That's your opinion. So yourre nostalgic of the NBA you grew up with. Shocker. That must mean players aren't as good now?
Which NBA era wins...
- Thread starter CySmurf
- Start date
Thank you for the best post in the entire thread. I agree with all the boomers in that I enjoyed the NBA better in the 90s and 2000s, but to somehow shortchange today's players and the game is absurd.
Hard disagree, their mid range shot is as pure and reliable as the best mid range shooters today. Hakeem literally talked a coach out of using him as a three point shooter because he thought it would hurt the team to pull him away from paint.
I’m not saying they are Steph, nobody is, but if they were born in the 90s they’d be as good long range shooters as any of today’s bigs. Especially if Hakeem played his whole life like today’s international players instead of arriving at Houston barely knowing the sport.
Both of those guys would still be good players today. Especially Hakeem because I think he was absolutely athletic enough to defend most of today's 5s. It's not that I don't think the great scores of past generations couldnt score some points, I just don't think most would have the ability to defend the perimeter. Thats the #1 reason why I think today's teams would mop up the floor with teams from 30 years ago.
I’d agree with you a guy like Ewing would absolutely not fit today’s game. Hakeem is pretty much a prototype human to play the sport like Giannis or LeBron.
Jordan was playing against local mailmen?
Magic Johnson
James Worthy
Clyde Drexler
Charles Barkley
Gary Payton
Karl Malone
John Stockton
Dikembe Mutombo
Patrick Ewing
Joe Dumars
Isiah Thomas
Dennis Rodman
Dominique Wilkins
Shaquille O'Neal
Tim Hardaway
Alonzo Mourning
Mark Price
Reggie Miller
Chris Weber
Every one of those guys is in the NBA Hall of Fame, and every one of them led a team that Jordan beat in the playoffs and/or finals. Add to this list guys like Shawn Kemp and Larry Johnson and Brad Daugherty and others who aren't in the HoF but are still all-time greats. Oh, and even though they lost the series he still dropped 63 on Larry Bird's Celtics as a second year player in the playoffs at the Boston Garden.
But yeah, continue on with the narrative that MJ didn't play/win against good competition, lol.
Last edited:
The league was watered down from a team standpoint during that era. Nobody said it didn't produce great individual players, There wasn't much parity Your argument is so tired and old. Go.tp.bed boomer. You sound like the 50 year old at the end of the bar talking about his h.s. sports career
Literally the post you said was the best post in the thread.
You're an old 50 then. Before you know it you'll be blaming young people for everything wrong with America. You're a smart guy. It's totally fine that you don't like today's NBA, but stop trying to discredit the league and players today.
It's baseless. We get it you don't like the NBA. Saying players today are somehow subpar is absurd. I enjoyed the NBA more in the 90s myself.
Chuck would have hard time guarding guys off the ball. He'd probably be okay if his counterpart just went to the block and tried to back him down all the time which almost never happens today.
Malone would be way more of a challenge for today's players than Charles. More reliable shooter, one of the best mid range shooters ever, one of the greatest physical specimens to ever play and inflicted mass pain on every opponent. A big caveat is do the refs let Malone knee SGA in the balls every play like he was allowed in his era? His signature move was basically a floater where he kneed you in the balls, sometimes no foul, sometimes foul on the guy getting kneed.
Charles did start "chucking" 3s toward end of his career, pun intended.
I was talking to a guy who played on the #1 ranked Waverly team in the 80s. Said the same thing. Teams today would have beaten them playing with today’s rules. But his team would beat today’s teams playing by their rules.
For the record I don’t really care about these arguments and for some reason basketball seems like the sport people love to rag on the most. The same kind of transition has happened in football, but nobody is sitting here arguing about how the 90s Cowboys would beat the 2024 Eagles.
Malone would probably have still been a good player offensively but there is no chance he's guarding someone like Kevin Durant or LeBron James.
Imagine the Karl Malone as we know him and add the ball handling skills of a PG and deadly precision from beyond the arc. That's the skill set of the league elite PF's the last 20 years. And let's not forget why we got rid of the "old rules". As it turns out the "old rules" NBA without a superstar to the magnitude Jordan we're awful. 2.guys on the block backing people down, etc... Jordan made the game in the 90s and people watched him. He saved the NBA by himself. When I watch games from 30 years ago I'm glad we don't play by those rules. Also if players in the 90s would have had the skill set guys today do the games would have looked way different, even with the "old rules". The way games look today compared to other generations has way more to do with skill set than rules themselves.
Last edited:
Nobody today can guard Durant's jumper either. His jumper is not defensible where he releases it at his height and length. Neither was Dirk's and neither is Joker's.
Hakeem could defend those shots anywhere on the court better than anybody playing today, but they'd still get them off most of the time.
Malone is a better paint defender than anybody playing today and Hakeem is the GOAT paint defender. Interior defense basically sucks now.
I'd roll the dice with someone like Pippen defending Durant vs anybody playing today. Kawhi was comparable to Pippen that way but shorter and less wing span.
