EPTNBA 2010-2011 Season - Page 76
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
city42
1656 Posts
| ||
|
Judicator
United States7270 Posts
On February 10 2011 07:00 Ace wrote: This isn't the first time he's been guilty of that Or being able to find the edit button, I put him at about 13, just discovered the internet is bigger than AOL and thought he can just shit up any thread he comes across because his opinion matters. @ricerocket, where did I agree with you? If anything I agreed with you about Artest being semi-crazy, but you were completely off on everything else regarding Isiah. If you can extrapolate (since you asked of a similar feat from city42) then you can reason that Isiah is Isiah, his personality is independent of the NBA era...which leads back city42's original point about players being a product of the system they grew up playing basketball in, the AAU kids and why today's NBA is more kumbaya than the 80s regardless of the rule changes and shift in culture. But cool, you can sit there and pretend you're the king of the world when it comes to smarts and that everyone else is off their rockers. Emperor's new clothes, bro. | ||
|
ricerocket
154 Posts
On February 10 2011 07:08 city42 wrote: Whoa. I'll reply to your whole post in a minute, but I have to discuss the most egregious thing first. You started by trying to get me to comply with formal debate conventions. Then, within half a page, you go ad hominem on me. What the hell is that? LOL. You first bring up "reading comprehension," and you then bring up "ad hominem?" What's your next move, calling for a ban because you can't admit you were wrong? Man, you are just going on all cylinders aren't you? | ||
|
Judicator
United States7270 Posts
On February 10 2011 07:08 city42 wrote: Whoa. I'll reply to your whole post in a minute, but I have to discuss the most egregious thing first. You started by trying to get me to comply with formal debate conventions. Then, within half a page, you go ad hominem on me. What the hell is that? Look he's just angry that he knows that he overreached on some of his points and then tries backtrack and cover up by getting all angry. People didn't read in NBA threads to begin with, so what do you expect? | ||
|
ricerocket
154 Posts
On February 10 2011 07:12 Judicator wrote: Or being able to find the edit button, I put him at about 13, just discovered the internet is bigger than AOL and thought he can just shit up any thread he comes across because his opinion matters. @ricerocket, where did I agree with you? If anything I agreed with you about Artest being semi-crazy, but you were completely off on everything else regarding Isiah. If you can extrapolate (since you asked of a similar feat from city42) then you can reason that Isiah is Isiah, his personality is independent of the NBA era...which leads back city42's original point about players being a product of the system they grew up playing basketball in, the AAU kids and why today's NBA is more kumbaya than the 80s regardless of the rule changes and shift in culture. But cool, you can sit there and pretend you're the king of the world when it comes to smarts and that everyone else is off their rockers. Emperor's new clothes, bro. Isiah is a product of the system just like Artest and Garnett are also products of the system. Except you forget that NBA culture is as much a system as their childhood upbringing, and it's a system that now both promotes mutual respect and frowns heavily on conflict beyond the contest of the game. And in today's system, Isiah would be as cool a dude as Artest and Garnett, maybe cooler. Ala the point I've been arguing all along. Extrapolate that. | ||
|
ricerocket
154 Posts
On February 10 2011 07:14 Judicator wrote: Look he's just angry that he knows that he overreached on some of his points and then tries backtrack and cover up by getting all angry. People didn't read in NBA threads to begin with, so what do you expect? Lol, didn't you just also bring up "reading comprehension?" And then you turn around and say something like this. The Internet is never short of people who love to mock themselves. 'Tis why it amuses me so and feels so addictive. Tell me, o'English professor, which point did I try to backtrack and cover up with anger? | ||
|
city42
1656 Posts
On February 10 2011 07:12 ricerocket wrote: LOL. You first bring up "reading comprehension," and you then bring up "ad hominem?" What's your next move, calling for a ban because you can't admit you were wrong? Man, you are just going on all cylinders aren't you? I brought up "reading comprehension" because you didn't show any, which is quite evident by how you put words in my mouth (physical play vs. playing through injuries). Your ridiculous causal relationship doesn't help matters, either. 95% of basketball injuries aren't caused by overly physical play, but just occur naturally over the course of 82 games. The list includes but is not limited to: sprained ankles, bruised backs, jammed fingers, broken fingers, stress fractures, blown ACLs, pulled hamstrings, facial injuries from accidental elbows, hernias, any number of elbow ailments, and strained quads. Your view of the NBA 20 years ago is hilarious. Do you really think players actively tried to maim one another every game? Hard fouls and fights were used by players to police themselves on the court. There wasn't any violence just for the hell of it. Even Laimbeer had a method to his madness: if you were thinking about him and his cheap shots, you couldn't be playing ball at the same time. Players back then suffered the same injuries they do now. Reducing the game's physicality doesn't create a magical dropoff in injuries. | ||
|
ricerocket
154 Posts
On February 10 2011 07:25 city42 wrote: I brought up "reading comprehension" because you didn't show any, which is quite evident by how you put words in my mouth (physical play vs. playing through injuries). Your ridiculous causal relationship doesn't help matters, either. 95% of basketball injuries aren't caused by overly physical play, but just occur naturally over the course of 82 games. The list includes but is not limited to: sprained ankles, bruised backs, jammed fingers, broken fingers, stress fractures, blown ACLs, pulled hamstrings, facial injuries from accidental elbows, hernias, any number of elbow ailments, and strained quads. Your view of the NBA 20 years ago is hilarious. Do you really think players actively tried to maim one another every game? Hard fouls and fights were used by players to police themselves on the court. There wasn't any violence just for the hell of it. Even Laimbeer had a method to his madness: if you were thinking about him and his cheap shots, you couldn't be playing ball at the same time. Players back then suffered the same injuries they do now. Reducing the game's physicality doesn't create a magical dropoff in injuries. And I brought up over sensitivity because you show plenty. And for a guy who loves MJ, the Pistons and the 80s as much as you do, you are glaringly oblivious of such a thing called "The Jordan Rules." And since you don't know what it is, Pistons coach described it like this: Any time he went by you, you had to nail him. If he was coming off a screen, nail him. We didn't want to be dirty—I know some people thought we were—but we had to make contact and be very physical. And I would love to see where you get your "95%" from. Because I believe you just pulled that out of your ass. "Reducing the game's physicality doesn't create a magical dropoff in injuries?" You are right, the dropoff isn't magical, it's real, as it was the whole intention David Stern described for his rule changes in the early 00s. User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
Ace
United States16096 Posts
Even including AAU games, most of the guys who grew up playing basketball around my age (Lebron, Wade, Durant) grew up in an 80s/90s environment: no blood, no foul. So I think even with the hand-checking rules of the 80s most NBA players wouldn't be at too much of a disadvantage. All of these guys have played in systems where forearm to the back is the standard defense on the perimeter. @ricerocket: Players get injured today just as much as they did back then. The difference is with advances in technology, training, maintenance and actually requiring players to be conditioned major injuries are treated far easier. Sports medicine has advanced so much in the last 20 years. That is a much bigger reason that guys have longer careers than the rule changes. Hand checking and lane clogging weren't causing injuries. | ||
|
ricerocket
154 Posts
Quite a friend you are, sir. | ||
|
ricerocket
154 Posts
On February 10 2011 07:36 Ace wrote: @ricerocket: Players get injured today just as much as they did back then. The difference is with advances in technology, training, maintenance and actually requiring players to be conditioned major injuries are treated far easier. Sports medicine has advanced so much in the last 20 years. That is a much bigger reason that guys have longer careers than the rule changes. Hand checking and lane clogging weren't causing injuries. Reading comprehensions man, reading comprehensions. I was wondering why you guys brought this phrase up so quickly, is it because people kept mentioning it to you? I never said a word about hand checking and lane clogging causing injuries. I said hard fouls and disregard of another player's well being as the main reason. Culture change, not rule change. Your boy city42 is the one who kept bring up rules. | ||
|
Ace
United States16096 Posts
| ||
|
Judicator
United States7270 Posts
On February 10 2011 07:34 ricerocket wrote: And I brought up over sensitivity because you show plenty. And for a guy who loves MJ, the Pistons and the 80s as much as you do, you are glaringly oblivious of such a thing called "The Jordan Rules." And since you don't know what it is, Pistons coach described it like this: And I would love to see where you get your "95%" from. Because I believe you just pulled that out of your ass. "Reducing the game's physicality doesn't create a magical dropoff in injuries?" You are right, the dropoff isn't magical, it's real, as it was the whole intention David Stern described for his rule changes in the early 00s. Well here's the problem, because you pin the change in player attitudes on the NBA which is hard to swallow simply because players entering the league aren't magically reprogrammed into being friendly with each other. Isiah is Isiah, if anything I would argue for the opposite simply because his treatment of Jordan during the All-Star game and how he approached that situation. A situation that would be 1000x worse in today's media coverage. Can you imagine what he would do to Lebron? Also, nailing someone doesn't mean you're maiming them. You're not taking a shot their knees or anything like that. I really don't understand where you're getting that concept from. Did you ever watch those games or are you just using your imagination? Some of the hardest "hits" were rough shots for sure, but nothing you wouldn't shake off and return the game to. It was to test Jordan's will or determination more than anything physical. Since you are buying into Stern's bullshit, do you really think Stern has the best wishes of the players or the league in mind? Yeah, what produces more revenue? Flashy offenses or stout defenses? Mind you this is the same Stern that fines players/coaches for complaining about any ref call even post-game, suspends players for wearing the headbands upside down or wearing too baggy of shorts. Yeah...player safety was definitely what he had in mind at the time. While we were on the subject, explicitly and clearly define physical play please. I think you and everyone else in this thread has a very different defintion. Edit: Guess we'll have to wait 90 days for his response, oh shucks. | ||
|
Holcan
Canada2593 Posts
| ||
|
city42
1656 Posts
On February 10 2011 07:45 Ace wrote: I don't think necessarily think players of the 80s/90s were on some super level of toughness so if that's his argument I definitely don't agree with it. It sure was harder to be a perimeter player and attack the lane constantly though. No, that was never my argument. I never got to fully explain anything because he kept putting words in my mouth and replying to arguments I never made. Players back then DID play through more injuries, and it was out of necessity. Prior to the NBC TV contract, the league was still just getting by financially (mid to late 80s). You HAD to give the crowd their money's worth, or else they'd stop coming. The non-stars especially had to gut through some injuries, because they were making next to no money and could be easily replaced. Since Europe wasn't a real option back then for most players, if the NBA team dumped them their career was done. I would never try to argue that players were somehow biologically tougher back then...that's nonsense. Guaranteed contracts and alternate playing options make it more possible to nurse injuries off the court in this era. Since the current players are spoiled by the friendly system we have now, I don't think they'd be able to immediately adapt to the old school environment. There would definitely be a readjustment period, kind of like Oakley at the end of his career only the opposite. Because of that, I think the guy's claim that if you put Rose in Isiah's shoes, he'd be just as tough, is silly. | ||
|
a176
Canada6688 Posts
time to let go 7 threes tomorrow! | ||
XaI)CyRiC
United States4471 Posts
I don't know if I buy the argument that players in the 80's era were generally more skilled than players in the 90's and 2000's. Both players and coaches are always taking lessons learned from those who came before them and trying to either incorporate what works and/or trying to improve upon them. Kobe is a great example, as he has repeatedly stated that he built his game by watching the players who came before him, and has done so as recently as this past season with Olajuwon and his post game. While not all players are students of the game like Kobe, they are all affected and taught with those lessons in mind, whether they realize it or not. However, there is a good argument that even though players and coaches are aware of and know of certain skills/strategies, there's a whole other step involved in the execution of it all. For example, just because a player watches Ray Allen shoot and practices shooting like him, it doesn't mean that he'll actually be able to shoot as well as Ray simply because of a disparity in talent and maybe just how that player's body is best suited to play. Same goes for things observed in Bird's, Jordan's and Magic's games. Up until Lebron, we hadn't really seen anyone with Magic's mixture of size, athleticism and court vision after him which is necessary to play that way. After all of that, it's my opinion that the overall skill level of the NBA has not dropped, but it arguably hasn't jumped either (although I agree with the opinion that players tend to be more well-rounded nowadays, i.e. you get a lot more "tweeners" who have broad skillsets across all shapes/sizes). What has changed though is the physicality and athleticism that you see in players today versus the 80's. Players today are simply more athletic, stronger and bigger overall than their previous counterparts. A lot of that is due to the advancements in training, development and sports medicine, but some of it is just that the popularity of basketball has grown (internationally even) and a larger pool of talent to pull from will result in better quality players. In the past, you'd never have heard of Yao, Dirk or Pau in the NBA, but now you're seeing the best in the world, more of whom have grown up playing basketball and getting better training/development. In the end, there's no definitive way to determine which era would necessarily do better in the other because there are so many factors to consider. Do the 80's era players get the benefit of modern training/development/medicine/etc? Do the 90's-2000's players not get the benefit of all that? What rules do they grow up playing and develop under? It's very likely that many of the elite players would have been very different players if they played in the different eras to adapt to the respective circumstances, which throws a kink in it all and makes comparisons nigh impossible. Fun topic to talk about though. Personally, the things that I wonder the most about are about how players like Russell and Wilt would have fared in the modern league where they wouldn't have such a huge advantage over others in size, strength and athleticism. How would guys like West and Bird have fared against modern players who would have significant advantages in size, strength, speed and athleticism? How much faster and/or stronger would they have been if they had had the benefits of modern training? Would Lebron have averaged 50/20/15/10/10 in the 70's/80's? Would Shaq have averaged 50/30/10/10? Fun to ponder, but impossible to argue  | ||
|
BalliSLife
1339 Posts
My time is limited right now but my five would be Rondo Kobe Lebron Blake Griffin Dwight Howard I know it seems really 2k11ish but to me, this team is pure athleticism and definitely not bad defensively. I have a hard time imagining a combo from the 80s that beats this. | ||
|
Holcan
Canada2593 Posts
Kobe Lebron Dunca Dwight would be my five 6th man would be Amare for that extra scoring punch | ||
|
Ace
United States16096 Posts
Either way for Point Guard I'm going with Chris Paul, Deron Williams or Steve Nash if we have to go modern era. | ||
| ||
