U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Basketball
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-07-2018, 02:05 PM
 
11,680 posts, read 7,059,219 times
Reputation: 6387

Advertisements

As a kid I was always knew a guy was elite if he averaged say 22+ ppg. It was rare air. If I pick a year in the 90s - let’s say 1992, there were 10 players that averaged over 22ppg. That’s it.

Looking at today’s league, there are 22 players averaging over 22 ppg.

Several years there were 8 players over 22 ppg, but in 99 it got so bad that only 4 players averaged over 22 ppg. In that same season only 7 players shot over 50% from the field...in 2018 30+ players.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-07-2018, 02:38 PM
 
7,738 posts, read 4,584,665 times
Reputation: 8445
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddiehaskell View Post
As a kid I was always knew a guy was elite if he averaged say 22+ ppg. It was rare air. If I pick a year in the 90s - let’s say 1992, there were 10 players that averaged over 22ppg. That’s it.

Looking at today’s league, there are 22 players averaging over 22 ppg.

Several years there were 8 players over 22 ppg, but in 99 it got so bad that only 4 players averaged over 22 ppg. In that same season only 7 players shot over 50% from the field...in 2018 30+ players.
Mid-range jumpers vs threes. Shooting .333 from three is valuable as shooting .500 from two, but nobody was smart enough to shoot more threes. The pace was also slower.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2018, 04:30 PM
 
11,680 posts, read 7,059,219 times
Reputation: 6387
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands View Post
Mid-range jumpers vs threes. Shooting .333 from three is valuable as shooting .500 from two, but nobody was smart enough to shoot more threes. The pace was also slower.
So essentially it was harder to score because players had to work for 2s instead of taking 3s...which also results in more driving lanes for when a player does decide to get closer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2018, 05:07 PM
 
7,738 posts, read 4,584,665 times
Reputation: 8445
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddiehaskell View Post
So essentially it was harder to score because players had to work for 2s instead of taking 3s...which also results in more driving lanes for when a player does decide to get closer.
That’s one way to look at it. Poor shot selection is another.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2018, 06:28 PM
 
11,680 posts, read 7,059,219 times
Reputation: 6387
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands View Post
That’s one way to look at it. Poor shot selection is another.
”Poor” shot selection in hind sight. Things like advanced analytics weren’t even a thought for most of the 90s...the game was played more through the eye test, tradition and feel. It will be interesting to see if the NBA uses analytics in the future to find a better risk/reward balance for 3pt line distance...i.e. players shoot X percentage taking shots from 15 inches behind the line. There have been plenty of changes over the last 100 or so years so I can’t imagine everything stays static from here on out.

Last edited by eddiehaskell; 04-07-2018 at 06:44 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2018, 06:35 PM
 
5,302 posts, read 3,331,328 times
Reputation: 6483
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddiehaskell View Post
So essentially it was harder to score because players had to work for 2s instead of taking 3s...which also results in more driving lanes for when a player does decide to get closer.
Or more players actually cared and played defense back then!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2018, 06:46 PM
 
7,738 posts, read 4,584,665 times
Reputation: 8445
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddiehaskell View Post
”Poor” shot selection in hind sight. Things like advanced analytics weren’t even a thought for most of the 90s...the game was played more through the eye test, tradition and feel.
I mostly agree, but failure to see the value of the three-ball just seems bone-headed. Historically, the game had been about getting bigs “high percentage shots”, which was generally a good idea, since no one could shoot. As wings became more dominant, and bigs extended their range, the NBA became a game of twelve-foot post-ups and mid-range jumpers. These are some of the worst shots in basketball. Mid-range jumpers should be opportunistic shots, taken when the defense overcommits to the arc. Honestly, the only players I want shooting 17-20 footers are guys like Serge Ibaka and LaMarcus Aldridge. Maybe, Anthony Davis, but I’d like to see him stretch his jumper out to the arc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-09-2018, 10:53 AM
 
3,565 posts, read 1,878,325 times
Reputation: 2263
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands View Post
Mid-range jumpers vs threes. Shooting .333 from three is valuable as shooting .500 from two, but nobody was smart enough to shoot more threes. The pace was also slower.
This is an oversimplification. The rules were different, with zone defense prohibited and hand checking allowed. Most teams viewed the best offense as isolation. The inability of a defense to send help made it very difficult to stop a dominant isolation scorer (whether face-up or in the post).

Don Nelson thought that transition was the best offense, and Run TMC pushed the ball at all opportunities. That didn't necessarily mean 3s--in fact, it often resulted in open mid range shots. He was also a major pick & roll proponent, and asked his point guard to use the walk-up three--all parts of modern NBA offense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by eddiehaskell View Post
So essentially it was harder to score because players had to work for 2s instead of taking 3s...which also results in more driving lanes for when a player does decide to get closer.
You simply have to consider the rule changes. If you were to put a great scorer today in a total isolation, they're going to put up phenomenal numbers. But with variations of zone defense permitted, there is never an opportunity for total isolation in the NBA today. When a player attacks the rim, they often have to get past at least 2 defenders in order to finish. Spreading the floor with shooters is the response, and it creates opportunities for more open spot up shots.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands View Post
That’s one way to look at it. Poor shot selection is another.
It wasn't poor shot selection, it was a reasoned response to the era's defense, which routinely put defenders on an island.

Quote:
Originally Posted by eddiehaskell View Post
”Poor” shot selection in hind sight. Things like advanced analytics weren’t even a thought for most of the 90s...the game was played more through the eye test, tradition and feel. It will be interesting to see if the NBA uses analytics in the future to find a better risk/reward balance for 3pt line distance...i.e. players shoot X percentage taking shots from 15 inches behind the line. There have been plenty of changes over the last 100 or so years so I can’t imagine everything stays static from here on out.
Analytics is little more than quantifying observed results. Those results depend on all of the fundamental questions that get answered by coaches and players--analytics are not the cause, but the result.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands View Post
I mostly agree, but failure to see the value of the three-ball just seems bone-headed. Historically, the game had been about getting bigs “high percentage shots”, which was generally a good idea, since no one could shoot. As wings became more dominant, and bigs extended their range, the NBA became a game of twelve-foot post-ups and mid-range jumpers. These are some of the worst shots in basketball. Mid-range jumpers should be opportunistic shots, taken when the defense overcommits to the arc. Honestly, the only players I want shooting 17-20 footers are guys like Serge Ibaka and LaMarcus Aldridge. Maybe, Anthony Davis, but I’d like to see him stretch his jumper out to the arc.
Mid-range jumpers are part of good basketball strategy when used appropriately. A team has to force a defense in the NBA to guard the entire floor. Players are too athletic and too talented to give up sections of the floor. There are a load of guards and wings who routinely make opponents pay at the mid range, and their commitment to doing so is part of what opens up a defense to attack at the 3 point line and in the paint. High post mid-range shots are not usually where the great midrange attack is: it's usually curling off of screens or pulling up out of the pick & roll. There is also a cost to great bigs extending their range: you take them out of the interior, where they may offer their greatest threat to the defense. Sometimes that is a trade-off worth making (see Kevin Love), but other times that is detrimental (see Blake Griffin).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2018, 09:19 PM
 
52,015 posts, read 41,851,918 times
Reputation: 32455
The big difference is physical play.

In 1992 you could handcheck among other things which meant you could guard shooters much tighter since if they tried to drive past you....you could essentially push them lol.

NBA.com - NBA Rules History

Most posters are going to be too young or generally lazy to do basic research on changes from the past. It's the internet after all, anyone can go to McDonalds and get wifi.

From around 1995:
• Hand-checking eliminated from the end line in the backcourt to the opposite foul line.

I'd suggest reading through the whole thing.

Also keep in mind that they didn't get serious about the hand checking until later.

Tends to be in the NBA....implementation and then increasing enforcement in the following years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2018, 09:39 PM
 
52,015 posts, read 41,851,918 times
Reputation: 32455
No offense to Steph Curry. I actually like todays open flow NBA much more than in the "jordan era".

But back then they'd have effing wrecked him with tight D and handchecking if not worse like basically just knocking him out with a stiff forearm to the face while driving the basket.

I'm not saying this is Good. Quite the opposite.

I'm just saying that it's g-damn impossible to compare today to the 90's when big brutal centers roamed the earth and teams had actual "enforcers" like in hockey.

The NBA is RADICALLY different today than it was 25 years ago and we have a lot of posters around that age that need to respect the game and learn it's history if they want to be taken seriously and not taken apart like a gazelle in a crocodile pit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Basketball
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top