Yodi2007 wrote:King was a better player overall! Defense and leadership, 2 qualities Melo lacks!
From King's basic stats, you don't truly get a feel for his defensive shortcomings. Here are his career defensive numbers
Season Ag Tm G Min trDRtg
------+----+------+-------+--------+--------
1978 21 NJN 79 3092 107.3
1979 22 NJN 82 2859 105.6
1980 23 UTA 19 419 113.4
1981 24 GSW 81 2914 112.1
1982 25 GSW 79 2861 109.8
1983 26 NYK 68 2207 103.1
1984 27 NYK 77 2667 105.1
1985 28 NYK 55 2063 110.2
1987 30 NYK 6 214 114.5
1988 31 WSB 69 2044 109.5
1989 32 WSB 81 2559 110.7
1990 33 WSB 82 2687 111.8
1991 34 WSB 64 2401 110.7
1993 36 NJN 32 430 107.4
By any account, he wasn't very good at that end of the floor. With a career mark of 2.63 DWS/3K (average is 3.07), King's subpar defense has to be accounted for in any Hall of Fame discussion regarding the prolific scorer.
What leadership do you talk about here? King never had a long career with the Knicks and he took the Knicks far, their roster wasn't good yet and there were superior teams in the 80s. He was great against the Pistons in 84 in the first round, but we fell one game short to the Celtics. Other than that season, there isn't much of a resume of "Leadership".
I'm tired of people who have no idea what they're talking about desperately trying to take a shot at Melo for whatever reason it may be.
Bernard King was a great player and great Knick, but he was only a Knick for 4 seasons. In his 4th season, he only played 6 games. King played more games with the Bullets than the Knicks. It's always this sack of crap argument that matches up the old generation player with the new one, and you have some dude who never did his research picking the old gen player because it feels "right". Melo is going on his 5th season with the Knicks and has about 3-5 more left. He'll retire as one of the best to sport the Knicks jersey. Just like Melo, King's Knicks only won 44 games and 48 games, the next two seasons only won 26-28 games apiece.
Melo is better than King.
King didn't take 3pt shots, thus him having a higher FG% is evident. Especially in the 80s where there was only 2 teams that played defense the entire season.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/lea ... _1985.html
Teams averaging 120 ppg and the best defense was 104 ppg.
But overall, in fact, scoring was much easier for most of the 1990s, including Jordan's heyday. (And it was even easier in the 1980s.) Not only was the game played faster, a clear sign that there was relatively little resistance as players went up and down the court and to the basket, but teams also scored a lot more per possession. For instance, in 1992-93, known for a rough-and-tumble series between the Knicks and the Bulls, scoring was at 108.0 points per 100 possessions. This year, it's down to 105.8, which is actually an increase from last season.
Think about that -- when the team had the ball in the 1990s, it scored more than it does now.
That's despite the following: Offensive strategy has evolved in the mathematically correct direction, which is to shoot more 3s and space the floor better. Of course, that's in part because players are more afraid to enter the lane -- watch a Clippers game for the number of times Chris Paul shies away from going to the rim because he knows he'll get hit. He has admitted as much, despite being one of the toughest, most physical point guards we've ever seen.
But defenses are so fast, physical and prepared that, even with much improved outside shooting in the game these days (the 3-point percentage across the league is 35.9, as opposed to 32.0 percent in Jordan's first championship season), scoring is down.
In the 1990s, teams shot a much higher percentage from the field than they do now, and a higher percentage on 2-point baskets. If players were getting banged on every play, why was it so much easier for the skinnier players of that decade to score? Why was it so much easier then to get to the bucket and score on 2-point shots? And, if they were better shooters then, why is 3-point shooting better now?
In fact, in some ways players were more protected by the refs then, when we look at the number of fouls called. In those days, basketball had the aural effect of Brazilian Carnival, with whistles constantly going off. Today, the average team earns fewer free throws per field goal attempt than in any season of the '80s or '90s. And overall, this season is on pace to set the new all-time NBA record for fewest free throws attempted.
Although some of that is related to offensive strategy today, keep in mind that offensive strategy is largely dictated by how the defense plays -- if players can't get to the basket, they will go less often. It's not as if today's athletes don't have the talent and athleticism to score at the rim. It's just that today's game doesn't permit as much of that.
And the notion that old-school refs were silent as stars got walloped is bogus. Through age 28, Jordan was granted more free throws than LeBron per game, even though LeBron plays more minutes. If James is indeed playing in a softer era and getting all the calls, it's not resulting in more freebies from the stripe. As Gibson and Van Gundy said, the treatment LeBron got Wednesday night was just ordinary stuff -- and not all of it was whistled.
When it comes to LeBron specifically, one of the complaints about him is that he bullies his way to the basket -- that he is too physical. And he's not the only one: Kobe Bryant, Dwyane Wade, Derrick Rose and Russell Westbrook are among the many perimeter players known for their punishing style. It's hard to square that with the claim that the game is less physical.
Furthermore, one way that the game is more physical now is because of the new rules allowing zone defense, which means more bigs are waiting to stop (or wallop) LeBron and anyone else who wants to go to the basket. In the '80s and '90s, Jordan didn't have to play against zones and zone-style defense, because that kind of defense was illegal. Sure, he absorbed some hard fouls here and there, but he also got to the basket all the time without getting hit -- enough that several highlight videos of his exploits were released before he even made the Finals.
Of course, Jordan's era had legalized handchecking, which was certainly a deterrent for would-be drivers. Handchecking was a significant physical tactic, one that helped a defense. And it's one of the ways that the '90s were more physical than the game today. But handchecking didn't do more to thwart offensive players than legalized zone (which includes the similar tactic of bigs coming out hard to bump and stop ball-handlers). We know that because the aforementioned numbers say so.
What does the film say?
This is where someone suggests that the heightened physical play is obvious if you merely watch those old games. I would respond that you indeed should go back and watch.
What you'll find in those '90s "slugfests" might shock you. Yep, there are some hard fouls (just as there are today). But defensive communication is often weak; screens are dealt with poorly; and double-teams result in wide-open shots.
For an example, witness Penny Hardaway knifing through the Bulls for 38 points in the 1996 Eastern Conference finals. Skinny Penny does it with undeniable skill, but he also gets to the rim with ridiculous ease. Keep in mind, these are the 72-win Bulls we're talking about, the greatest team to ever play -- the team with the No. 1 defense in the league that season. Just imagine how easy it was to score on the Celtics that year as they were giving up 107.0 points per game, or the Vancouver Grizzlies, with Big Country Reeves manning the middle. Weakside defense was, indeed, weak.
These people are harping back to when they were 8-12 years old and easily influenced. Blinded by nostalgia. At the age, most of these fans didn't even understand what was going on the court, they just were entertained by the play.
an inflated FG% isn't something that makes player A better than player B.
skill set wise, Melo edges King. Melo has more range, more moves offensively.
Isolation, Melo is a 6"8 240lbs SF/PF who can face or post up against the best in the NBA. King was 6"7 and 205lbs.
Teams in the 80s were averaging 110-120ppg on 48-50% shooting. Lakers shot 55% as a team in 1985. That was the norm. Defense got tougher with the Bad Boys and then with Chicago and the Knicks of the early 90s. But, in general defense in the NBA in the 1980s wasn't as tough as it later became. The whole King > Melo because of FG% is a joke. Calling Melo "inefficient" is comedy and a disrespect to anyone who calls himself a NBA fan.
