NBA is more watered down now than in the 80s

TrueWarrior · Post #1 » by **TrueWarrior** » Tue Jul 20, 2010 5:54 am

Just for the misinformed who keep comparing Bird, Magic, and Jordans teams to LeBrons, Kobes, Wades and any other team these days; there were only 23 teams in the NBA up until the 1988-89 season. The Heat and Hornets joined that year, making it 25. The following season in 1989-90 the Magic and T Wolves joined, making it 27. The Raptors and Grizzlies then came in 1995-96, with the Bobkittens coming in 2004-05. Making the 30 teams we have now.

Obvious to most? Sure. But then why do people keep comparing teams of now to teams from the 80s like they are congruent? The talent was more concentrated then. 7 more teams is roughly 5-15 more star players and alot of good role players too. Imagine if there were only 23 teams now? How much better would each team be? Most people know this yet many are constantly comparing teams in the 80s to teams now (*Ahem* LeBron *Ahem*) as if that proves their point. Every team in the NBA has less talent on it now than they used to have. Which is why alot of people are angry at LeBron for not trying to create some parity.

Sure guys like Magic and Bird's teams had more talent when you compare them to teams of today, but they were also going up against more talent since it was less dispersed.

Its very difficult to compare these eras. Just wanted to make this clear.

Some believe that there is more talent these days in general compared to back then so its pretty much even. I dont buy it because there have been some downright horrible teams lately, my Knicks included.

britblazerdude · Post #2 » by **britblazerdude** » Tue Jul 20, 2010 5:57 am

We have 50,000,000 more people in the USA now. 50 million more to make the NBA better

LAKERFAN24 · Post #3 » by **LAKERFAN24** » Tue Jul 20, 2010 5:57 am

80's was amazing Lakers vs Celtics, Less teams more talent on teams
90's was atrocious The upspring of Franchise teams ruined that decade.
00's really good new pool of talent internationlly

TrueWarrior · Post #4 » by **TrueWarrior** » Tue Jul 20, 2010 5:59 am

britblazerdude wrote:We have 50,000,000 more people in the USA now. 50 million more to make the NBA better

Then why are some teams so bad for so long? Why did there seem to be more stars on teams back then? Why were there so much better big men?

Like I said I dont buy it. But you are all entitled to your opinions. Just thought this was a fun fact to share.

TrueWarrior · Post #5 » by **TrueWarrior** » Tue Jul 20, 2010 6:02 am

LAKERFAN24 wrote:80's was amazing Lakers vs Celtics, Less teams more talent on teams
90's was atrocious The upspring of Franchise teams ruined that decade.
00's really good new pool of talent internationlly

The international players have been the best thing to happen to the NBA, but even so alot of them equate to role players at best, with only a few exceptions making it as All Stars. I still think its more watered down now than compared to the early/mid 80s.

Bucs80 · Post #6 » by **Bucs80** » Tue Jul 20, 2010 6:20 am

NBA is watered down.

Why? because you only have 2-5 teams who have realistic chances to win a championship every year. In a team with 30 teams, that isn't good at all.

britblazerdude · Post #7 » by **britblazerdude** » Tue Jul 20, 2010 6:32 am

Bucs80 wrote:NBA is watered down.

Why? because you only have 2-5 teams who have realistic chances to win a championship every year. In a team with 30 teams, that isn't good at all.

How exactly does 2-5 teams with a shot equate to watered down?

britblazerdude · Post #8 » by **britblazerdude** » Tue Jul 20, 2010 6:32 am

You can't complain about watered down until you try to watch regular season NHL

Post #9 » by **Doctor MJ** » Tue Jul 20, 2010 8:58 am

TrueWarrior wrote:
britblazerdude wrote:We have 50,000,000 more people in the USA now. 50 million more to make the NBA better

Then why are some teams so bad for so long? Why did there seem to be more stars on teams back then? Why were there so much better big men?

Like I said I dont buy it. But you are all entitled to your opinions. Just thought this was a fun fact to share.

Eh, I don't think you've thought this through.

-Why are teams bad for so long now? It's not a "now" thing. Go look at the Clippers in the 80s.

-What does the fact that teams in any era are bad for a long time? It means they're poorly run. Go look at the Rockets last year. There is no team in the league that hasn't had years in the past decade that had significantly more talent than that. They sucked because they weren't put together and coached well. Of course the fact that some teams are poorer than others to begin with also contributes to it.

-Why did there seem to be more stars in the 80s? Eh, "seem" is the key word. You should look at this by evaluating drafts over the years. There really was a decade of really disappointing drafts from '86 to '95, and the quality of the league went down along with the major expansion. From '96 onward it's been actually quite good, and even more recently it's been even better. Consider that in the last 5 drafts that have reached a point worth evaluating ('03 to '07) we've had LeBron, Wade, Melo, Bosh, Howard, Paul, Deron, Roy, Rondo and Durant.

Not sure what that has to do with dilution though.

-Why so much better big men? Well now that's an excellent question. People can talk about rule changes all they want but it's not like we're not seeing effective big men right now, and it's not like teams aren't drafting big men any more. For all the talk of Wall being the perfect player for the modern NBA, the reason Cousins wasn't a strong contender for the #1 was all his mental issues. There's something going on.

Factors I'm aware of:
-It's not sexy to just stay by the basket, so kids don't want to do it
-Rules have been changed that are resulting in more drives leading to free throws
-The focus on 3 point shooting has reduced the impact on shot blockers

ahonui06 · Post #10 » by **ahonui06** » Tue Jul 20, 2010 9:01 am

This is why Bill Russell's 11 titles are so impressive. Less than 20 teams when he played and totally dominated the NBA landscape.

JordansBulls · Post #11 » by **JordansBulls** » Tue Jul 20, 2010 12:23 pm

ahonui06 wrote:This is why Bill Russell's 11 titles are so impressive. Less than 20 teams when he played and totally dominated the NBA landscape.

It is much easier. Look at the WNBA. When it was a smaller league it was much easier for one team to dominate like the Houston Comets.

Bobbcats · Post #12 » by **Bobbcats** » Tue Jul 20, 2010 12:48 pm

it is hard to take these threads seriously when the number of foreign players alone who have joined the league are more than enough to fill every expansion team since the 80's. By "dilution" you mean dilution of the fans attention. Now there are too many teams to follow closely so you don't recognize as high a % of the players. The talent hasn't been diluted

tidho · Post #13 » by **tidho** » Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:46 pm

LeBron's Cavs and Dirk's Mavericks were both winning as many games a season as the Lakers and Celtics of the 80's. In both cases neither star could get it done. The team's weren't good enough. That's an indication to me that there isn't the depth today.
A lot of people look at the 80's and think only two teams had talent. The Bucks, Rockets, SIxers, among others were very deep and talented too.

rumdiary · Post #14 » by **rumdiary** » Tue Jul 20, 2010 3:33 pm

The league should have hundreds of teams in relegation/promotion style systems like football (football, not handegg).