Discussion in 'Sports Zone' started by JustDezIt, Feb 17, 2013.
Apparently even young, Chinese kids have no problem with Lebron:
Actually, the only thing in statement that is true is the passing, which has been proven in this thread over and over again.
And yes, watching Terry embarrass Lebron is almost as satisfying as watching you embarrass yourself.
Lebron travels three times, all uncalled by refs, which allows the Heat to defeat the Celtics. Gotta love his fundamentals, right?
Remember when your geezer friend tried to say defense was better in the '80s?
In the 10 seasons between 1979-1989, there were 5 games total in which a team scored less than 70 points.
In the 2012-13 season alone, there have been 6 such games.
Last season, there were 20 such games.
Old, obsolete, out-of touch. What an awful way to go through life.
Way to expose your anti-LeBron bias. Must suck rooting against someone who's better than anyone you've ever liked.
Yeah, Mike's a better rebounder.
Do me a favor and keep posting. I'm enjoying this wholeheartedly and you look more and more like a butt-hurt Kobe fan with every post.
Of course, LeBron has the same advantages over Mike that he has over Kobe, so it's not at all surprising. The lame excuses for LeBron's superior production are exactly the same.
Considering how inaccurate you've been with statistics, I would doubt those numbers, but also considering how most nba players today can't make a wide open jumper than I'm not surprised scoring is down.
I actually disliked Jordan much more when he played than I do Lebron. I thought he was horrible to his teammates and coaches, I at least pity Lebron for being so soft. The difference between you and I is I've likely forgotten more basketball than you've ever learned and I'm not biased.
Keep posting videos exposing your nonsense? absolutely.
Kobe fan? :laugh2: I've never even mentioned Kobe in this thread. Keep reaching, buddy.
Oh, so that's the new excuse. Everyone shot like Ray Allen back in the '80s.
In this next video Lebron tries to combine football with basketball. Sadly, it still doesn't make him a better player than Jordan.
Good, diversify your argument. MJ was better at baseball and gambling too.
Just divert attention away from basketball ability and production. LeBron owns those comparisons.
The fact that you are getting more and more belligerent and using name calling as a way to argue shows you a) are immature b) that I'm under your skin and c) that your arguments carry no weight. So please continue to believe that a guy who quit on his team in the playoffs and who had to run away because he was soft is a better player than the one whom 99.9% of former players call the greatest. I noticed you've dropped your 2 earlier arguments with Pippen because you were exposed. Much easier to do thus when the other person is uneducated and resorts to name calling as a tool. Have a great day seething in your patents basement while making up poor arguments that include stats from an unfinished season and career. A career that does include LBJ aging yet.
I like to be informed when it comes to sports....ahem (try it Nav) so I was doing some research of Defensive trends over the years instead of seeing some random stat and taking it a given. The best analysis I found was actually on another message board talking about the same things...Defenses. It wasn't actually his analysis but a case study regarding the numbers. If you can't look at this objectively then you have issues. Hopefully I can get all the information on here. Everything below the link will be direct from this poster but I don't want to quote it and cut it off so I am citing his work. It may take a few posts so excuse the length. From poster Calabis
Sorry but I have to post this again from a old thread....its in black and white....why people defend this era of defense is beyond me, hell the guy who helped change the rules state how its easier for good, athletic wing players, how its easier to get off shots...why is this ignored??? How many times does it need to be posted??
Here are the reasons for the drop, not all this mythical garbage about great defenses from 98-04 and these so called great zones of today
Despite the dip in 3-point percentage, overall scoring is up this season. The league is scoring more than 200 points per game (200.01 to be precise) for the first time since the 1994-95 season. But that's more about pace than offensive efficiency. At 95.2 possessions per team per 48 minutes, this is the fastest pace the league has played at in the last 10 years. Efficiency is actually down from last season as the league is scoring 104.2 points per 100 possessions, down from 105.4 in 2008-09.
Along with the dip in 3-point percentage, the mid-range game continues to fade. The percentage of mid-range points (points not scored at the line, in the paint or beyond the arc) is down to just 20.6 percent. Points in the paint are higher than they've been since the league started tracking them in the 2000-01 season. Those baskets account for 41.7 percent of all points this season, up from 40.1 percent a year ago.(So much for this zone myth of keeping perimeter guys out of the lanes)
Scoring from the mid-range area isn't a trend that good offensive teams have. Chicago scores 26.9 percent of its points from mid-range and ranks 27th offensively. Detroit scores 26.6 percent of its points from mid-range and ranks 26th offensively. Dallas (25.2 percent, 10th) and Portland (24.9 percent, seventh) go against the grain, thanks to the shooting of Dirk Nowitzki and LaMarcus Aldridge.
Article from 2004: We'll begin with playing slower, which teams have become a little too good at during the David Stern era. In '84-85, the average NBA team used 104.8 possessions in a 48-minute game. By last year, the league had come to a screeching halt, using just 92.0 possessions per game. NBA teams have nearly 13 chances a game fewer than they did two decades ago. In other words, the biggest reason for the 17-point decrease in scoring isn't due to bad shooting, bad passing, changes in officiating or even the oft-cited increase in high-school aged kids entering the league. The main reason that offense has declined so much is because teams have stopped running. The change in pace alone accounts for 76.2 percent of the decline in scoring since '84-85. If the league reverted to the same pace it played at two decades ago, teams would average about 106.7 points a game.
While a slower pace is the main culprit in lower scores, that doesn't let offenses off the hook. Regardless of the speed with which the game is played, teams have become less efficient on the offensive end. In fact, even after we adjust for the fewer number of possessions teams use, there's still a 4.1 points-per-game difference that results from teams getting less out of each trip down the floor. This is noteworthy since the increased use of the 3-pointer should have produced the opposite effect.
1984-85 2003-04 Change
Points per game 110.8 93.4 -17.4
Possessions/game 104.8 92.0 -12.8
Points/possession 1.05 1.01 -.04
Field-goal pct. 49.1 43.9 -5.2
Free-throw pct. 76.4 75.2 -1.2
3-point pct. 28.1 34.7 +6.6
Off. Rebound pct. 32.9 28.7 -4.2
FTA/FGA .330 .303 -.207
Turnovers/possession .169 .154 -.015
Offenses are actually quite a bit better than those of the past when it comes to holding onto the ball. Teams turned the ball over on 16.9 percent of their possessions two decades ago, but did so just 15.4 percent of the time in '03-04. Since teams score about 1.2 points on each possession without a turnover, the difference adds about 1.9 points per game to offenses. The cause of the turnover decline is no mystery -- with teams running less, they have fewer chances for open-court miscues.
But those gains are exactly offset by a decline in offensive rebounding. In '84-85, offenses grabbed the board on 32.9 percent of missed shots, but by '03-04 that had declined to 28.7 percent. That difference has cost offenses 2.0 points per game, and it probably results from 3-point shooters being spaced too far away from the basket to have a prayer of getting an offensive board.
However, that still leaves the lion's share of the responsibility in decreased offensive efficiency at the doorstep of a common complaint: Declining shooting. Since '84-85, field-goal percentages have sunk roughly in proportion to Billy Squier's albums sales, from 49.1 percent to 43.9 percent last season. Sharp minds in the audience will quickly note that the 3-pointer is a much more prevalent part of modern offenses (teams try more than five times as many as they did two decades ago), so we should expect field-goal percentages to be lower in return for the greater payoff. Yet even allowing for the rise of the 3-pointer, shooting is still in the dumpster. Teams averaged 0.99 points for each field-goal attempt in 1984-85, but just 0.94 last season. That five-hundreths of a percentage point difference is enough to subtract 2.9 points a game from offenses.
That goes to underscore that the 3-pointer has, on balance, not had much of an effect. On the one hand, players shoot the long bomb much more accurately than twenty years ago -- improving from 28.1 percent to 34.7 percent -- which has added 1.9 points per game to scoring.
But there's a hidden cost to all of those 3s. Because they're bombing away instead of going to the rim, teams are getting to the line much less often. Teams took 0.33 free-throws per field-goal attempt back then, but only 0.30 last season, a change that cost teams about 1.7 points a game -- giving back nearly all of the difference from the increase in 3-point accuracy.
Our study tells us two things about the state of scoring. First, pace is a much bigger factor than the decline in offensive efficiency. Second, the main cause of the dip in efficiency is the sharp drop in 2-point field-goal percentage.
Article from 2001: In addition, the typical player nowadays generally dedicates more time to weight training, perhaps to the detriment of additional shooting drills. And never since the NBA added its 3-point line back in 1979-'80 have treys been hoisted more frequently by more pedestrian shooters, driving down shooting accuracy league-wide. Perhaps the best evidence of this is that Boston's Antoine Walker -- a post-up forward to be sure -- has attempted more three-pointers this season (196) than all but two players in the entire league.[/FONT]
Also factoring into the decline in offensive output is the increase in college underclassmen -- many of whom arrive at the "Next Level" ill-prepared with solid basketball foundations. In the five NBA Drafts between 1986 and 1990, 58 underclassmen declared themselves eligible. In the NBA Drafts from 1996 to 2000, the number rose to 153. Perhaps not coincidentally, three of the four-worst league-wide shooting seasons in history occurred in this span.
From a Laker Blog: The NBA will never admit to it publically, but zone defense was primarily legalized to contain Shaquille O'neal. Shaquille simply could not be guarded by one man, it was just not possible. It's a lopsided mismatch regardless of whoever is guarding him. Add Kobe Bryant to that team and it is plain to see that the league would be dominated for a long time to come. Therefor, in order to even out the playing field, the league legalized zone defense.
Yet since 2004 Shaq shot 60+ percent 5 times, 59 2 times, prior to this his high was .599 one time(Zone didn't stop Shaq's efficiency)
Zone Myth...as of Dec 22, 2005
Here's a look at the NBA's top five in scoring points in the paint (through Tuesday)
1. Tony Parker, Spurs 328
2. Tim Duncan, Spurs 322
3. Dwyane Wade, Heat 316
4. LeBron James, Cavs 304
5. Allen Iverson, Sixers 298
Source: Elias Sports Bureau
The other myth of taller and longer players
SURVEY OF HEIGHT, WEIGHT, AGE AND EXPERIENCE SINCE 1985
Team Height Weight Age Exp.
]1985-86 6’ 7.36” 214.40 26.72 3.85
1986-87 6’ 7.62” 215.46 26.53 3.83
1987-88 6’ 7.38” 215.61 27.01 4.10
1988-89 6’ 7.31” 215.58 26.92 4.01
1989-90 6’ 7.09” 214.82 26.79 3.95
1990-91 6’ 7.16” 216.16 27.01 4.08
1991-92 6’﻿ 7.04” 216.47 27.09 4.20
1992-93 6’ 7.06” 219.86 27.19 4.15
1993-94 6’ 7.34” 221.68 27.26 4.28
1994-95 6’ 7.19” 221.50 27.43 4.56
1995-96 6’﻿ 7.27” 223.66 27.56 4.42
1996-97 6’ 7.20” 223.67 27.74 4.63
1997-98 6’ 7.11” 222.95 27.82 4.82
1998-99 6’ 7.10” 222.85 27.82 4.81
1999-00 6’ 7.26” 224.68 27.95 5.20
2000-01 6’ 7.03” 223.47 27.75 5.01
2001-02 6’ 7.26” 224.05 27.47 4.82
2002-03 6’ 7.40” 225.40 27.34 4.73
2003-04 6' 7.31" 225.45 27.22 4.76
2004-05 6' 7.26" 224.29 27.03 4.61
2004 Rule Changes
NBA.com: Since the hand-checking rule was interpreted differently beginning in the 2004-05 season, the game has opened up. Players are penetrating and the floor is spread. As a result, scoring has risen every season. Was this anticipated back in 2004?
SJ: No. The scoring increase was not our goal. Our objective was to allow for more offensive freedom by not allowing defenders to hand-, forearm- or body-check ball handlers. By doing so, we encouraged more dribble penetration. As players penetrated more, it produced higher quality shots for the ball handler as well as shots for teammates on passes back out to perimeter. When NBA players get higher quality shots -- having more time to shoot -- they tend to make more of them.[/FONT]
NBA.com: Shooting percentages have risen since 2004-05 regardless of location -- at-the-rim shots, short- and deep-mid range and 3-pointers. Does this surprise you, especially the higher percentages from 3-point range?
SJ: It doesn't. With the rule and interpretation changes, it has become more difficult for defenders to defend penetration, cover the entire floor on defensive rotations and recover to shooters. This has provided more time for shooters to ready themselves for quality shots. With more dribble penetration, ball handlers are getting more opportunities at the rim. Additionally, teams now realize the 3-point shot is a great competitive equalizer, so they are taking more; they have improved their skill level on threes and are making them at a higher rate.
You also remember when NBA rules expert Rod Thorn said this after the handchecking rule was changed and the defensive 3 second rule:"It's more difficult now to guard the quick wing player who can handle the ball," Thorn said of the change. "I think it helps skilled players over someone who just has strength or toughness. What the NBA is trying to do is promote unimpeded movement for dribblers or cutters."
[.....Hmmm so somehow they made it tougher to play defense, but its much harder to shoot today
Zone doesn't keep anyone out of lanes
460 pts on layups/dunks
572 pts inside 10 ft
862 pts inside of 15 ft
439 pts from the FT line.
Total: 669 pts outside 15+ ft < 1,301 pts INSIDE 15 ft or the FT line.
That means 66% (2/3 of his pts) came inside of 15 ft & the FT line LOL!!
Carmelo (the alleged pure jump shooter) scored:
652 pts on dunks/layups
736 pts inside 10 ft
864 pts inside 15 ft
508 pts from the FT line
571 pts outside 15 f
Total: 1,372 of his total pts came inside 15 ft or the FT line (71% of his total pts)
D-Wade (who doesn't even have MJ's post game or jumper) scored:
762 pts on dunks/layups
894 pts inside 10 ft
996 pts inside 15 ft
534 pts from the FT line
515 pts from outside 15 ft
Total: 1,530 of his total pts came inside 15 ft or from the FT line (75% of his total pts)
I mean it's ridiculous how these new rules have made SO EASY for these guys to score inside..Tony Parker (a 6'1 pt guard) has led the league in pts scored in the paint TWICE!!
Tyriq Evans (a rookie in 2010) scored 714 pts on layups/dunks (84% of his total pts)
Durant scored 602 pts on layups/dunks (70% of his total pts)
LBJ scored 754 pts on layups/dunks (68% of his total pts)
Brandon Roy scored 346 pts on layups/dunks (63% of his total pts)
Joe Johnson scored 324 pts on layups/dunks (42% of his total pts)
I mean the list of wing players scoring big time pts INSIDE 10-15 ft in tody's game is endless...
Darren Williams scored:
392 pts on layups/dunks
486 pts inside 10 ft
528 inside 15 ft
335 pts from the FT line
556 pts from outside 15 ft
Total: 863 of his total pts came INSIDE 15 ft or the FT line (61% of his total pts)
Dirk Nowitzki (not a great athlete & terrible foot speed) scored:
328 pts on layups/dunks
416 pts inside 10 ft
718 pts inside 15 ft
536 pts from the FT line
773 pts outside 15 ft
Total: 1,254 of his total pts came INSIDE 15 ft or the FT line (62% of his total pts)
also after 2004 rulechanges: the leagues top 10 scorers scored 23% more points than the year before and saw a 4% field goal increase
As much as these young guys act like handchecking is some myth that was useless on defense[/FONT] http://hoopsapedia.webs.com/mj50ppgtoday.htm
Joe Johnson's response when asked about the handchecking rules in the summer of 2010: "It benefits me," said Joe Johnson, one of three players (Mike Bibby and Jamal Crawford are the others) on the Hawks' roster who have averaged 20 or more points in a season. "It definitely changes the game because it gives every guy that extra step. "If we could hand check now, the game would be totally different," Johnson said. "If they couldn't hand check back in the day, there are some guys that would have been even better than they were. It would have been nuts for some of the big-time scorers and perimeter players from the 1980s and 1990s. Can you imagine what [Michael] Jordan would have done in a league where you couldn't hand check."[/FONT]
Question for Clyde Drexler:
In the current league where there is no hand checking and no ruff play how much better would your numbers be?
Clyde Drexler: Oh, tremendously better, from shooting percentage to points per game everything would be up, and our old teams would score a lot more points, and that is saying something because we could score a lot back then. I do think there should be an asterisk next to some of these scoring leaders, because it is much different trying to score with a forearm in your face. It is harder to score with that resistance. You had to turn your back on guys defending you back in the day with all the hand checking that was going on. For guys who penetrate these days, it's hunting season. Yes, now you can play (floating)zone(legally), but teams rarely do.[/FONT]
Hall of Famer Rick Barry, a keen observer of the game, said he would love to see players of the past getting to attack the basket under the new officiating. "They'd score a lot more," he said.
"The defensive rules, the hand checking, the ability to make contact on a guy in certain areas .... [have] all been taken away from the game. If Kobe could get 81, I think Michael could get 100 in today's game."- Scottie Pippen January 2006
Tex Winter said. "Players today can get to the basket individually much easier."
Asked if he could defend Jordan under today's interpretation of the rules, Dumars first laughed, "It would have been virtually impossible to defend Michael Jordan based on the way the game's being called right now."[/FONT]
"The game has changed big-time,” said Dallas point guard Jason Kidd . "When I came in you could hand check and hold a little bit. You could definitely be more physical with the ball-handler[/FONT]
Funny how so many people still involved in today's game keep mentioning handchecking...also I thought a very good example of past era defense was Game 1 of Bulls/Heat series....Heat complained of all the body bumping and handchecking the Bulls got away with against Lebron and Wade...they didn't fair so well offensively, they did when the refs decided to take that physical defensive play away from the Bulls perimeter defenders.[/FONT]
Last but not least, 6 DPOY Perimeter (2 of them winning it twice), Legit bigs inside the paint
What you just posted means there were more smart, quality players in 79-89 vs teams that can't run offenses and that suck now. You made my point? Did you ever think that team just aren't good now and that quality IQ players are gone? No, because that would take rational thought about how basketball is played. Look at the posts I just put up. If you can even make up anything that says anything in it is wrong you are full of it. But I'm sure HOF player quotes like Drexler, Dumars, Rick Barry, Pippen(again) and Tex Winter (one of the top offensive minds) just don't know what they are talking about. Please stop. You are now not just embarrassing yourself, your embarrassing your Mom upstairs and the Dad you might have that should have taught you basketball.
And to add to the Height and Weight quotes above...they are actually going down from that last poll
2005-2006 6' 7.18" 223.08
2006-2007 6' 6.3" 221.55
2007-2008 6' 6.98" 221.00
In fact this article in 2012 shows players are shrinking...not getting longer and bigger. Please stop
I found the comments from HOF players as well as current player Joe Johnson about handchecking very enlightening. Thanks for posting that, HoustonFrog.
No problem. There were a lot of good debates out there but this one seemed to hit the nail on the head and backed it up well. I also thought the stats about guys getting to the paint was really huge. Even with zones guys are able to exploit it. Add that there is no physical play/hand checking, etc and guys have an open court. The scoring has gone down and all because of sloppy play and a watered down product more than better defenses. Watch any video of the Knicks or Pistons awhile back and it is nothing like the game now. That is just reality and the above stats show that.
Thought you were done, O-T! Twice!
Who's under whose skin again?
The league's shrinking? They're still bigger than they were in the '80s, O-T! Looks like the average player's still about 7 lbs heavier than they were back then. And that doesn't even take into account the athleticism.
But your distraction attempts and excuse-making are still hilarious, O-T. Welcome back again!
No physical play!!!!!
No I didn't, because that's a mind-numbingly stupid conclusion to jump to. The game is different, but that doesn't mean it's "worse" or that players are stupid now.
Your midlife crisis is really pathetic. The '80s are over and there's a slew of great players and great teams in the league nowadays.
LeBron would eat people up in the '80s just like he does nowadays. Want a more physical game? Bring it on. If you want to get physical with LeBron, he's got Karl Malone's build to get physical right back with you.
In a league where the average player is smaller and less athletic than they are now.
Only in your sad little existence is 6'6" 215 lbs better able to deal with physical play than 6'8" 260 lbs.
Try and guard someone who's built like Karl Malone but 10x more versatile, Mike! You can hand-check him... but he can hand-check you too.
If I'm better than you at poker, blackjack, solitaire, and bridge, then that means I'm a better card player than you are. Pretty simple concept.
LeBron of 2013 scores more efficiently, passes better, rebounds better, and defends more positions than Mike did. That means he's better at basketball than Mike was.
Pretty telling that you can't simply stick to Player A's basketball repertoire vs Player B's basketball repertoire. It's because you know Mike simply can't match up in the basketball department.
So go ahead and give us another biased history lesson on the evolution of the game, O-T. Or how about another dig at LeBron for leaving the Cavs while ignoring the fact that MJ couldn't win crap until he got a great supporting cast?
The excuses for LeBron's superiority are hilarious.