Ohio Chatter
Ohio Chatter

Forums

All Threads Serious Business Sports Politics Archive Pick 'ems
Log In Create Account

Was the NBA Better in the 80's, 90's, or 00's?

Home ▸ Archive ▸ Pro Sports ▸ Was the NBA Better in the 80's, 90's, or 00's?
F

Footwedge

Senior Member

9,265 posts
Dec 25, 2009 5:59 PM
Athletes are bigger and stronger today....but the league today is much more watered down. I think the NBA had better players in the 70's.
Dec 25, 2009 5:59pm
SQ_Crazies's avatar

SQ_Crazies

The Godfather

7,977 posts
Dec 25, 2009 7:04 PM
^Well that is the worst argument you can make for yourself. Top to bottom the talent hasn't ever been anywhere near as high as it is today.
Dec 25, 2009 7:04pm
wes_mantooth's avatar

wes_mantooth

Tomfoolery & shenanigans

17,977 posts
Dec 25, 2009 7:27 PM
SQ_Crazies wrote: The game is better now than it ever has been, not even an argument. If you're naive enough to think that all sports aren't better now than they were 20-30 years ago then I don't know what to tell you.

The talent level has never been anywhere near where it is right now in the NBA.
Talent level is not what always makes the game better. The 80's with the Celtics/Lakers as a rivalry was as good as it gets. Also, fundamentals and team play was much better then.

There is no doubt that the athletes today are bigger, faster and stronger, but in a team sport that isn't always a good thing.
Dec 25, 2009 7:27pm
SQ_Crazies's avatar

SQ_Crazies

The Godfather

7,977 posts
Dec 25, 2009 7:44 PM
Completely disagree but I'm not going to bother arguing. This argument never goes anywhere.
Dec 25, 2009 7:44pm
wes_mantooth's avatar

wes_mantooth

Tomfoolery & shenanigans

17,977 posts
Dec 25, 2009 7:51 PM
SQ_Crazies wrote: This argument never goes anywhere.
Pretty much. It is completely subjective, so there is no way of proving it either way.
Dec 25, 2009 7:51pm
SQ_Crazies's avatar

SQ_Crazies

The Godfather

7,977 posts
Dec 25, 2009 8:01 PM
Nope.
Dec 25, 2009 8:01pm
T

tuskytuffguy

Senior Member

615 posts
Dec 25, 2009 10:07 PM
I'm willing to bet that those that think the game is better today range in ages 18-25. They have absolutely no clue, and only know of Jordan in his later years. The game is horrible nowadays. The evolution of the game itself sucks. The days of Daugherty, Price, Magic, Barkley, Jordan, Drexler, etc. were the best, hands down.
Dec 25, 2009 10:07pm
SQ_Crazies's avatar

SQ_Crazies

The Godfather

7,977 posts
Dec 25, 2009 10:16 PM
I'm 22. But don't think that I don't assume that I don't have knowledge of the game's past. The brand can't be worse when the talent from top to bottom is head and shoulders above what it once was. There are guys now that aren't top 5 in the league that would have been legends back then.

Every sport is better now than it was in the past--the evolution does not suck. I'm willing to bet that most of the people that think today's game isn't as good are over 25 and hardly follow the game. It's as much an assumption as the one you're making--and I've seen countless examples of it.

Again, this argument is stupid. But in my honest opinion, to think that the game isn't better is pretty naive. Same can be said for football, baseball, hockey, whatever...
Dec 25, 2009 10:16pm
T

tuskytuffguy

Senior Member

615 posts
Dec 25, 2009 10:25 PM
Football is the only game I could say is better now, yet there could be arguments made otherwise. The fact that basketball is basically barnball now is basically what kills it for me, and not only that, there are far less fundamentals in today's game. The fact that youngsters today rave over dunks like they do is more than enough to tell me that it's going downhill. back in the 80's-early 90's, noone cared about dunks, the only one that mattered was Jordan's legendary foul-line dunk. People cared most about actual fundamental shooting and constant full-court press was not unheard of at all. Granted, i did watch Cavs vs Lakers today, and the Cavs displayed excellent fundamentals, but that was one in a million.
Dec 25, 2009 10:25pm
B

burt07

Senior Member

600 posts
Dec 26, 2009 12:56 AM
I'm not going to get involved in this argument as it is definitely heading nowhere in a hurry. I'll just say from what I've read, both sides have had both their good arguments, and their downright terrible arguments.
Dec 26, 2009 12:56am
U

unique_67

Senior Member

167 posts
Dec 26, 2009 1:34 AM
90's, 80's, 00's
Dec 26, 2009 1:34am
F

Footwedge

Senior Member

9,265 posts
Dec 26, 2009 1:41 AM
SQ_Crazies wrote: ^Well that is the worst argument you can make for yourself. Top to bottom the talent hasn't ever been anywhere near as high as it is today.
I base my opinion on 2 things. What I have observed, which you haven't....and the fact that today there are twice as many teams. When you have twice the number of teams, then the product becomes dilluted.

Over the past decade or so....you've seen teams lose 75% of their games year in and year out. In pro basketball, that should never happen

Go look up the NBA standings of the 70's or even the 60's. Exclude the expansion teams, and the worst teams would win 40% of their games.

Today, the league is watered down. Since you are just a 22 year old, and a little wet behind the ears, you are forgiven..:D
Dec 26, 2009 1:41am
hoops23's avatar

hoops23

Senior Member

15,696 posts
Dec 26, 2009 2:00 AM
I don't think the league is watered down at all, just some teams aren't constructed the right way or are being constructed to make a run in the future..

Look at New Jersey. They have two legit players in Lopez and Harris. However, they go out and trade Vince Carter for Rafer Alston and Courtney Lee..

They also have a nice young piece in Chris Douglas-Roberts, but it's obvious that New Jersey is playing for the 2010 NBA Draft and free agent market.

A team like Minny has a young nucleus in Flynn, Jefferson, Ellington, and Brewer... Two very good players and two good players who will be good role players. They're still adding pieces to the puzzle.

Of course, when you have 29 teams, some teams will see their down years.. But, how long does one team stay down for in the NBA? Not very. The Knicks have been decimated by poor FO decisions, so they're the exclusion to that rule.. Same with the Clippers (who have talent, but no leadership)

Look at teams like Charlotte and Memphis this season. While they are under .500 overall, I believe both teams have winning records in December and have both beaten some quality teams.

The Kings are another team who were terrible last year, but ONE draft has them playing as a coherent team again.. OKC, a team who has pretty much built their entire team through the draft is finally starting to reap some of those rewards.. Durant, Green, Westbrook, Harden, etc..

I think the talent that is truly starting to fluctuate into the league is really bringing a true competitive balance.. Hell, check out some of the supposed names in this upcoming draft!
Dec 26, 2009 2:00am
Mr. 300's avatar

Mr. 300

Senior Member

3,090 posts
Dec 26, 2009 8:00 AM
Footwedge wrote:
SQ_Crazies wrote: ^Well that is the worst argument you can make for yourself. Top to bottom the talent hasn't ever been anywhere near as high as it is today.
I base my opinion on 2 things. What I have observed, which you haven't....and the fact that today there are twice as many teams. When you have twice the number of teams, then the product becomes dilluted.

Over the past decade or so....you've seen teams lose 75% of their games year in and year out. In pro basketball, that should never happen

Go look up the NBA standings of the 70's or even the 60's. Exclude the expansion teams, and the worst teams would win 40% of their games.

Today, the league is watered down. Since you are just a 22 year old, and a little wet behind the ears, you are forgiven..:D

A little wet????? He and littlemandevil are drowning in moisture. :P
Dec 26, 2009 8:00am
S

Sonofanump

Dec 26, 2009 9:14 AM
79-94 was the best period in NBA history.
Dec 26, 2009 9:14am
C

cats gone wild

Senior Member

2,651 posts
Dec 26, 2009 2:34 PM
wes_mantooth wrote:
SQ_Crazies wrote: The game is better now than it ever has been, not even an argument. If you're naive enough to think that all sports aren't better now than they were 20-30 years ago then I don't know what to tell you.

The talent level has never been anywhere near where it is right now in the NBA.
Talent level is not what always makes the game better. The 80's with the Celtics/Lakers as a rivalry was as good as it gets. Also, fundamentals and team play was much better then.

There is no doubt that the athletes today are bigger, faster and stronger, but in a team sport that isn't always a good thing.

tuskytuffguy wrote: I'm willing to bet that those that think the game is better today range in ages 18-25. They have absolutely no clue, and only know of Jordan in his later years. The game is horrible nowadays. The evolution of the game itself sucks. The days of Daugherty, Price, Magic, Barkley, Jordan, Drexler, etc. were the best, hands down.

Totally agree. And just because people have more strength or talent these days, doesnt make bball more fun to watch,and it doesnt mean they actually use their talent to their best abiltiy. Its boring to me except for a few dunks here and there. And for the posters who are in their teens and early 20's, how would you know how good bball was back in the 80's/early 90's. Take it from posters who know.
Dec 26, 2009 2:34pm
Hb31187's avatar

Hb31187

Senior Member

8,534 posts
Dec 26, 2009 3:59 PM
You act like we cant watch old games lol like we've never seen basketball in the 80s and 90s
Dec 26, 2009 3:59pm
SQ_Crazies's avatar

SQ_Crazies

The Godfather

7,977 posts
Dec 29, 2009 10:53 AM
Hilarious that anyone assumes I don't know anything about the game before 1987. But whatever, when your arguing with morons they'll nearly always take the easy way out--can't say I didn't see that coming. Like I said though, I could make the same sort of generalization--you old guys probably RARELY if ever watch today's NBA. I have as much right to assume that as you do to assume I don't know anything about the past--because I wasn't born.

This argument isn't even close--believe what you want. Give me 1960's officials and the 1960's Decade All Star team vs. today's "Dream Team" and I'll bet the farm on today's players winning by 15+...15 is being nice.
Dec 29, 2009 10:53am
Skyhook79's avatar

Skyhook79

Senior Member

5,739 posts
Dec 29, 2009 11:10 AM
SQ_Crazies wrote: Hilarious that anyone assumes I don't know anything about the game before 1987. But whatever, when your arguing with morons they'll nearly always take the easy way out--can't say I didn't see that coming. Like I said though, I could make the same sort of generalization--you old guys probably RARELY if ever watch today's NBA. So you have no more right than you assume I have to comment on any of this.

This argument isn't even close--believe what you want. Give me 1960's officials and the 1960's Decade All Star team vs. today's "Dream Team" and I'll bet the farm on today's players winning by 15+...15 is being nice.
No 0ne said the 60's were the best NBA days. Most people believe it was the 80's. Give me the 80's Decade All Star's with any set of officials and they would blow up todays "Dream Team".
Dec 29, 2009 11:10am
Hb31187's avatar

Hb31187

Senior Member

8,534 posts
Dec 29, 2009 11:29 AM
If we're doing all Decade teams...
Gimme...

CP3/Younger Jkidd
Bryant/Dwade
Bron/Melo
Duncan/Garnett
Younger Shaq/Howard

And i like the new schools chances
Dec 29, 2009 11:29am
Skyhook79's avatar

Skyhook79

Senior Member

5,739 posts
Dec 29, 2009 11:55 AM
Hb31187 wrote: If we're doing all Decade teams...
Gimme...

CP3/Younger Jkidd
Bryant/Dwade
Bron/Melo
Duncan/Garnett
Younger Shaq/Howard

And i like the new schools chances

Gimme...

Magic/Isiah
Jordan/Drexler
Bird/Dr J
Karl Malone/Barkley
Jabbar/Akeem

Everyone on both teams in their prime and the 80's DOMINATE!!!!!
Dec 29, 2009 11:55am
Hb31187's avatar

Hb31187

Senior Member

8,534 posts
Dec 29, 2009 12:07 PM
Lol or we drop it down to the post every offensive trip and let shaq man handle the finese big men of the 80's u listed

Or let a faster, stronger more athletic version of magic johnson run the show(god shoot me for praising lebron) and the 00's run with it
Dec 29, 2009 12:07pm
Little Danny's avatar

Little Danny

Senior Member

4,288 posts
Dec 29, 2009 12:13 PM
I understand why the young pup's are arguing for today's players. However, for perspective consider the fact that today's players can't even beat the best international squads-- how are they going to beat a team of guys who took the game to a whole new level,mixed with fundamentals and talent (Jordan, Bird, Magic, Hakeem, Malone)?

I also think people 25 and younger discount the talent of guys from the 80's and 90's. Guys like Jordan, David Thompson, and Dominque Wilins could jump as high as anyone playing the game today. There is nobody playing today who could shoot as well as Bird, Price, Stockton, and even Jordan (particulary in his later years). It's not as if there was no talent back in the day.
Dec 29, 2009 12:13pm
Little Danny's avatar

Little Danny

Senior Member

4,288 posts
Dec 29, 2009 12:18 PM
Hb31187 wrote: Lol or we drop it down to the post every offensive trip and let shaq man handle the finese big men of the 80's u listed

Or let a faster, stronger more athletic version of magic johnson run the show(god shoot me for praising lebron) and the 00's run with it
Shaq's best years were in the 1990's (maybe I'll give you a year or two in this decade but the majority of it was during this time). Shaq had a big body and was just as powerful then, yet another guy in the era dominated- Hakeem The Dream. Shaq could not keep up with the footwork and The Dream schooled him everytime.
Dec 29, 2009 12:18pm
sleeper's avatar

sleeper

Legend

27,879 posts
Dec 29, 2009 1:40 PM
Little Danny wrote:
Hb31187 wrote: Lol or we drop it down to the post every offensive trip and let shaq man handle the finese big men of the 80's u listed

Or let a faster, stronger more athletic version of magic johnson run the show(god shoot me for praising lebron) and the 00's run with it
Shaq's best years were in the 1990's (maybe I'll give you a year or two in this decade but the majority of it was during this time). Shaq had a big body and was just as powerful then, yet another guy in the era dominated- Hakeem The Dream. Shaq could not keep up with the footwork and The Dream schooled him everytime.
Wrong. Shaq was dominate when he was with the Lakers and they won championships from 2000 -2003.

Also, the reason this team can't dominate in the Olympics like the former team is because basketball wasn't as international as it is now. Players from all over the world play basketball at a high level, a lot of them play week in week out in the NBA, and opt to play for their home country during the Olympics. Back then, international players were here and there, so it was essentially playing college caliber talent with the best in the NBA.

The reason people perceive the players back then as being superior is because they've already seen their entire career, but I have no doubt when the stars in this league are done, we will have seen the best decade in NBA history, and you can take that to the bank.
Dec 29, 2009 1:40pm