Support NeoGAF

[FullMetalx117]

They weren't weak teams, it's just that Showtime, The Celts, and Bad Boys were just that good. Sure, those teams were definitely older in the early to mid 90s, but still really good. You used to be able to get away with murder in the NBA, now they are ticky tack on everything and allow Patrick Ewing style walks now more than ever.

Teams aside, there were also more all-time great players back then. You simply don't have that level of depth in today's game and across multiple positions. There were a lot more very good to great centers in that era as well. There isn't even a "The Round Mound" type of player in today's game. It was a different and lot more challenging era then.

This is not true. The centers in those eras would get torched by the 3 point shot today, many of them may even become unplayable. I agree we should appreciate the historic greatness but the modern NBA player today is found in kindergarden, has a team of trainers around them, taking care of nutrition early, working out early, basically becoming superhuman by the time they're 19. And that's the vast majority of players today. Back then, you legit had plumbers as your 6th man. Objectively speaking, just with all the training and money involved, you have better players/athletes today.

 

[zcaa0g]

This is not true. The centers in those eras would get torched by the 3 point shot today, many of them may even become unplayable. I agree we should appreciate the historic greatness but the modern NBA player today is found in kindergarden, has a team of trainers around them, taking care of nutrition early, working out early, basically becoming superhuman by the time they're 19. And that's the vast majority of players today. Back then, you legit had plumbers as your 6th man. Objectively speaking, just with all the training and money involved, you have better players/athletes today.

What you say definitely applies to today's football players in terms of size and physical development, but that does not apply to today's basketball players. There's been no monumental change there physically.

 

[AlteredForms]

Just fighting fire with fire. Your nonsense deserves nonsense. 10-0

I'm detecting salty tears pouring from those yellow eyes Bender. Don't worry, 7-1 is still a remarkable achievement,

 

[bender]

I'm detecting salty tears pouring from those yellow eyes Bender. Don't worry, 7-1 is still a remarkable achievement,

Your detecting is as good as your reasoning. It is foolish to talk about hypotheticals in a definitive fashion. If they didn't lace 'em up, there is no way to know.

 

[AlteredForms]

Your detecting is as good as your reasoning. It is foolish to talk about hypotheticals in a definitive fashion. If they didn't lace 'em up, there is no way to know.

That's a lazy argument as we can take all things into consideration to form a solid (but not absolute) outcome. I think Houston wins against the Bulls in 1995 with or without Jordan. Look at the competition they had to deal with in the playoffs. Utah Jazz, Phoenix Suns, San Antonio and sweeping the Orlando Magic. According to analytics it's the toughest and most improbable NBA Championship run of all time.

 

[bender]

That's a lazy argument as we can take all things into consideration to form a solid (but not absolute) outcome. I think Houston wins against the Bulls in 1995 with or without Jordan. Look at the competition they had to deal with in the playoffs. Utah Jazz, Phoenix Suns, San Antonio and sweeping the Orlando Magic. According to analytics it's the toughest and most improbable NBA Championship run of all time.

Your arguments were pretty lazy until this post so I responded in kind. It's find to hold the belief, but there are no certainties. Analytics are great, they aren't the end all be all and are best used in combination with your eyes. Either can lie, both usually don't in concert. I'd also not bet against Jordan and that has little to do with being a fanboy. My loyalties are in Dallas seeing as I grew up there and my fanboy'ing starts and stops with Dirk, but even I'm realistic about his place in the pantheon. And to that, I'd say the 2011 Mavs are the toughest and most improbable of all time Portland (even had time machine game from Brandon Roy) -> Lakers (defending champs) -> OKC (KD, Harden, Westbrook) -> Heatles.

 

[AlteredForms]

Your arguments were pretty lazy until this post so I responded in kind. It's find to hold the belief, but there are no certainties. Analytics are great, they aren't the end all be all and are best used in combination with your eyes. Either can lie, both usually don't in concert. I'd also not bet against Jordan and that has little to do with being a fanboy. My loyalties are in Dallas seeing as I grew up there and my fanboy'ing starts and stops with Dirk, but even I'm realistic about his place in the pantheon. And to that, I'd say the 2011 Mavs are the toughest and most improbable of all time Portland (even had time machine game from Brandon Roy) -> Lakers (defending champs) -> OKC (KD, Harden, Westbrook) -> Heatles.

You responded like a robot and called my arguments lazy? Makes sense I suppose, but I stand behind my explanation. You said not to bet against Jordan but even he was losing in his prime to the Celtics and Pistons, because it's a team game fool. No one individual can carry a team without decent production from his peers, that's why Jordan loses in the 95 NBA Finals, because his team had holes and lost to Orlando as a result.

As for the toughest and most improbable run, I still have to give the edge to 95 Houston Rockets. They beat Utah with Stockton and Malone who won 60 games coached by Jerry Sloane. A Phoenix Suns team who went to the 1993 NBA Finals with Charles Barkley (who won MVP), Kevin Johnson and Dan Majerle. How about beating another 60 win team in San Antonio Spurs with MVP David Robinson and Dennis Rodman, then sweeping the Orlando Magic with prime Shaq and Penny Hardaway? Add the fact that the sport was more physical and Hakeem had only one All-Star in Clyde Drexler wins it for me.

The resume speaks for itself, I would give the 2011 Mavs a solid 2nd place.

 

[bender]

You responded like a robot and called my arguments lazy? Makes sense I suppose, but I stand behind my explanation. You said not to bet against Jordan but even he was losing in his prime to the Celtics and Pistons, because it's a team game fool. No one individual can carry a team without decent production from his peers, that's why Jordan loses in the 95 NBA Finals, because his team had holes and lost to Orlando as a result.

As for the toughest and most improbable run, I still have to give the edge to 95 Houston Rockets. They beat Utah with Stockton and Malone who won 60 games coached by Jerry Sloane. A Phoenix Suns team who went to the 1993 NBA Finals with Charles Barkley (who won MVP), Kevin Johnson and Dan Majerle. How about beating another 60 win team in San Antonio Spurs with MVP David Robinson and Dennis Rodman, then sweeping the Orlando Magic with prime Shaq and Penny Hardaway? Add the fact that the sport was more physical and Hakeem had only one All-Star in Clyde Drexler wins it for me.

The resume speaks for itself, I would give the 2011 Mavs a solid 2nd place.

I responded to the ridiculousness of talking about hypotheticals as an absolute in kind, if that makes me a robot then beep bloop beep. No shit it is a team game, "fool". Jordan was only really great teams. No one denies that.

Spurs with Robinson and Rodman doesn't bolster the resume of that Rockets team. Robinson is super overrated and caught feelings because of The Worm's popularity in SA. He's the reason Dennis ended up on the Bulls. But, I have my biases towards Dirk and the Mavs so I'm not impartial. Their Portland series wasn't all that impressive and some of those loses lead to the "same old Mavs" narrative. No one believed in that team.

 

[AlteredForms]

I responded to the ridiculousness of talking about hypotheticals as an absolute in kind, if that makes me a robot then beep bloop beep. No shit it is a team game, "fool". Jordan was only really great teams. No one denies that.

Spurs with Robinson and Rodman doesn't bolster the resume of that Rockets team. Robinson is super overrated and caught feelings because of The Worm's popularity in SA. He's the reason Dennis ended up on the Bulls. But, I have my biases towards Dirk and the Mavs so I'm not impartial. Their Portland series wasn't all that impressive and some of those loses lead to the "same old Mavs" narrative. No one believed in that team.

I made a proposition based upon the evidence, I never said anything about absolute results, I thought that was obvious. As for the Spurs, they won 60 games that season in a tough Western Conference. David Robison is a HOF and of the NBA's 75 Greatest Players, how is he "super overrated" when he has the resume? Unless of course you're claiming Tim Duncan saved him which is absolute BS as Robinson and Popovich made Duncan into what he was.

 

[bender]

Tim Duncan saved him which is absolute BS as Robinson and Popovich made Duncan into what he was.

 

[Morrie’s wig shop]

Yeah, congratulations dudes a phenomenal player but he’s pushing 40 with no breaks of course he was gonna break it at some point……
Because of my age it is mandatory that Jordan will always be the GOAT for me.

 

[Ribi]

Fuck lebron that diva bitch. And I'll say the same thing I said that got me banned here back in the day. Hope someone on the court slaps him

 

[Xenon]

You have to be pretty hard pressed to not to respect all LeBron has accomplished. Yet I still am able to do just that, FLJ!

Spoiler: .

I will give him a nod for beating GS and getting Cleveland their title, that was pretty cool.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

What you say definitely applies to today's football players in terms of size and physical development, but that does not apply to today's basketball players. There's been no monumental change there physically.

NBA players are definitely more skilled, faster and fit. Just about all of them look like they work out everyday. Not like that back in the day.

A lot of big men now (especially European players) are good shooters and passers. Centres used to be all rebounders and their baskets would be within a 10 ft radius..

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Great player, but it did help that he started playing in the NBA after kindergarten to get this record if you know what I mean. Plus the competition in the NBA was far greater in the 80s and 90s than in the 2000s and 2010s. You had several greatest of all time at their positions or Top 10 best NBA players ever in that era. That's not the case today. His Airness will always be #1 of course.

NBA draws from a much larger talent pool today than it did in Jordan's era. Players are much better today.