generation that it would be almost impossible to average 20 rebounds a game. With more shots being put up back then, you have more opportunities for rebounds. Dennis Rodman, who I consider the greatest rebounder of all time, did come close with 18.7 per game in 1992. AND that's from the greatest rebounder of all time. So if he couldn't do it in the modern generation, I highly doubt Bill Russell would do it today.