Started By
Message

Teams were not as deep or talented in MJ’s era.

Posted on 5/31/18 at 9:08 am
Posted by _Hurricane_
Somewhere
Member since Feb 2016
4447 posts
Posted on 5/31/18 at 9:08 am
Am I right or wrong?
Posted by BCMCubs
Colorado
Member since Nov 2011
22146 posts
Posted on 5/31/18 at 9:09 am to
MJ is the greatest of all time.
No argument, no matter how rational, will ever change my mind
Posted by Zanzibaw
BR
Member since Jun 2016
2946 posts
Posted on 5/31/18 at 9:11 am to
How in the frick can you think people want to read another one of these threads?
Posted by lsupride87
Member since Dec 2007
94849 posts
Posted on 5/31/18 at 9:12 am to
Assuming the league does not add teams, pro sports will always get deeper. Population keeps going up, meaning there is a larger talent pool to pick from

That doesnt even take into account medical/nutritional evolution. It simply brings in the numbers
This post was edited on 5/31/18 at 9:13 am
Posted by _Hurricane_
Somewhere
Member since Feb 2016
4447 posts
Posted on 5/31/18 at 9:13 am to
Which I think adds to the argument that Lebron is better for being so dominant in a deeper league.
Posted by Walt OReilly
Poplarville, MS
Member since Oct 2005
124216 posts
Posted on 5/31/18 at 9:13 am to
Posted by Bunk Moreland
Member since Dec 2010
52995 posts
Posted on 5/31/18 at 9:14 am to
When you add franchises, it dilutes the talent pool. It's science.
Posted by lsupride87
Member since Dec 2007
94849 posts
Posted on 5/31/18 at 9:15 am to
quote:

When you add franchises, it dilutes the talent pool. It's science.


Correct

Which is why I said that
Posted by hoopsgalore
Chicago, IL
Member since Nov 2013
8635 posts
Posted on 5/31/18 at 9:15 am to
These threads are getting old.
Posted by lsupride87
Member since Dec 2007
94849 posts
Posted on 5/31/18 at 9:17 am to
For example though, in the 90s, mjs reign, the world had a population of 5.2 billion

In the 2010s, lebrons reign, the world population was 6.8 billion


That is an increase of 30% without increasing the teams in the NBA......


From sheer numbers it is impossible to even attempt the argument the league wouldnt get naturally deeper
Posted by bamaatlsu
Dallas
Member since Mar 2007
5068 posts
Posted on 5/31/18 at 9:18 am to
super teams also weren’t the cool thing to do, so yes teams at the top weren’t as deep.
Posted by lsupride87
Member since Dec 2007
94849 posts
Posted on 5/31/18 at 9:18 am to
quote:

super teams also weren’t the cool thing to do, so yes teams at the top weren’t as deep
Tell me what era the NBA didnt have super teams




Posted by GeauxTigerTM
Member since Sep 2006
30596 posts
Posted on 5/31/18 at 9:20 am to
quote:

Teams were not as deep or talented in MJ’s era.


It's just so impossible to compare eras like this. The game as played in both eras and the physical difference of both eras really makes this damn near impossible.

It's sometime hard to describe just how different the game is in 2018 as compared to 1995 or so. Watching teams jack up 40 3 point shots a game, while having virtually no mid range game and almost no actual centers or exclusive point guards is surreal at times.

I guess my point is that it depends what you mean. I think players today, like they are in literally every sport, are dominant physically almost across the board to their counterparts 20+ years ago and more so the further you go back. But...it depends what you mean by talent. If there are no centers who play the way guys like Shaq, or Hakeem, or David Robinson, or Kareem, etc did playing today because that is just not how the position is played, can it be said the center position is deeper? Or strictly point guards like Stockton or Isaiah?

There are obviously guys that could move from era to era and who you could imagine altering their game to fit in. It's easy to imagine a shooter like Reggie Miller being even more effective as a 3 point shooter today given a completely blank check and an offense geared to doing that almost exclusively. Likewise, there are times when I'd love to see a guy like LaBron playing a Karl Malone type offense, getting the ball on the block and backing and dominating in the paint.

I think the vast differences in the way the game is played keeps me from trying to compare guys so much and simply enjoy what they do within their own generation.
Posted by JRock99
Member since May 2018
160 posts
Posted on 5/31/18 at 9:27 am to
It only matters what you do vs your era....6-0 vs 3-5 in NBA finals. Check out MJ’s 91 roster and Pipoen’s stats. This team beat the back to back champion that had multiple HOF’s. #Noexcuses

Posted by monkeybutt
Member since Oct 2015
4583 posts
Posted on 5/31/18 at 9:30 am to
quote:

It only matters what you do vs your era....6-0 vs 3-5 in NBA finals. Check out MJ’s 91 roster and Pipoen’s stats. This team beat the back to back champion that had multiple HOF’s. #Noexcuses



quote:

JRock99

quote:

1 post


For fricks sake
Posted by VADawg
Wherever
Member since Nov 2011
44697 posts
Posted on 5/31/18 at 9:31 am to
quote:

MJ is the greatest of all time.
No argument, no matter how rational, will ever change my mind


Thanks for showing yourself as one of the nostalgics who shouldn't be taken seriously
Posted by VA LSU fan
Virginia
Member since Dec 2007
7872 posts
Posted on 5/31/18 at 9:34 am to
MJ played in a diluted league prior to a big European movement of players. There were a few but not many. That is why players like Sabonis and Kukoc stayed over seas for a few years prior to playing the the NBA.

Expansion happened within three to four years of each of th Bulls three peats.

MJ was a great player. Definitely top five with Lebron, Magic, Bird, and either Kareem or Russell. But his untouchable status was a product of Nike and ESPN.
Posted by GeauxTigerTM
Member since Sep 2006
30596 posts
Posted on 5/31/18 at 9:35 am to
quote:

It only matters what you do vs your era.


I think there are a few sports where comparing athletes/statistics is still somewhat possible...baseball being the one that comes to mind, and even that is really a stretch at this point given things like modern pitching rotations, changing strike zones, bats made of wood other than plain old ash, etc.

But in sports where you're expected to pluck a guy from 1985 and drop him on the court in 2018 and see if his body which was built for his own time and competition and his game which was built for the same thing can suddenly compete with guys built for today and whose game fits with today makes no real sense to me.

I don't think it's an insult to guys from the past to say that their modern counterparts are better pure athletes in most cases...with a handful of exceptions. But I think it does both a disservice to suggest that the former could never play today if the assumption is that they could not if they were suddenly dropped into a game as a 27 year old out of the blue instead of growing up with today's players and being part of their generation, just as it will be 25 years from now when someone points out that the NBA players of 2043 are better athletes than nearly everyone playing today.
Posted by Hoops
LA
Member since Jan 2013
6512 posts
Posted on 5/31/18 at 9:43 am to
Kirk Herbstreit put it best when asked to predict a score between USC that season and an undefeated team from decades ago. “USC wins but I’m not disrespecting an all time great team by predicting a score.” People need to stop attaching their own self worth to these players. Discussions are just for fun not to prove anything.
Posted by BCMCubs
Colorado
Member since Nov 2011
22146 posts
Posted on 5/31/18 at 9:43 am to
Shouldnt take me seriously on NBA. Ive watched maybe 5 games in the last 3 seasons.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 8Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram