- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Are NBA Players Getting Too Good? (YT Video)
Posted on 12/27/23 at 9:31 pm
Posted on 12/27/23 at 9:31 pm
LINK
Summary: NBA players, systems, and philosophies are just too good offensively these days, and this makes historical comparisons very difficult.
Even if you look at the terrible "Dead Ball Era" (about 1997-2016, when teams just intentionally ran a slow pace that artificially destroyed offensive stats), judging the basic efficiency, the current offense is miles better (so it's not just number of possessions). Historically, by pure pace, this era isn't an outlier (The Dead Ball Era is).
It's not just "muh no defense", either. Basically every aspect of offensive efficiency/skill is on another level from any other time. Efficiency is up, turnover % is down, EFG is up, 3PT is up, FT% is up (while # of FTs is down), etc. etc.
Look how putrid the halcyon Dead Ball Era was. Funny enough, their Turnover % was low, which isn't surprising b/c the entire reason their coaches promoted anti-offense was specifically to limit turnovers (I always compared it to football teams who "ran out the clock" instead of trying to actually play offense). I mean that FT% cannot be explained away with "defense was so much better". Look how simply unskilled that era was.
The next question is what defenses can do, and I don't think there is anything. Modern defense is already the most complicated it's ever been in the NBA and it can't keep up. The video doesn't get into details. I imagine the only thing that can be done is something drastic like eliminating the 3 point shot. Narrowing the lane defensively or just allowing pure zones would help eliminate one aspect of modern offense (drives to the rim).
I can only imagine how many fricking points teams would be scoring against the old Illegal Defense rules of the Dead Ball Era.
Look at that space
Now imagine advanced skillsets of the modern era and the isolation skills of elite players and think about how much abuse would occur.
ETA: Or we can listen to the stars of the era as to what defense was harder:
LINK
LINK
Summary: NBA players, systems, and philosophies are just too good offensively these days, and this makes historical comparisons very difficult.
Even if you look at the terrible "Dead Ball Era" (about 1997-2016, when teams just intentionally ran a slow pace that artificially destroyed offensive stats), judging the basic efficiency, the current offense is miles better (so it's not just number of possessions). Historically, by pure pace, this era isn't an outlier (The Dead Ball Era is).
It's not just "muh no defense", either. Basically every aspect of offensive efficiency/skill is on another level from any other time. Efficiency is up, turnover % is down, EFG is up, 3PT is up, FT% is up (while # of FTs is down), etc. etc.
Look how putrid the halcyon Dead Ball Era was. Funny enough, their Turnover % was low, which isn't surprising b/c the entire reason their coaches promoted anti-offense was specifically to limit turnovers (I always compared it to football teams who "ran out the clock" instead of trying to actually play offense). I mean that FT% cannot be explained away with "defense was so much better". Look how simply unskilled that era was.
The next question is what defenses can do, and I don't think there is anything. Modern defense is already the most complicated it's ever been in the NBA and it can't keep up. The video doesn't get into details. I imagine the only thing that can be done is something drastic like eliminating the 3 point shot. Narrowing the lane defensively or just allowing pure zones would help eliminate one aspect of modern offense (drives to the rim).
I can only imagine how many fricking points teams would be scoring against the old Illegal Defense rules of the Dead Ball Era.
Look at that space
Now imagine advanced skillsets of the modern era and the isolation skills of elite players and think about how much abuse would occur. ETA: Or we can listen to the stars of the era as to what defense was harder:
quote:
Michael Jordan- "I never liked zones," Jordan said. "I felt like that's a lazy way to play defense and with them, you can eliminate a lot of the stars making things happen."
LINK
quote:
Tracy McGrady- "To me, it's frustrating because I love to entertain. I mean, you play a zone on me like that and I don't know if you guys (media) realize that, or the fans realize that, but my job is real tough when a team zones up on us. I can't do anything."
quote:
KICKS: If you guys could change one rule in the League, what would it be?
KG: No zone.
TD: Yeah, the zone.
KG: If there was one rule I could change today, it would be the zone. Go back to the [looking down], Am I, am I, am I straddling the line?
Jess [Kersey]: “Hey, you’re on the line! Illegal defense, ’cause you…”
TD: Three seconds.
TM: That shite is stupid.
KICKS: Because it didn’t do what they thought it would do?
KG: I think it puts players that are really good at a disadvantage, so to speak. Everybody here gets double-teams, if not triple-teams, so we can all speak on this. But it sorta—I remember Phoenix sat somebody literally right there [in the lane].
TM: It makes it hard for a guy like me—
KG: —who penetrates.
TD: It makes it hard for all of us.
KG: All of us. Dog, Phoenix sat a person right here! Don’t you go nowhere, Bo Outlaw, you stay right here.
TM: Yeah, but you also got a guy like Troy Hudson who can shoot the ball, Wally can shoot the ball, you know what I’m sayin’? Y’all have guys that can create, for themselves. Me? [Shakes head]
KG: Not always. [Laughter all around]
TM: Me?
TD: You’re the best in the League, man, you do it all yourself. [More laughter]
TM: It’s tough on all of us, it really is. When you’re tryin’ to make a move, and you got another guy sittin’ right there on the same side just waitin’…
KG: Waitin’ on you!
TM: Just waitin’.
KG: He ain’t even playin’ his man!
TM: Nah, not at all.
KG: That’s where teammates are really, really important. Not only is there pressure on you to get them the ball, but the pressure’s on them to be productive and draw the defense.
LINK
This post was edited on 12/27/23 at 9:38 pm
7
Posted on 12/27/23 at 9:51 pm to SlowFlowPro
You’re right and great data but the Neanderthals that hate the NBA won’t read this and just say it was much better in the 90’s
Posted on 12/27/23 at 9:52 pm to SlowFlowPro
Coaching and individual overall player defense is down. Center/power forward post play is down. Rebounding and boxing out is down. On ball defense is down. Transition defense is almost nonexistent. Officiating is too far in favor of offense and scoring.
This post was edited on 12/28/23 at 4:26 am
Posted on 12/27/23 at 9:57 pm to Fus0623
quote:
You’re right and great data but the Neanderthals that hate the NBA won’t read this and just say it was much better in the 90’s
Basically. People will swear Charles Oakley would've looked just like Durant but the league was too tough then.
Posted on 12/27/23 at 9:58 pm to Fus0623
quote:It was.
and just say it was much better in the 90’s
Posted on 12/27/23 at 10:00 pm to Fus0623
quote:
You’re right and great data but the Neanderthals that hate the NBA won’t read this and just say it was much better in the 90’s
This data doesn't even support the conclusion he's trying to make.
How does data that offense is performing better counter an argument that offense is performing better because defense is performing worse when all offense is defended other than free throws.
And the data on free throws is going to be skewed because post players are getting less touches (and shaq probably brought down the league average himself lol).
Post players are getting less touches because perimeter play is inventivized by the state of defense.
This is an entire thread dedicated to what people already know.
Posted on 12/27/23 at 10:02 pm to BayouFann
quote:
Center/power forward post play is down.
Post play is inefficient, especially with modern defense.
The big men of today's game are so much more skilled than being post-only players. The post up game is easy, comparatively. No reason to think they can't do it, but there is just no logical reason to do it in the normal course of a normal game.
quote:
Coaching and individual overall player defense is down.
Based on what, exactly?
quote:
Rebounding and boxing out is down.
Rebounding has changed, philosophically. More and longer shots have made rebounds dangerous for the fastbreak. Again, it's inefficient to focus on this. It's not an ability/skill issue. It's a smart basketball issue.
quote:
On ball defense is down.
Again, based on what, exactly? I don't think the data backs you up here.
quote:
Transition definition is almost nonexistent.
Transition offense is just too good and efficient. You literally cannot defend a transition opportunity consistently when 4 or 5 guys can shoot the 3 and make FTs.
quote:
Officiating is too far in favor of offense and scoring.
FT rates are very low, historically.
What can officials do, exactly? Fouls are still fouls. Defense was made more expansive and technically is much more effective than the old model. Do you just expect refs to cheat and not call fouls or something?
Posted on 12/27/23 at 10:03 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
What can officials do, exactly? Fouls are still fouls.
Are you claiming how a game is officiated and how much contact merits a foul is black and white?
Posted on 12/27/23 at 10:06 pm to Fus0623
The league has intentionally shaped the rules to make playing defense harder. That along with the three point line creating more spacing makes it much easier as an offensive player.
This post was edited on 12/27/23 at 10:07 pm
Posted on 12/27/23 at 10:09 pm to Turbeauxdog
quote:
How does data that offense is performing better counter an argument that offense is performing better because defense is performing worse when all offense is defended other than free throws.
Because its performing better across the board AND against tougher defensive schemes.
Look at 3PT and FT rates. Turnover rates. Etc.
quote:
And the data on free throws is going to be skewed because post players are getting less touches
Big men can shoot FTs now.
Again, that's the skill gap. Big men can pass, shoot, hit FTs, and, often, dribble.
quote:
because perimeter play is inventivized by the state of defense.
Perimeter play is incentivized by math. Defense has to adjust to teams understanding basic math and ignoring coachspeak.
Other than basically prime Shaq (who would have severe issues at the end of games today defensively and due to his FTs), you can't justify that sort of offense. Remember, they almost changed the rules specifically to protect Shaq to ensure he was viable to end games.
Trying to run an offense via the post is about as smart as trying to take 20 seconds on offense to "get into your offensive set" only to rush a shot with the remaining 4 seconds.
Posted on 12/27/23 at 10:13 pm to Turbeauxdog
quote:
Are you claiming how a game is officiated and how much contact merits a foul is black and white?
Refs are typically pro-defense with this application, like how they unevenly call in favor of defense historically against Lebron driving or Zion driving.
What else can they do? Allow strikes to the face?
There isn't much they can do to stop 3 point shooting. Even there, they've made rule after rule to help the D (like the landing rule and shooters initiating contact for cheap FTs) since the Warriors' dynasty started.
When was the last major rule to hinder defense? Eliminating hand checking almost 20 years ago? They also paired that with pro-defense rules like allowing partial zone Ds, the 8 second clock, etc. It's been a steady stream of pro-defense rules since, for the most part (if not entirely) since then. Hand checking wasn't THAT effective.
Posted on 12/27/23 at 10:17 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Look at 3PT and FT rates. Turnover rates. Etc.
Again.
This data makes no argument in your favor
Posted on 12/27/23 at 10:21 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Eliminating hand checking almost 20 years ago?
You mean almost exactly when your ppg trend starts ramping up?
Thanks.
Posted on 12/27/23 at 10:23 pm to Turbeauxdog
quote:
You mean almost exactly when your ppg trend starts ramping up?
So hand checking is what caused coaches to play slower?
You know it existed outside of the Dead Ball Era, right?
This post was edited on 12/27/23 at 10:23 pm
Posted on 12/27/23 at 10:24 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Perimeter play is incentivized by math.
By analytics, skill levels, and structural changes in what is allowed by defenses.
You know it can be true that offense is better and defense is worse (or severely hampered by rules), right?
Posted on 12/27/23 at 10:24 pm to Turbeauxdog
quote:
This data makes no argument in your favor
So players doing better statistically on offense against tougher defense isn't a favorable argument?
Also, how is FT% not agnostic entirely to defense? Big men still exist. I am still waiting to hear how big men being more skilled doesn't show that big men are more skilled.
Posted on 12/27/23 at 10:25 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
So hand checking is what caused coaches to play slower? You know it existed outside of the Dead Ball Era, right?
Theres literally no coherency here.
Posted on 12/27/23 at 10:30 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
against tougher defense isn't a favorable argument?
Where is your data for this?
Posted on 12/27/23 at 10:31 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Also, how is FT% not agnostic entirely to defense?
I said it was, what's your point?
Posted on 12/27/23 at 10:31 pm to Turbeauxdog
quote:
By analytics, skill levels, and structural changes in what is allowed by defenses.
No, by math.
Take your top 10 centers from the Dead Ball Era or the high-flying, no defense 80s preceding it. Look at what comparable 3point rate is necessary to compete with their FG%. When you go to total eFG (considering the likely FT% drop), it gets even worse.
quote:
You know it can be true that offense is better and defense is worse (or severely hampered by rules), right?
Sure it's theoretically possible, but the data doesn't back this up.
There is one statistical outlier, and it's the Dead Ball Era. The reason this era was an outlier was due to pace, which was a coaching/style philosophy. Holding the ball on offense until the end of the shot clock certainly does not make a defense better.
If it was a pure "defense worse" scenario, then you must also argue that more efficient choices somehow has minimal or no effect. Explain to me how shooting better, turning the ball over less, and taking smarter shots changes the defense. Look at 3PA for the easiest example, both because of the efficiency and the inability of defense to really stop them. What is the trend in 3PA the past 10 years? Now, you have to explain how this means defenses are getting worse when you see such a poignant statistical shift. If it was a simple case of "defense worse", then you wouldn't need this efficiency shift and you could run dino offense. This menas you'd have a MUCH higher expected offensive output.
Bad D + Dino offense = better scoring (like we see)
Bad D + Smart offense = same offense we see today?
This post was edited on 12/27/23 at 10:32 pm
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News