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

Moderators: KingDavid, bwgood77, zimpy27, cupcakesnake, Domejandro, infinite11285, Harry Garris, ken6199, Dirk, bisme37

bledredwine
RealGM
Posts: 12,425
And1: 4,049
Joined: Sep 17, 2010
   

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

Post#41 » by bledredwine » Wed May 1, 2024 10:20 pm

tsherkin wrote:
bledredwine wrote:No chance. He was too skilled, regardless. He was an athlete and he'd find a way to score, especially in this zero defense beat-one-man to get a layup era.


Absolutely not. He was trash-garbage and would remain so in this era.

Lebron is sub 40% beyond 3 feet. Didn't stop him from scoring 30 per game. Actually, he's been trash beyond 3 feet, and below average from 3. Athleticism matters.


Yeah but he was an athletic marvel with a slashing game who was a better FT shooter than Baker AND developed a 3, AND had a post game. That's not a sensible comparison.

I get it if you're trying to use this as parody for other arguments made, but man. Vin Baker. What a cheese-dong.


Couldn't disagree more. There are so many players now that would be role players in the 90s, just benefitting from free space. It's like a glorified pick up game, the way it's played now. Team Popovich.


Funny how cross era players like T Mac, KG etc all call the 90s a "stacked" era instead of the current era. The top contenders don't even have more than one legit star.

How many do you genuinely believe will usurp any of Jordan, Hakeem, Robinson, Shaq, Barkley, Malone, Stockton, and so many clear top 50 players?

And why did the Jazz state that Stockton was still owning them on the court just last year? 90s was a stacked era.

You also think that just ONE or TWO players cross era would have dominated the 90s. But nope.... they all went on to dominate the 00s or later.
https://undisputedgoat.medium.com/jordan-in-the-clutch-30f6e7ed4c43
LBJ clutch- 19 of 104 career: https://www.yardbarker.com/nba/articles/lebron_james_has_only_made_19_of_107_shots_in_clutch_situation_during_his_career_178_fg_125_from_3_pointers/s1_16751_38344895
tsherkin
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 79,246
And1: 20,670
Joined: Oct 14, 2003
 

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

Post#42 » by tsherkin » Wed May 1, 2024 10:23 pm

bledredwine wrote:Funny how cross era players like T Mac, KG etc all call the 90s a "stacked" era instead of the current era.


T Mac hasn't said much of anything intelligent about basketball since he started doing commentary, so I don't know if he's the guy you want to look to as a marker for anything. Having played doesn't itself make someone worth listening to.

Yes, the environment is different, but Baker for example was a sub-40% shooter on close shots, had no range to speak of and blew chunks at the line... and he wasn't much of a slasher. That was not a dude who would thrive today. He's a horrifically bad example for someone who could be a star today. That's a dreadful, dreadful call.
LockoutSeason
Ballboy
Posts: 34
And1: 33
Joined: Feb 28, 2024

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

Post#43 » by LockoutSeason » Wed May 1, 2024 10:25 pm

Today’s stars are physically and mentally tougher than ‘90s players. They’d laugh at this.
User avatar
Raps in 4
RealGM
Posts: 62,080
And1: 54,803
Joined: Nov 01, 2008
Location: Toronto
 

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

Post#44 » by Raps in 4 » Wed May 1, 2024 10:35 pm

Jokic would average 5/5/5 in the 90s. Steph would be playing in China. LeBron would be a top-50 player, at best.
bledredwine
RealGM
Posts: 12,425
And1: 4,049
Joined: Sep 17, 2010
   

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

Post#45 » by bledredwine » Wed May 1, 2024 10:36 pm

Here are some more b-list 90s players who could dominate today.








Go ahead and list the top 20 now. They'll look pretty bad compared to the 90s top 20! Especially top 30.
And when it comes to athleticism? Not remotely close to this group, especially in strength.
Do you really think that there are 10+ players now who could crack the top 50 of all time like we had then? No chance.

Oh and if talking defense, forget about it. Today's stars are terrible on that end.

Michael Jordan
Hakeem Olajuwon
Shaquille O'Neal
Clyde Drexler
Charles Barkley
Patrick Ewing
David Robinson
Shawn Kemp
Gary Payton
Mitch Richmond
Dominique Wilkins
Penny Hardaway
Grant Hill
John Stockton
Scottie Pippen
Reggie Miller
Alonzo Mourning
Chris Mullin
Tim Hardaway
Glenn Robinson
Dikembi Mutumbo
Kevin Johnson (would kill it today)


You literally can't list a reason that Run TMC (Tim Hardaway, Chris Mullen and Mitch Richmond) wouldn't dominate today. They have the skill sets individually, didn't stand a chance in the 90s.

Did I forget to mention that they were mostly healthy and available to play games come playoff time?

The gorilla in the room is unnoticed, and that is there were far more street hoops back then, and a ton of talent from the streets. Now, you don't see that and they lack any tenacity. Street hoops have been removed and you're watching the cookie-cutter league as a result. Sure, there are some very talented players, but most lack defensive ability and competitive drive.
https://undisputedgoat.medium.com/jordan-in-the-clutch-30f6e7ed4c43
LBJ clutch- 19 of 104 career: https://www.yardbarker.com/nba/articles/lebron_james_has_only_made_19_of_107_shots_in_clutch_situation_during_his_career_178_fg_125_from_3_pointers/s1_16751_38344895
picko
Starter
Posts: 2,391
And1: 3,458
Joined: May 17, 2018

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

Post#46 » by picko » Thu May 2, 2024 12:22 am

The period from 1993-94 to 2004-05 is one of the weakest eras for the NBA. The league expanded too quickly - spreading talent too thinly - and then incoming talent wasn't sufficient to replace ageing or outgoing talent. The standard of basketball was sloppy and unappealing and that's why steps were taken to improve the quality of the spectacle.

But even if you changed all the rules back - and turned a blind eye to the physicality - the game today still wouldn't look like the 1990s. The talent pool is significantly deeper and we've had no meaningful expansion in two-decades. Rosters are deeper and skill-sets are more varied. There is just no comparing an American league (1990s) to an International league (2020s) from a quality standpoint.

We also overestimate the physicality part. It's based primarily around highlights rather than people watching entire games. When you watch entire games it quickly becomes apparent that defense wasn't typically great and for large amounts of the game it wasn't typically physical either. We weren't having games end in the 70 point range because of insane defense or physicality, it primarily reflected poor offensive strategy and a general lack of talent. It wasn't something to be lauded and we shouldn't put it on a pedestal.
52-12-7
Senior
Posts: 645
And1: 258
Joined: Nov 29, 2007
 

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

Post#47 » by 52-12-7 » Thu May 2, 2024 12:50 am

Is this a joke? Entire generation today is much softer than the 90s.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk
One_and_Done
Assistant Coach
Posts: 3,843
And1: 2,789
Joined: Jun 03, 2023

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

Post#48 » by One_and_Done » Thu May 2, 2024 12:51 am

The 90s Knicks wouldn't even make the WC play in this year.
Warspite wrote:Billups was a horrible scorer who could only score with an open corner 3 or a FT.
User avatar
Johnny Bball
RealGM
Posts: 48,430
And1: 49,056
Joined: Feb 01, 2015
 

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

Post#49 » by Johnny Bball » Thu May 2, 2024 1:23 am

tsherkin wrote:
Johnny Bball wrote:Its funny how in every comparison people make, it's always that they would never play under todays rules, like they couldn't contain the perimeter shooting, without understanding in the very least that a comparison is a two way street and players today couldn't play under those rules the same way. Which was OPs point... not the other way around.

Just such lame one way arguments.


You could take any title team from the past fifteen years and they'd likely ice those Knicks without any kind of issue or adaptation time. The 3pt line still existed and their halfcourt sets would brutalize that kind of defense.


And you could understand the OP before making lame one-sided posts.
User avatar
LakerLegend
RealGM
Posts: 12,719
And1: 7,030
Joined: Jun 15, 2002
Location: SoCal

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

Post#50 » by LakerLegend » Thu May 2, 2024 1:41 am

EmpireFalls wrote:
LakerLegend wrote:It’s funny is how people can’t admit that the league legislated their changes. It’s not like players got better and figured out how to deal with physicality. The league literally changed the rules to promote offense.

This is absolutely true, but it is also undeniable that players, coaches, and especially GMs got a lot better. The value of space on the floor driven by 3-point shooting has changed the game in endless ways.

You want to talk about the league changing their rules to promote offense, they actually moved the 3 point line closer during the mid 90s to promote offense! That was a literal factual thing that happened - and scoring and efficiency still wasn’t anywhere near the levels it is today.

That to me is undeniable proof of how the players and coaching schemes today have improved.


They moved the 3 point line in for 3 seasons, but the difference is you could STILL be physical. So it didn't matter.

The changing of the rules allowed 3 point shooting to flourish because you can't guard anyone on the perimeter, it's not the other way around.
User avatar
LakerLegend
RealGM
Posts: 12,719
And1: 7,030
Joined: Jun 15, 2002
Location: SoCal

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

Post#51 » by LakerLegend » Thu May 2, 2024 1:46 am

tsherkin wrote:
bledredwine wrote:Pretty much all of the B-list stars of the 90s is definitely well-equipped to be a star today.
Take Vin Baker. His game perfectly translates to today's talent/rules. He'd kill it.

Didn't stand a chance in the 90s.



What? That's ridiculous. Sub-50% 2pt shooter, 64% FT shooter, bleh passer, bleh defender, net negative on O. He had one good season in 98 and otherwise largely sucked.

He'd be awful today.

Am I falling for you kidding here? Because this is so ridiculous it feels like it can't be serious.


Baker had problems with alcoholism and depression, which is why his career derailed.
Wallace_Wallace
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,863
And1: 6,202
Joined: Jul 28, 2017
     

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

Post#52 » by Wallace_Wallace » Thu May 2, 2024 1:54 am

Special_Puppy wrote:;t=12s


The motion offense by the mid 2010’s Warriors (especially with KD), would be witch craft for those defenders. Watching them getting backdoored by MJ numerous times without any resistance is f’ing infuriating.
User avatar
Hobo4President
Analyst
Posts: 3,548
And1: 3,222
Joined: Jan 01, 2010
Location: Straya
 

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

Post#53 » by Hobo4President » Thu May 2, 2024 2:12 am

90s stans be like "players used to be far more skilled and defense was great because you could tackle players and stars today wouldn't be able to handle it and this one guy couldn't score, shoot or play defense but he was a starter because he would hit guys hard"

bledredwine wrote:
tsherkin wrote:
bledredwine wrote:No chance. He was too skilled, regardless. He was an athlete and he'd find a way to score, especially in this zero defense beat-one-man to get a layup era.


Absolutely not. He was trash-garbage and would remain so in this era.

Lebron is sub 40% beyond 3 feet. Didn't stop him from scoring 30 per game. Actually, he's been trash beyond 3 feet, and below average from 3. Athleticism matters.


Yeah but he was an athletic marvel with a slashing game who was a better FT shooter than Baker AND developed a 3, AND had a post game. That's not a sensible comparison.

I get it if you're trying to use this as parody for other arguments made, but man. Vin Baker. What a cheese-dong.


Couldn't disagree more. There are so many players now that would be role players in the 90s, just benefitting from free space. It's like a glorified pick up game, the way it's played now. Team Popovich.


Funny how cross era players like T Mac, KG etc all call the 90s a "stacked" era instead of the current era. The top contenders don't even have more than one legit star.

How many do you genuinely believe will usurp any of Jordan, Hakeem, Robinson, Shaq, Barkley, Malone, Stockton, and so many clear top 50 players?

And why did the Jazz state that Stockton was still owning them on the court just last year? 90s was a stacked era.

You also think that just ONE or TWO players cross era would have dominated the 90s. But nope.... they all went on to dominate the 00s or later.


Lmao quite a few current players already have or will usurp pretty much everyone on that list not named Jordan, Shaq or Hakeem. Do you really think Stockton is better than Steph, KD, Lebron, Jokic, Chris Paul, Harden, Giannis?

We are yet to see a sport where talent decreases as the sport ages and becomes more popular, why would basketball be any different?
Showtime 80
Junior
Posts: 269
And1: 616
Joined: Nov 09, 2019

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

Post#54 » by Showtime 80 » Thu May 2, 2024 2:29 am

picko wrote:The period from 1993-94 to 2004-05 is one of the weakest eras for the NBA. The league expanded too quickly - spreading talent too thinly - and then incoming talent wasn't sufficient to replace ageing or outgoing talent. The standard of basketball was sloppy and unappealing and that's why steps were taken to improve the quality of the spectacle.

But even if you changed all the rules back - and turned a blind eye to the physicality - the game today still wouldn't look like the 1990s. The talent pool is significantly deeper and we've had no meaningful expansion in two-decades. Rosters are deeper and skill-sets are more varied. There is just no comparing an American league (1990s) to an International league (2020s) from a quality standpoint.

We also overestimate the physicality part. It's based primarily around highlights rather than people watching entire games. When you watch entire games it quickly becomes apparent that defense wasn't typically great and for large amounts of the game it wasn't typically physical either. We weren't having games end in the 70 point range because of insane defense or physicality, it primarily reflected poor offensive strategy and a general lack of talent. It wasn't something to be lauded and we shouldn't put it on a pedestal.


I kind’ve agree with certain points in your post.

To me the greatest period in NBA history was 1984-1993 with just unmatched star power, great teams, best rivalries and a variety of play styles that could go to the offensive extreme like the Doug Moe Nuggets or defensive physical limits like the Bad Boy Pistons. The NCAA, the greatest developmental feeder system the NBA has ever had also saw its Golden Era during this exact time without coincidence.

People always harp on the expansion of 89 and 90 but really by 1993 the Heat and Hornets were playoff teams, the Magic had Shaq and the Wolves were a year away from getting Garnett so that expansion worked out wonders for the league.

The real problem for the NBA started in the mid 90’s with the unnecessary expansion to Toronto and Vancouver along with the incoming high school to pro phenomenon (later one and done college players). You had a whole generation of players coming into the league without a true mastery of the fundamental aspect of basketball and all its nuances thus focusing and athleticism and flash which did not translate well against physical defensive tactics that were still utilized and within the rules of the time.

The foreign born players just like the new American heavily influenced AAU players struggled big time against those physical defensive tactics because the necessary tools to combat them were not a priority for the Euros as they focused on a more finesse perimeter oriented game while the American players were leaning to a more isolation heavy highlight driven approach (the I wanna be like Mike phenomenon). This created horrendous league wide offenses from 1998 to 2005.

But this is were the league’s top people like Stern, Stu Jackson, Rob Thorn and Jerry Colangelo felt the need to step in and open up the game for the offensive stars as defensive minded teams like the Spurs, Pistons and Pacers were lapping the field from 2003-2005.

Steve Nash who was a bench player/fringe all star from the mid 90’s to early 2000’s talked in an interview with Bill Simmons how those rule changes super charged his career and forged the MDA style offense to become the blueprint for future offensive systems:

;pp=ygUXc3RldmUgbmFzaCBiaWxsIHNpbW1vbnM%3D

As you can see rule changes have had a tremendous impact not only on the game play you see before you but also on development, team building and which players are getting drafted.

Forget the 90’s rules, go back to the 70’s rules with no 3 point line, physical defense with hand checking and strict dribbling rules what do you think would happen to the majority of the modern “manufactured heroes” and to hundreds of other jobs in the NBA filled by twiners and 3-D players? I guarantee you they would look a lot worse than those 70’s players did as the post game and mid range are at an all time low right now and the overall fundamentals of the American players have fallen off dramatically in the last 25 years thanks to AAU.
Ol Roy
Sophomore
Posts: 117
And1: 141
Joined: Dec 03, 2023

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

Post#55 » by Ol Roy » Thu May 2, 2024 2:43 am

Anthony Mason would be a problem today.
Mephariel
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,456
And1: 1,675
Joined: Jun 24, 2018
   

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

Post#56 » by Mephariel » Thu May 2, 2024 2:45 am

Yes. 90s defenders are not that good. I grew up watching the 90s. Who in the 90s is stopping prime Durant posting up?
MavsDirk41
Analyst
Posts: 3,254
And1: 2,560
Joined: Dec 07, 2022
     

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

Post#57 » by MavsDirk41 » Thu May 2, 2024 2:47 am

Hobo4President wrote:90s stans be like "players used to be far more skilled and defense was great because you could tackle players and stars today wouldn't be able to handle it and this one guy couldn't score, shoot or play defense but he was a starter because he would hit guys hard"

bledredwine wrote:
tsherkin wrote:
Absolutely not. He was trash-garbage and would remain so in this era.



Yeah but he was an athletic marvel with a slashing game who was a better FT shooter than Baker AND developed a 3, AND had a post game. That's not a sensible comparison.

I get it if you're trying to use this as parody for other arguments made, but man. Vin Baker. What a cheese-dong.


Couldn't disagree more. There are so many players now that would be role players in the 90s, just benefitting from free space. It's like a glorified pick up game, the way it's played now. Team Popovich.


Funny how cross era players like T Mac, KG etc all call the 90s a "stacked" era instead of the current era. The top contenders don't even have more than one legit star.

How many do you genuinely believe will usurp any of Jordan, Hakeem, Robinson, Shaq, Barkley, Malone, Stockton, and so many clear top 50 players?

And why did the Jazz state that Stockton was still owning them on the court just last year? 90s was a stacked era.

You also think that just ONE or TWO players cross era would have dominated the 90s. But nope.... they all went on to dominate the 00s or later.


Lmao quite a few current players already have or will usurp pretty much everyone on that list not named Jordan, Shaq or Hakeem. Do you really think Stockton is better than Steph, KD, Lebron, Jokic, Chris Paul, Harden, Giannis?



The league is much deeper now with the influx of international talent but do you really think the product on the court is more entertaining? Teams shooting 35 3s a game, too much focus on offense while sacrificing defensive intensity, no player rivalries. Watching the playoffs now do you thing the games are more exciting than 90s playoffs? I dont.
User avatar
Hobo4President
Analyst
Posts: 3,548
And1: 3,222
Joined: Jan 01, 2010
Location: Straya
 

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

Post#58 » by Hobo4President » Thu May 2, 2024 2:49 am

MavsDirk41 wrote:
Hobo4President wrote:90s stans be like "players used to be far more skilled and defense was great because you could tackle players and stars today wouldn't be able to handle it and this one guy couldn't score, shoot or play defense but he was a starter because he would hit guys hard"

bledredwine wrote:
Couldn't disagree more. There are so many players now that would be role players in the 90s, just benefitting from free space. It's like a glorified pick up game, the way it's played now. Team Popovich.


Funny how cross era players like T Mac, KG etc all call the 90s a "stacked" era instead of the current era. The top contenders don't even have more than one legit star.

How many do you genuinely believe will usurp any of Jordan, Hakeem, Robinson, Shaq, Barkley, Malone, Stockton, and so many clear top 50 players?

And why did the Jazz state that Stockton was still owning them on the court just last year? 90s was a stacked era.

You also think that just ONE or TWO players cross era would have dominated the 90s. But nope.... they all went on to dominate the 00s or later.


Lmao quite a few current players already have or will usurp pretty much everyone on that list not named Jordan, Shaq or Hakeem. Do you really think Stockton is better than Steph, KD, Lebron, Jokic, Chris Paul, Harden, Giannis?



The league is much deeper now with the influx of international talent but do you really think the product on the court is more entertaining? Teams shooting 35 3s a game, too much focus on offense while sacrificing defensive intensity, no player rivalries. Watching the playoffs now do you thing the games are more exciting than 90s playoffs? I dont.


Where did I argue about entertainment? Teams don't focus too much on offense at the expense of defense, defensive schemes are more advanced then they've ever been the simple fact is there's really not much you can do to defend some freak shooter in a pick and roll. It collapses entire defenses, which is also why we've tended towards shorter players because they're generally more athletic and better equipped to dealing with shooters around screens. Now I actually think the rules have favoured offense in the modern NBA but it's telling that some of these 90s is the more talented era guys straight up say superstars from today would suck in the past.
bledredwine
RealGM
Posts: 12,425
And1: 4,049
Joined: Sep 17, 2010
   

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

Post#59 » by bledredwine » Thu May 2, 2024 2:49 am

Mephariel wrote:Yes. 90s defenders are not that good. I grew up watching the 90s. Who in the 90s is stopping prime Durant posting up?


Michael Jordan
Hakeem Olajuwon
David Robinson
Scottie Pippen
Patrick Ewing
Gary Payton
Denis Rodman
Alonzo Mourning
Dikembi Mutumbo
Shawn Kemp
Mookie Blaylock
Kevin Garnett
Mitch Richmond

.... are not that good on defense, ey? k.
https://undisputedgoat.medium.com/jordan-in-the-clutch-30f6e7ed4c43
LBJ clutch- 19 of 104 career: https://www.yardbarker.com/nba/articles/lebron_james_has_only_made_19_of_107_shots_in_clutch_situation_during_his_career_178_fg_125_from_3_pointers/s1_16751_38344895
MavsDirk41
Analyst
Posts: 3,254
And1: 2,560
Joined: Dec 07, 2022
     

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

Post#60 » by MavsDirk41 » Thu May 2, 2024 2:51 am

Mephariel wrote:Yes. 90s defenders are not that good. I grew up watching the 90s. Who in the 90s is stopping prime Durant posting up?



I also grew up watching 90s nba. Who is stopping Shaq, Dream, Jordan, Barkley, Malone & Stockton pick & roll, Kemp, Kobe, Iverson, etc…

Return to The General Board