Question for the "We done with the 90's" people

[SHAQ32]

Knicks didn't have the shooting to compete with the teams today. Most teams didn't. That can't be a debate.

Outside shooting is only one part of the game.

Modern teams don’t have the size or the bodies to deal with the Knicks in the post, mid range, offensive or defensive boards

Why don't modern teams have the size?

Modern teams like to move players up a position on defense. They didn't do that back then. Guys that play center now don't have the height and weight to bang inside with the centers of the 90s for an entire game.

[Sedale Threatt]

Can the 90s fans point out how the talent in the NBA has decreased since the sport has become exponentially more popular? Seems weird.

The popularity of the NBA peaked in 1998 with the highest rated series of all time in the Finals. What popularity the league has had after is due mainly to Twitter, YouTube highlight packages and Inside the NBA with Charles Barkley. Ratings have gone down steadily since 1998.l since really nobody is gonna sit for 2:30 hours to watch a glorified 3 point shorting exhibition.

Aside from that it doesn’t seem so weird when the lone and best feeder system which was the NCAA which worked so well for many decades went down the crapper since the 2000’s in favor of AAU fundamentals deficient player development.

You know it’s bad when the soft Euros brag about how easy the NBA game is when compared to their leagues

The NBA set records for total attendance, average attendance, total sellouts and percentage of sellouts last season.

Outside of the NFL, pretty all TV ratings have tanked since then, sports or otherwise. Case example: The final episode of MASH was watched by more than 100 million people in the early 80s. Last year's largest audience for an episodic TV show was 17 million.

And last but not least, the NBA is about to double its media fee within a span of a decade, somewhere in the realm of $50 billion over 10 years.

In short, the NBA is doing exceptionally well right now, probably better than any non-NFL professional sports league in the world.

[BernteB]

it's funny if you consider the fact, that lebron james came into the nba the season after jordan retired for good, but still his stats look like as if he was in his prime. so what does that tell us about today's nba, which supposedly is packed with super skilled and athletic next generation players, if someone, who is, age wise, basically 90ies 2.0, still looks as good as he does?

Brons an anomaly freak, probably not gonna conclude much trying to generalize anything with him

yeah, makes totally, sense. the only explanation can be that he is some kind of super human.

wow....

[Sweet Meat Lew]

Ewing and Oakley could develop into a 3 point shooters, if that was the strategy. Nobody is getting ran out of the building. Just stop it.

Knicks didn't have the shooting to compete with the teams today. Most teams didn't. That can't be a debate.

Outside shooting is only one part of the game.

Modern teams don’t have the size or the bodies to deal with the Knicks in the post, mid range, offensive or defensive boards

Outside shooting is a huge part of the game today and last time I checked 3>2. That Knicks team gets murdered on the perimeter and those bodies are getting crushed in transition. Compare that Knicks team to this one and you will find all of your talking points are invalid.

[LakerLegend]

Knicks didn't have the shooting to compete with the teams today. Most teams didn't. That can't be a debate.

Outside shooting is only one part of the game.

Modern teams don’t have the size or the bodies to deal with the Knicks in the post, mid range, offensive or defensive boards

Outside shooting is a huge part of the game today and last time I checked 3>2. That Knicks team gets murdered on the perimeter and those bodies are getting crushed in transition. Compare that Knicks team to this one and you will find all of your talking points are invalid.

All of these small guards thriving today would get eaten up by that Knicks team if they played under old school rules.

[og15]

Outside shooting is only one part of the game.

Modern teams don’t have the size or the bodies to deal with the Knicks in the post, mid range, offensive or defensive boards

Outside shooting is a huge part of the game today and last time I checked 3>2. That Knicks team gets murdered on the perimeter and those bodies are getting crushed in transition. Compare that Knicks team to this one and you will find all of your talking points are invalid.

All of these small guards thriving today would get eaten up by that Knicks team if they played under old school rules.

These discussions just end up in these big generalizations and all encompassing statements when there's nuance. Lots of small guards were doing well in the 90's and before too, but suddenly small guards couldn't cut it. This is also even more odd because the NBA has actually cut out the truly "small" guard and there are very few guys 6'0 or under any more while they were able to at last get in a little bit more in the past (they have always been outliers).

Lots of players have shown the ability to adjust and fit into new changes in the league, others have not. There are last guys whose game at that time don't fit, but would adjust like Horford and Lopez, etc. But some people will act like any guy who wasn't taking 3's when he played can't even play in the current NBA when that's not even the reality for players now.

Here's the thing, if guys like Mark Price, Stockton and Kevin Johnson played in the modern NBA, people would be saying that if they played in some previous NBA they wouldn't be able to survive with all the physicality and would just be above average players.

Of course people will deny it now because then it doesn't fit the narrative and say, "no, they are different", "would never say that".

If Tiny Archibald was a 90's player, there would probably be some 70's fan saying "if this was the 70's a small guard like that wouldn't be able to do all this, he's get knocked down". Of course the real guy averaged 34/11 and played 46 mpg in 72/73 (he wouldn't do that in the 90's as pace is different and no one played 46 mpg, but whatever big season he had, they would say that).

It could at least be useful if these conversations were reasonable and not just these battles of bad no nuance arguments mixed with the "this is my favorite era, therefore it must be the best", "my favorite player of all time was from this era so I must prop it up", and "everything in the past sucks" posters.

[LakerLegend]

Outside shooting is a huge part of the game today and last time I checked 3>2. That Knicks team gets murdered on the perimeter and those bodies are getting crushed in transition. Compare that Knicks team to this one and you will find all of your talking points are invalid.

All of these small guards thriving today would get eaten up by that Knicks team if they played under old school rules.

These discussions just end up in these big generalizations and all encompassing statements when there's nuance. Lots of small guards were doing well in the 90's and before too, but suddenly small guards couldn't cut it. This is also even more odd because the NBA has actually cut out the truly "small" guard and there are very few guys 6'0 or under any more while they were able to at last get in a little bit more in the past (they have always been outliers).

Lots of players have shown the ability to adjust and fit into new changes in the league, others have not. There are last guys whose game at that time don't fit, but would adjust like Horford and Lopez, etc. But some people will act like any guy who wasn't taking 3's when he played can't even play in the current NBA when that's not even the reality for players now.

Here's the thing, if guys like Mark Price, Stockton and Kevin Johnson played in the modern NBA, people would be saying that if they played in some previous NBA they wouldn't be able to survive with all the physicality and would just be above average players.

Of course people will deny it now because then it doesn't fit the narrative and say, "no, they are different", "would never say that".

If Tiny Archibald was a 90's player, there would probably be some 70's fan saying "if this was the 70's a small guard like that wouldn't be able to do all this, he's get knocked down". Of course the real guy averaged 34/11 and played 46 mpg in 72/73 (he wouldn't do that in the 90's as pace is different and no one played 46 mpg, but whatever big season he had, they would say that).

It could at least be useful if these conversations were reasonable and not just these battles of bad no nuance arguments mixed with the "this is my favorite era, therefore it must be the best", "my favorite player of all time was from this era so I must prop it up", and "everything in the past sucks" posters.

Small guards could and did thrive back then too, but you didn't have a plethora of 6-2 guys scoring 30 night in and out like they do now.