Jordan's iso efficiency with just his left hand compared to iso efficiency of today's players.

[Johnny Bball]

I'm a bit confused here. Are you guys trying to tell me it's not easier to score in isolation with illegal defense in effect?

Watch on YouTube

Jordan himself said removing illegal defense would have neutered his game. Are the good folks at the Chicago Tribute Lebron Stans as well?

https://www.chicagotribune.com/2001/04/01/if-zone-defenses-come-in-stars-may-go-out/

Zone defense gets rarely used today...it'd often used more to give an opponent something different to look at. If it was so effective at stifling perimeter offense....it would be used most of the time...BUT it's not...and that tells you a lot.

I’m just going to focus on on this last sentence. The idea that taking away illegal defense was just so you can play zone as you’ve identified it is so laughably wrong. Many aspects of the modern day defense are built on zone principles. Did you even watch the video I posted?

I don't get the narrow focus on the illegal defense rule without the discussion of every other rule that changed since. Handchecking, the restricted area didn't exist which has a huge impact on how easy it is to finish, gather step, eurostep, palming and carrying, the fouls called on defense for contact initiated by offense, principle of verticality, 3 second rule. The pick and roll has neutered big centres making it even easier to finish inside.

The idea that the illegal defense rule would have neutered Jordan's game, when Jordan was doubled in the paint every time (Jordan rules, double him and wack him) that they could, seems to be quite overblown when you add the other changes that opened the game up for guards. They have been trying to open the game up for guards to replace Jordan for 20 years, literally. If you gave Jordan every rule he wanted, I don't think he could have even evisioned a rule set that helps him more than the current rule set.

I don't think hard doubling on drives into the paint under the illegal D ruleset, or just doubling on drives into the paint under the current rules changes things as much, in comparison.

And as much as that guy says illegal defense violatons were common, yes and no. He's right that they were common, what he doesn't say is they just weren't called much.

[Frosty]

There has always been a lack of understanding of what the illegal defense rules actually were. I often see, 'they had to stay close to their man'. Well illegal D was not a measure of how close you were to your assignment. In fact it gave you a lot of room to play off your man. Many teams played zones type defenses in the 80's and 90's. I also think it's funny that people think zones are completely allowed today. You can't play a 2-3 zone today with the 3 second rule. It was put in to allow freedom of penetration.

The other issue is that people like to imply that the isolation game that developed in the late 90's was prevalent throughout the 90's. You can find examples of it but it didn't become a crutch until later in the decade. The stats seemed to be based on samples up to early to mid 90's. Jordan rarely stayed still long enough to wait for isolation situations to be established, he usually reacted quickly to avoid letting the defense establish itself.

The late 90's and early 2000's struggled offensively for a variety of reasons, one of which was the seemingly abnormal number of career impacting injuries to upcoming stars and then another was the leagues reaction to refill those roles with younger players where you saw the entry of high school players who never experienced the proper coaching players received in college and learned to deal with better defenses. The league had to supplement their coaching staffs to help players in this regard and the league went out of their way to implement rules changes to make scoring easier. Johnny covered the rule changes that have come in. The league stated at the time that these rule changes were made to make penetration easier. They realized it was a lot easier to find smaller players who could shoot and dribble than it was to find a new Shaq. By making penetration easier it allowed a lot more players to become stars.

Even older players whose game relied on penetration experienced a resurgence under the new hands off rule changes in 2005

Allen Iverson
Highest TS% pre rule change = .535 (most years he was closer to .500)

PPG/TS% 2 years before
27.6/.500
26.4/.478

29 years old, injuries have taken their toll, stats have been declining then suddenly after rule changes he has a revival
30.7/.532
33.0/.543

[Johnny Firpo]

There has always been a lack of understanding of what the illegal defense rules actually were. I often see, 'they had to stay close to their man'. Well illegal D was not a measure of how close you were to your assignment. In fact it gave you a lot of room to play off your man. Many teams played zones type defenses in the 80's and 90's. I also think it's funny that people think zones are completely allowed today. You can't play a 2-3 zone today with the 3 second rule. It was put in to allow freedom of penetration.

The other issue is that people like to imply that the isolation game that developed in the late 90's was prevalent throughout the 90's. You can find examples of it but it didn't become a crutch until later in the decade. The stats seemed to be based on sampled up to early to mid 90's. Jordan rarely stayed still long enough to wait for isolation situations to be established, he usually reacted quickly to avoid letting the defense establish itself.

The late 90's and early 2000's struggled offensively for a variety of reasons, one of which was the number of career impacting injuries to upcoming stars and then another was the leagues reaction to refill those roles with younger players where you saw the entry of high school players who never experienced the proper coaching players received in college and learned to deal with better defenses. The league had to supplement their coaching staffs to help players in this regard and the league went out of their way to implement rules changes to make scoring easier. Johnny covered the rule changes that have come in. The league stated at the time that these rule changes were made to make penetration easier. They realized it was a lot easier to find smaller players who could shoot and dribble than it was to find a new Shaq. By making penetration easier it allowed a lot more players to become stars.

Even older players whose game relied on penetration experienced a resurgence under the new hands off rule changes in 2005

Allen Iverson
Highest TS% pre rule change = .535 (most years he was closer to .500)

PPG/TS% 2 years before
27.6/.500
26.4/.478

29 years old, injuries have taken their toll, stats have been declining then suddenly after rule changes he has a revival
30.7/.532
33.0/.543

I'm not sure if Iverson is as good of an example as you think. If you check the stats, he had - by far - his best rim finishing years early, at his athletic peak, and by far, his worst shooting seasons as well, which can not only be measured by his terrible early three point percentage, but also his free throw percentage and mid range stats. By the mid-2000's he couldn't finish at a high rate at the rim anymore, but he became a much better shooter, evidenced by his three point, floater, mid range and free throw percentages. Iverson clearly developed his shot on multiple levels and distances.

[Frosty]

There has always been a lack of understanding of what the illegal defense rules actually were. I often see, 'they had to stay close to their man'. Well illegal D was not a measure of how close you were to your assignment. In fact it gave you a lot of room to play off your man. Many teams played zones type defenses in the 80's and 90's. I also think it's funny that people think zones are completely allowed today. You can't play a 2-3 zone today with the 3 second rule. It was put in to allow freedom of penetration.

The other issue is that people like to imply that the isolation game that developed in the late 90's was prevalent throughout the 90's. You can find examples of it but it didn't become a crutch until later in the decade. The stats seemed to be based on sampled up to early to mid 90's. Jordan rarely stayed still long enough to wait for isolation situations to be established, he usually reacted quickly to avoid letting the defense establish itself.

The late 90's and early 2000's struggled offensively for a variety of reasons, one of which was the number of career impacting injuries to upcoming stars and then another was the leagues reaction to refill those roles with younger players where you saw the entry of high school players who never experienced the proper coaching players received in college and learned to deal with better defenses. The league had to supplement their coaching staffs to help players in this regard and the league went out of their way to implement rules changes to make scoring easier. Johnny covered the rule changes that have come in. The league stated at the time that these rule changes were made to make penetration easier. They realized it was a lot easier to find smaller players who could shoot and dribble than it was to find a new Shaq. By making penetration easier it allowed a lot more players to become stars.

Even older players whose game relied on penetration experienced a resurgence under the new hands off rule changes in 2005

Allen Iverson
Highest TS% pre rule change = .535 (most years he was closer to .500)

PPG/TS% 2 years before
27.6/.500
26.4/.478

29 years old, injuries have taken their toll, stats have been declining then suddenly after rule changes he has a revival
30.7/.532
33.0/.543

I'm not sure if Iverson is as good of an example as you think. If you check the stats, he had - by far - his best rim finishing years early, at his athletic peak, and by far, his worst shooting seasons as well, which can not only be measured by his terrible early three point percentage, but also his free throw percentage and mid range stats. By the mid-2000's he couldn't finish at a high rate at the rim anymore, but he became a much better shooter, evidenced by his three point, floater, mid range and free throw percentages. Iverson clearly developed his shot on multiple levels and distances.

I'm not going off on a tangent about Iverson. There are a lot of examples of perimeter players scoring increasing because the rule changes were specifically designed to open up penetration, cause defenses to collapse and therefore open up opportunities for shooters to get better looks. Rather than Iverson, do you dispute that the rules changes made it easier for slashers and hence outside shooters?

2006

Jackson, the league vice president, sees more than an increase in free throws. He says a leaguewide a improvement in shooting percentage can be traced to tighter officiating. With players getting to the rim more easily, defenders have to leave their men to help more, which in turn leaves other players open for shots. All that, he says, is good for the game.

[bledredwine]

I'm a bit confused here. Are you guys trying to tell me it's not easier to score in isolation with illegal defense in effect?

Watch on YouTube

Jordan himself said removing illegal defense would have neutered his game. Are the good folks at the Chicago Tribute Lebron Stans as well?

https://www.chicagotribune.com/2001/04/01/if-zone-defenses-come-in-stars-may-go-out/

Zone defense gets rarely used today...it'd often used more to give an opponent something different to look at. If it was so effective at stifling perimeter offense....it would be used most of the time...BUT it's not...and that tells you a lot.

I’m just going to focus on on this last sentence. The idea that taking away illegal defense was just so you can play zone as you’ve identified it is so laughably wrong. Many aspects of the modern day defense are built on zone principles. Did you even watch the video I posted?

https://thesportjournal.org/article/strategically-driven-rule-changes-in-nba-causes-and-consequences/

Here. This is a peer-reviewed article on the study of the rule changes from various angles and concludes that the rule changes significantly increased scoring.

Aside from this, David Stern and various coaches were discussing the rule changes at the time, Stern himself stating that the game was too reliant on centers and he created the changes to open up scoring, particularly for perimeter players. Luka stated that it’s “easy” to score in the NBA, elaborating on the three second violation.

So if you’re trying to make excuses for the opposite side of the coin, you’re denying the reality- it’s a heck of a lot easier to score today. We already have so much proof.

And as Johnny pointed out, no one faced defenses as tough as Jordan did against the badboy pistons. Heck, Jordan put up one of most efficient 50 point games ever against that Pistons squad with 59 points and Chuck Daley created the rules because he was tired of being embarrassed by Jordan.

Actually, there’s a good chance that was the most efficient game ever at that amount or more points. It was nearly 80% from the field.

Jordan was a more talented scorer than anyone since and that was forty years ago… pretty amazing. He still looks like a player from the future. That’s how you know he’s the GOAT.

[Johnny Firpo]

There has always been a lack of understanding of what the illegal defense rules actually were. I often see, 'they had to stay close to their man'. Well illegal D was not a measure of how close you were to your assignment. In fact it gave you a lot of room to play off your man. Many teams played zones type defenses in the 80's and 90's. I also think it's funny that people think zones are completely allowed today. You can't play a 2-3 zone today with the 3 second rule. It was put in to allow freedom of penetration.

The other issue is that people like to imply that the isolation game that developed in the late 90's was prevalent throughout the 90's. You can find examples of it but it didn't become a crutch until later in the decade. The stats seemed to be based on sampled up to early to mid 90's. Jordan rarely stayed still long enough to wait for isolation situations to be established, he usually reacted quickly to avoid letting the defense establish itself.

The late 90's and early 2000's struggled offensively for a variety of reasons, one of which was the number of career impacting injuries to upcoming stars and then another was the leagues reaction to refill those roles with younger players where you saw the entry of high school players who never experienced the proper coaching players received in college and learned to deal with better defenses. The league had to supplement their coaching staffs to help players in this regard and the league went out of their way to implement rules changes to make scoring easier. Johnny covered the rule changes that have come in. The league stated at the time that these rule changes were made to make penetration easier. They realized it was a lot easier to find smaller players who could shoot and dribble than it was to find a new Shaq. By making penetration easier it allowed a lot more players to become stars.

Even older players whose game relied on penetration experienced a resurgence under the new hands off rule changes in 2005

Allen Iverson
Highest TS% pre rule change = .535 (most years he was closer to .500)

PPG/TS% 2 years before
27.6/.500
26.4/.478

29 years old, injuries have taken their toll, stats have been declining then suddenly after rule changes he has a revival
30.7/.532
33.0/.543

I'm not sure if Iverson is as good of an example as you think. If you check the stats, he had - by far - his best rim finishing years early, at his athletic peak, and by far, his worst shooting seasons as well, which can not only be measured by his terrible early three point percentage, but also his free throw percentage and mid range stats. By the mid-2000's he couldn't finish at a high rate at the rim anymore, but he became a much better shooter, evidenced by his three point, floater, mid range and free throw percentages. Iverson clearly developed his shot on multiple levels and distances.

I'm not going off on a tangent about Iverson. There are a lot of examples of perimeter players scoring increasing because the rule changes were specifically designed to open up penetration, cause defenses to collapse and therefore open up opportunities for shooters to get better looks. Rather than Iverson, do you dispute that the rules changes made it easier for slashers and hence outside shooters?

2006

Jackson, the league vice president, sees more than an increase in free throws. He says a leaguewide a improvement in shooting percentage can be traced to tighter officiating. With players getting to the rim more easily, defenders have to leave their men to help more, which in turn leaves other players open for shots. All that, he says, is good for the game.

I think the most important rule change was the 3-second rule, but not in the way people think. When the 3-second rule came out, the NBA (Pat Riley and others) actually thought it will slow the game down even further, and it will make it even harder for teams to score, because it will allow zone defense.

Riley wasn't wrong either. From 2001 and 2010, the pace was at an all-time low, and offensive ratings plummeted to numbers previously only seen in the 70s. The rule destroyed the spacing that the illegal defensive rule forced, because now you didn't have to respect non-shooters. But it was a glass ceiling, and Nash and D'Antoni have talked about it since.

From probably as early as 2004, the importance of shooting started to grow year by year. The SSOL Suns ignited what later turned out to be the biggest/most important skill development curve the NBA has ever seen. Young players started to work on their shot like never before. What the Suns started (and Dirk played a part too, along with others) went supernova once Curry joined the league, and the "skill over size" notion took roots.

My point with all that, in my opinion it wasn't directly the rules that changed the NBA, or at least not in the way many think. The 3-second rule didn't make it easier to score, it revealed what was a league-wide skill issue, that simply not nearly enough players could shoot. This is what has changed, the collective mindset, and as a result, today's players are just, on average, much, much, much more skilled than the players of the past, most certainly when it comes to their shooting. And honestly, I feel anyone who doesn't see that, basically chooses not to see it, for nostalgic reasons.

[bledredwine]

There has always been a lack of understanding of what the illegal defense rules actually were. I often see, 'they had to stay close to their man'. Well illegal D was not a measure of how close you were to your assignment. In fact it gave you a lot of room to play off your man. Many teams played zones type defenses in the 80's and 90's. I also think it's funny that people think zones are completely allowed today. You can't play a 2-3 zone today with the 3 second rule. It was put in to allow freedom of penetration.

The other issue is that people like to imply that the isolation game that developed in the late 90's was prevalent throughout the 90's. You can find examples of it but it didn't become a crutch until later in the decade. The stats seemed to be based on sampled up to early to mid 90's. Jordan rarely stayed still long enough to wait for isolation situations to be established, he usually reacted quickly to avoid letting the defense establish itself.

The late 90's and early 2000's struggled offensively for a variety of reasons, one of which was the number of career impacting injuries to upcoming stars and then another was the leagues reaction to refill those roles with younger players where you saw the entry of high school players who never experienced the proper coaching players received in college and learned to deal with better defenses. The league had to supplement their coaching staffs to help players in this regard and the league went out of their way to implement rules changes to make scoring easier. Johnny covered the rule changes that have come in. The league stated at the time that these rule changes were made to make penetration easier. They realized it was a lot easier to find smaller players who could shoot and dribble than it was to find a new Shaq. By making penetration easier it allowed a lot more players to become stars.

Even older players whose game relied on penetration experienced a resurgence under the new hands off rule changes in 2005

Allen Iverson
Highest TS% pre rule change = .535 (most years he was closer to .500)

PPG/TS% 2 years before
27.6/.500
26.4/.478

29 years old, injuries have taken their toll, stats have been declining then suddenly after rule changes he has a revival
30.7/.532
33.0/.543

I'm not sure if Iverson is as good of an example as you think. If you check the stats, he had - by far - his best rim finishing years early, at his athletic peak, and by far, his worst shooting seasons as well, which can not only be measured by his terrible early three point percentage, but also his free throw percentage and mid range stats. By the mid-2000's he couldn't finish at a high rate at the rim anymore, but he became a much better shooter, evidenced by his three point, floater, mid range and free throw percentages. Iverson clearly developed his shot on multiple levels and distances.

I'm not going off on a tangent about Iverson. There are a lot of examples of perimeter players scoring increasing because the rule changes were specifically designed to open up penetration, cause defenses to collapse and therefore open up opportunities for shooters to get better looks. Rather than Iverson, do you dispute that the rules changes made it easier for slashers and hence outside shooters?

2006

Jackson, the league vice president, sees more than an increase in free throws. He says a leaguewide a improvement in shooting percentage can be traced to tighter officiating. With players getting to the rim more easily, defenders have to leave their men to help more, which in turn leaves other players open for shots. All that, he says, is good for the game.

The 3 second violation made it much easier to slash and no hand checking gave players more space. As basketball mastermind Hubie Brown explained, you can't stand in front of a guy if you can't hand check him because he'll blow right by you.

This explains why a vastly inferior player like Russell Westbrook was able to average basically a 30 point triple double for three seasons straight and you have all sorts of players from Harden, Lebron, Westbrook to Shai/Luka cutting and dishing.

Watch on YouTube

[Johnny Bball]

I'm not sure if Iverson is as good of an example as you think. If you check the stats, he had - by far - his best rim finishing years early, at his athletic peak, and by far, his worst shooting seasons as well, which can not only be measured by his terrible early three point percentage, but also his free throw percentage and mid range stats. By the mid-2000's he couldn't finish at a high rate at the rim anymore, but he became a much better shooter, evidenced by his three point, floater, mid range and free throw percentages. Iverson clearly developed his shot on multiple levels and distances.

I'm not going off on a tangent about Iverson. There are a lot of examples of perimeter players scoring increasing because the rule changes were specifically designed to open up penetration, cause defenses to collapse and therefore open up opportunities for shooters to get better looks. Rather than Iverson, do you dispute that the rules changes made it easier for slashers and hence outside shooters?

2006

Jackson, the league vice president, sees more than an increase in free throws. He says a leaguewide a improvement in shooting percentage can be traced to tighter officiating. With players getting to the rim more easily, defenders have to leave their men to help more, which in turn leaves other players open for shots. All that, he says, is good for the game.

I think the most important rule change was the 3-second rule, but not in the way people think. When the 3-second rule came out, the NBA (Pat Riley and others) actually thought it will slow the game down even further, and it will make it even harder for teams to score, because it will allow zone defense.

Riley wasn't wrong either. From 2001 and 2010, the pace was at an all-time low, and offensive ratings plummeted to numbers previously only seen in the 70s. The rule destroyed the spacing that the illegal defensive rule forced, because now you didn't have to respect non-shooters. But it was a glass ceiling, and Nash and D'Antoni have talked about it since.

From probably as early as 2004, the importance of shooting started to grow year by year. The SSOL Suns ignited what later turned out to be the biggest/most important skill development curve the NBA has ever seen. Young players started to work on their shot like never before. What the Suns started (and Dirk played a part too, along with others) went supernova once Curry joined the league, and the "skill over size" notion took roots.

My point with all that, in my opinion it wasn't directly the rules that changed the NBA, or at least not in the way many think. The 3-second rule didn't make it easier to score, it revealed what was a league-wide skill issue, that simply not nearly enough players could shoot. This is what has changed, the collective mindset, and as a result, today's players are just, on average, much, much, much more skilled than the players of the past, most certainly when it comes to their shooting. And honestly, I feel anyone who doesn't see that, basically chooses not to see it, for nostalgic reasons.

Ugh...You just said it yourself... the rule changes were exactly what FORCED the changes. And change in this league doesn't happen overnight. The impact of changing those rules wasn't fully felt until about 2015 and the GSW death lineup, the PNR making big centres obsolete and changing the entire way teams then approached the game cascading down for years to 5 out and how they defend.

Curry plays the way he plays because when he was in high school and college the rule changes allowed him to be more successful. without those changes he doesn't develop his game the way he did, nor does it translate the same way. He doesn't get shots off the same way under the old rules. He isn't seen as more valuable Hasheem Thabeet that way (some are slower to adapt to change than others). Even in Curry's draft year teams had started to see that it was becoming a guard league with the top 10 being almost all guards.

You literally keep thinking this is a skill issue when its clearly different skills are required BECAUSE the rules changed, and entirely different player prototypes are valuable BECAUSE the rules changed. But derp* nostalgia because we like unskilled players.

You literally got all the way to the end and right conclusion in your post, and did a 180 right at the end, and decided it was just skill.

[Johnny Firpo]

I'm not going off on a tangent about Iverson. There are a lot of examples of perimeter players scoring increasing because the rule changes were specifically designed to open up penetration, cause defenses to collapse and therefore open up opportunities for shooters to get better looks. Rather than Iverson, do you dispute that the rules changes made it easier for slashers and hence outside shooters?

2006

I think the most important rule change was the 3-second rule, but not in the way people think. When the 3-second rule came out, the NBA (Pat Riley and others) actually thought it will slow the game down even further, and it will make it even harder for teams to score, because it will allow zone defense.

Riley wasn't wrong either. From 2001 and 2010, the pace was at an all-time low, and offensive ratings plummeted to numbers previously only seen in the 70s. The rule destroyed the spacing that the illegal defensive rule forced, because now you didn't have to respect non-shooters. But it was a glass ceiling, and Nash and D'Antoni have talked about it since.

From probably as early as 2004, the importance of shooting started to grow year by year. The SSOL Suns ignited what later turned out to be the biggest/most important skill development curve the NBA has ever seen. Young players started to work on their shot like never before. What the Suns started (and Dirk played a part too, along with others) went supernova once Curry joined the league, and the "skill over size" notion took roots.

My point with all that, in my opinion it wasn't directly the rules that changed the NBA, or at least not in the way many think. The 3-second rule didn't make it easier to score, it revealed what was a league-wide skill issue, that simply not nearly enough players could shoot. This is what has changed, the collective mindset, and as a result, today's players are just, on average, much, much, much more skilled than the players of the past, most certainly when it comes to their shooting. And honestly, I feel anyone who doesn't see that, basically chooses not to see it, for nostalgic reasons.

Ugh...You just said it yourself... the rule changes were exactly what FORCED the changes. And change in this league doesn't happen overnight. The impact of changing those rules wasn't fully felt until about 2015 and the GSW death lineup, the PNR making big centres obsolete and changing the entire way teams then approached the game cascading down for years to 5 out and how they defend.

Curry plays the way he plays because when he was in high school and college the rule changes allowed him to be more successful. without those changes he doesn't develop his game the way he did, nor does it translate the same way. He doesn't get shots off the same way under the old rules. He isn't seen as more valuable Hasheem Thabeet that way (some are slower to adapt to change than others). Even in Curry's draft year teams had started to see that it was becoming a guard league with the top 10 being almost all guards.

You literally keep thinking this is a skill issue when its clearly different skills are required BECAUSE the rules changed, and entirely different player prototypes are valuable BECAUSE the rules changed. But derp* nostalgia because we like unskilled players.

You literally got all the way to the end and right conclusion in your post, and did a 180 right at the end, and decided it was just skill.

No, the rule changes played a part, but not in the way people think, that's what I was saying, and I think I elaborated on it fairly okay. Whether you agree with it or not, is a different question. Again, normally, the 3-second rule wouldn't have made it easier to score in the overall scheme of the game, but it led to the league-wide realization that you can no longer not be a shooter and be okay and play a lot and have a big role in the NBA.

[turnaroundJ]

If anyone could show me one game today wherein players don’t “handcheck” they should see a doctor because they see things that don’t exist. Players use arms all the time.

“Handchecking” has been used the same for decades but pushing or grabbing or holding has never been allowed.

[Johnny Bball]

I think the most important rule change was the 3-second rule, but not in the way people think. When the 3-second rule came out, the NBA (Pat Riley and others) actually thought it will slow the game down even further, and it will make it even harder for teams to score, because it will allow zone defense.

Riley wasn't wrong either. From 2001 and 2010, the pace was at an all-time low, and offensive ratings plummeted to numbers previously only seen in the 70s. The rule destroyed the spacing that the illegal defensive rule forced, because now you didn't have to respect non-shooters. But it was a glass ceiling, and Nash and D'Antoni have talked about it since.

From probably as early as 2004, the importance of shooting started to grow year by year. The SSOL Suns ignited what later turned out to be the biggest/most important skill development curve the NBA has ever seen. Young players started to work on their shot like never before. What the Suns started (and Dirk played a part too, along with others) went supernova once Curry joined the league, and the "skill over size" notion took roots.

My point with all that, in my opinion it wasn't directly the rules that changed the NBA, or at least not in the way many think. The 3-second rule didn't make it easier to score, it revealed what was a league-wide skill issue, that simply not nearly enough players could shoot. This is what has changed, the collective mindset, and as a result, today's players are just, on average, much, much, much more skilled than the players of the past, most certainly when it comes to their shooting. And honestly, I feel anyone who doesn't see that, basically chooses not to see it, for nostalgic reasons.

Ugh...You just said it yourself... the rule changes were exactly what FORCED the changes. And change in this league doesn't happen overnight. The impact of changing those rules wasn't fully felt until about 2015 and the GSW death lineup, the PNR making big centres obsolete and changing the entire way teams then approached the game cascading down for years to 5 out and how they defend.

Curry plays the way he plays because when he was in high school and college the rule changes allowed him to be more successful. without those changes he doesn't develop his game the way he did, nor does it translate the same way. He doesn't get shots off the same way under the old rules. He isn't seen as more valuable Hasheem Thabeet that way (some are slower to adapt to change than others). Even in Curry's draft year teams had started to see that it was becoming a guard league with the top 10 being almost all guards.

You literally keep thinking this is a skill issue when its clearly different skills are required BECAUSE the rules changed, and entirely different player prototypes are valuable BECAUSE the rules changed. But derp* nostalgia because we like unskilled players.

You literally got all the way to the end and right conclusion in your post, and did a 180 right at the end, and decided it was just skill.

No, the rule changes played a part, but not in the way people think, that's what I was saying, and I think I elaborated on it fairly okay. Whether you agree with it or not, is a different question. Again, normally, the 3-second rule wouldn't have made it easier to score in the overall scheme of the game, but it led to the league-wide realization that you can no longer not be a shooter and be okay and play a lot and have a big role in the NBA.

The 3 second rule replaced the old illegal defense rule. There are two illegal defense rules. The old one prohibited zone defense, play close to your man. But teams in fact did play zone because it wasn'r called. The new rule limits the ability of a zone defender to remain in the paint while guarding no one, making the allowing zone defense rule (which was allowed anyway by ignoring the call) of 2001 less impactful. But pairing it with the handchecking rule makes a huge difference on how easy it is to both, get to the rim, and get off a pick to get a three off.

Like I said, you got to the end then just ignored the entire reason.

The rules changing ARE THE REASON players spend so much more time on shooting from 3, and the entire reason the player prototype is different, especially for bigs. It didn't lead to "the realization". The rule changes are what allowed so much more to be done from distance because it made defending more difficult and getting to the rim far easier.

[Johnny Bball]

If anyone could show me one game today wherein players don’t “handcheck” they should see a doctor because they see things that don’t exist. Players use arms all the time.

“Handchecking” has been used the same for decades but pushing or grabbing or holding has never been allowed.

They are allowed to handcheck below the free throw line (forearm in the back, etc.). Players don't (and never did) initiate their drive below the FT line normally.

So of course you will see it in every game.

https://videorulebook.nba.com/rule/handcheck/

[ForeverTFC]

Zone defense gets rarely used today...it'd often used more to give an opponent something different to look at. If it was so effective at stifling perimeter offense....it would be used most of the time...BUT it's not...and that tells you a lot.

I’m just going to focus on on this last sentence. The idea that taking away illegal defense was just so you can play zone as you’ve identified it is so laughably wrong. Many aspects of the modern day defense are built on zone principles. Did you even watch the video I posted?

I don't get the narrow focus on the illegal defense rule without the discussion of every other rule that changed since. Handchecking, the restricted area didn't exist which has a huge impact on how easy it is to finish, gather step, eurostep, palming and carrying, the fouls called on defense for contact initiated by offense, principle of verticality, 3 second rule. The pick and roll has neutered big centres making it even easier to finish inside.

The idea that the illegal defense rule would have neutered Jordan's game, when Jordan was doubled in the paint every time (Jordan rules, double him and wack him) that they could, seems to be quite overblown when you add the other changes that opened the game up for guards. They have been trying to open the game up for guards to replace Jordan for 20 years, literally. If you gave Jordan every rule he wanted, I don't think he could have even evisioned a rule set that helps him more than the current rule set.

I don't think hard doubling on drives into the paint under the illegal D ruleset, or just doubling on drives into the paint under the current rules changes things as much, in comparison.

And as much as that guy says illegal defense violatons were common, yes and no. He's right that they were common, what he doesn't say is they just weren't called much.

Well the disconnect here is that I never offered an opinion on whether or not it became easier to score overall. My argument is only in regards to scoring in isolation. The reason I’m focusing on illegal defense is because I do think it made isolation scoring that much easier. Yes teams doubled Jordan once he drove but he was in the paint by that time and there’s little you can do once he gets there because he’s MJ.

So far, much of the rebuttals has been around scoring overall which isn’t what I’m arguing. There’s a reason why we’ve become a pick and roll league.

[Frosty]

I'm not sure if Iverson is as good of an example as you think. If you check the stats, he had - by far - his best rim finishing years early, at his athletic peak, and by far, his worst shooting seasons as well, which can not only be measured by his terrible early three point percentage, but also his free throw percentage and mid range stats. By the mid-2000's he couldn't finish at a high rate at the rim anymore, but he became a much better shooter, evidenced by his three point, floater, mid range and free throw percentages. Iverson clearly developed his shot on multiple levels and distances.

I'm not going off on a tangent about Iverson. There are a lot of examples of perimeter players scoring increasing because the rule changes were specifically designed to open up penetration, cause defenses to collapse and therefore open up opportunities for shooters to get better looks. Rather than Iverson, do you dispute that the rules changes made it easier for slashers and hence outside shooters?

2006

Jackson, the league vice president, sees more than an increase in free throws. He says a leaguewide a improvement in shooting percentage can be traced to tighter officiating. With players getting to the rim more easily, defenders have to leave their men to help more, which in turn leaves other players open for shots. All that, he says, is good for the game.

I think the most important rule change was the 3-second rule, but not in the way people think. When the 3-second rule came out, the NBA (Pat Riley and others) actually thought it will slow the game down even further, and it will make it even harder for teams to score, because it will allow zone defense.

The 3 second rule was a counter to zones. If you don't have it you can have pure 2-3 zones, with it you can't camp a defender out in the key like you could under illegal defense rules.

Spoiler:

One positive for defenders is that you can double-team a superstar even when he doesn't have the ball.
But let's be real about this. When analyzing the change, realize the NBA has also implemented a defensive three-second rule. If a player camps out in the three-second lane on the defensive end, it will be ruled illegal, with an immediate penalty of a technical-foul shot.

That being the case, the traditional college 2-3 zone -- planting a player like a Dikembe Mutombo in the three-second area to block shots -- won't exist with the new rules. The big man will have to get out of the lane in that three-second span. - Dick Vitale

Riley wasn't wrong either. From 2001 and 2010, the pace was at an all-time low, and offensive ratings plummeted to numbers previously only seen in the 70s. The rule destroyed the spacing that the illegal defensive rule forced, because now you didn't have to respect non-shooters. But it was a glass ceiling, and Nash and D'Antoni have talked about it since.

Few teams played zones, it was still a predominantly man to man defense. Besides, you never had to respect bad shooters in the past either. The rules allowed a lot of defensive shading

Riley in 2006

Spoiler:

"I think guys are just warming up to the whole thing," Heat coach Pat Riley says. "Everybody's starting to realize, 'Hey, I can get a ton here.' So I think this year has really been the first year where the rule is starting to have an impact. We're going to have a 200-point game by a team pretty soon."

Riley admits there is a drawback to the changes. "It's visually better--you see guys with outrageous nights have 81 points," he says, alluding to the league-high total scored by Bryant on January 22. "But I don't like 26 or 30 free throws by an individual. To me, that is ludicrous."

From probably as early as 2004, the importance of shooting started to grow year by year. The SSOL Suns ignited what later turned out to be the biggest/most important skill development curve the NBA has ever seen. Young players started to work on their shot like never before. What the Suns started (and Dirk played a part too, along with others) went supernova once Curry joined the league, and the "skill over size" notion took roots.

Because the league made rules that opened up penetration AND hence opportunities for shooters. The league stated that. Why you need to try and rationalize it another way confuses me.

My point with all that, in my opinion it wasn't directly the rules that changed the NBA, or at least not in the way many think. The 3-second rule didn't make it easier to score, it revealed what was a league-wide skill issue, that simply not nearly enough players could shoot. This is what has changed, the collective mindset, and as a result, today's players are just, on average, much, much, much more skilled than the players of the past, most certainly when it comes to their shooting. And honestly, I feel anyone who doesn't see that, basically chooses not to see it, for nostalgic reasons.

So the league puts in rules specifically to open things up for perimeter players and you just want to hand wave it away and explain them achieving the results they planned for through 'skills'. It's a lot easier to train players to shoot from three then it is to find guys that can break down a tough defense. They made the rule changes right after the leagues Jordan replacement (Kobe) got locked down in the finals.

Stu Jackson

Spoiler:

Our objective was to allow for more offensive freedom by not allowing defenders to hand-, forearm- or body-check ball handlers. By doing so, we encouraged more dribble penetration. As players penetrated more, it produced higher quality shots for the ball handler as well as shots for teammates on passes back out to perimeter. When NBA players get higher quality shots -- having more time to shoot -- they tend to make more of them.

For an interesting read check out this article from the 80's
https://vault.si.com/vault/1985/10/28/give-the-dan-a-plus

[CodeBreaker]

Of course, aim bot Kawhi is up there.

[bledredwine]

If anyone could show me one game today wherein players don’t “handcheck” they should see a doctor because they see things that don’t exist. Players use arms all the time.

“Handchecking” has been used the same for decades but pushing or grabbing or holding has never been allowed.

No they don’t. They certainly aren’t allowed to give resistance back. Anyone with eyes can see this in highlights of any player from now and the 90s, prior.

[Marrrcuss]

If anyone could show me one game today wherein players don’t “handcheck” they should see a doctor because they see things that don’t exist. Players use arms all the time.

“Handchecking” has been used the same for decades but pushing or grabbing or holding has never been allowed.

No they don’t. They certainly aren’t allowed to give resistance back. Anyone with eyes can see this in highlights of any player from now and the 90s, prior.

You dedicated your sig to some obscure stat that probably hasnt been validated? Wow.

Anyway, Players do get in the occasional hand check but it also depends on the player. You're allowed more leeway against the stronger ones, as always.

[Frosty]

If anyone could show me one game today wherein players don’t “handcheck” they should see a doctor because they see things that don’t exist. Players use arms all the time.

“Handchecking” has been used the same for decades but pushing or grabbing or holding has never been allowed.

No they don’t. They certainly aren’t allowed to give resistance back. Anyone with eyes can see this in highlights of any player from now and the 90s, prior.

You dedicated your sig to some obscure stat that probably hasnt been validated? Wow.

Anyway, Players do get in the occasional hand check but it also depends on the player. You're allowed more leeway against the stronger ones, as always.

Touching a guy with your hands is not hand checking. You used to be able to literally push/against a guy slowing a guy on a pick and roll or directing someone off their preferred line.

The hand check rule had the biggest impact on the game that I've witnessed.

The hand check has always been a part of pro basketball. What we have done is interpret the hand check slightly different in that, if a defender has what I’ll refer to as a “stayed hand” on the defender, e.g. with a stiffened elbow, a foul on the defense would be called if it affects the offensive player's speed, rhythm or balance. It's been five years since we really began to interpret the hand check in this way, and we continue to focus on enforcement.

Three years ago, before the ’04-05 season, we also began to really interpret and enforce the forearm and body check, where by we had defenders either placing a hand or a forearm on an offensive player’s shoulder or hip in an effort to slow them down and give them a defensive advantage in terms of sliding in front of the offensive player. When we disallowed that – the use of the hand, the use of the forearm to the shoulder, the hip, the body – that in conjunction with the hand check interpretation started to give offensive players on the perimeter more offensive freedom.

[bledredwine]

If anyone could show me one game today wherein players don’t “handcheck” they should see a doctor because they see things that don’t exist. Players use arms all the time.

“Handchecking” has been used the same for decades but pushing or grabbing or holding has never been allowed.

No they don’t. They certainly aren’t allowed to give resistance back. Anyone with eyes can see this in highlights of any player from now and the 90s, prior.

You dedicated your sig to some obscure stat that probably hasnt been validated? Wow.

Like this one? https://fadeawayworld.net/lebron-james-has-only-made-19-of-107-shots-in-clutch-situation-during-his-career-17-8-fg-12-5-from-3-pointers

This one is well known.

Or perhaps his 38% midrange percentage, which sinks to 35% in the playoffs? And these are not even clutch stats- general stats.

Or how about his 73% free throw percentage? Think that’s been a good situation in the clutch?

Did you not watch Durant triple his clutch points in their finals series?

You should validate accusations before making them. The vast majority of positive Lebron clutch stats are cherry picked from a tiny sample size or include several minutes in the fourth. He’s definitely great in the fourth, but not for high pressure shots.

[OhayoKD]

Youtuber JxmyHighroller tracked and then compared Jordan's left hand points per iso efficiency against the league's best iso scorers today while using either hand. Turns out Jordan's iso efficiency with only his left hand is far superior to any player in the league even removing Jordan's dominant hand in the comparison. Jordan's ability to finish with his left hand was basically unparalleled in the history of basketball for a wing iso finsher.



For those who want to watch the video breakdown and analysis. Analysis of Jordan's iso scoring numbers starts at 19m mark for those who do not want to watch whole video.

Watch on YouTube

There's no way this thread went 4 pages with no one pointing out these numbers are false lmao