Post by Mulder and Scully on Mar 3, 2021 17:22:42 GMT


Again, the league average during the 80s was 109, the so called "tough" defense didn't slow down the scoring. The scoring in the 90s was actually similar to the 2010s with the exception of last two seasons. Just look at the scoring averages till the 2017-18 season.
There were more free throws and fouls compared to this era. Saying that this era has too many fouls is totally false.
And, yes the physical defense was exaggerated as it didn't deter teams from scoring a lot, especially in the 60s and 80s.
The physical defense didn't affect the scoring average because those players grew up with that style of play. Put an 80s-90s superstar in todays league and they wouldn't believe how easy it is to score. Put today's superstars in the late 80s-90s (post McHale clothesline, prime Bad Boys and Ewing Knicks era, so stop using a lone game from 1983 as the quintessential '80s-90s era' NBA) and they'd start crying after their first hard foul. I'm not mellowmoviereview so you don't need to defend LeBron to me. LeBron predates the soft league we have on our hands now. I take more issue with the pure shooters that don't do much else, like Curry and Klay, or flop artists like Harden. These guys wouldn't have thrived in those days (again 'those days' being the latter half of the 80s and the entire decade of the 90s), they would've been serviceable at best. Harden I could see being a quality player, but Klay and Steph would've been role players. Never mind hard fouls, some good ol' hand checking would've made their life miserable.
Learn more about those eras. Read about the style of play, not just statistics. Jim Loscutoff had his number retired by the Celtics and he averaged 6 points a game for his career. His nickname was 'Jungle Jim' because he was built like a beast and his job was to come into the game and throw people around if they got out of line. That role doesn't exist in today's NBA. See? Even when the league was putting up tons of points in an up tempo style of play, the game was still rough in a way it just isn't today.
The athletes today are as talented as they've ever been in this league, that isn't a question. I don't love the three point crazy format (which is highly ironic if you had grown up playing basketball with me), but today's NBA requires a level of skill from more of its players overall than it did in the past. They aren't a bunch of bums out there. But there is an enormous difference in physicality from the old days to today, and that should be taken into consideration when comparing legacies and the overall impact on a player's accomplishments.
We've had this discussion before. You always bring up hypothetical scenarios on how todays players wouldn't have dominated in the 80s and 90s and how players from those eras would have dominated today. You stated that the physical defense didn't affect the scoring average because those players grew up with that style of play. What makes you think todays players couldn't have adjusted their game to the physical style play of those eras? There's literally no way to know this since it's completely hypothetical. You're trying to prove something that can never happen.
Stephen Curry and Klay Thompson would have been "role players"? Hahahahahahaha you have great imagination.
Your bias against todays game is obvious and your close-mindedness shows. You're hellbent on trying to prove something that's just a big fantasy.
This is typical "old heads" thinking. They refuse to let go of the past.
