Modern players better because they have to play against zone?

[Ryoga Hibiki]

Those interviews say a lot about how much weight we should give to former players' opinions.
I think we all agree that the rule was blessing and improved dramatically the quality of the show we're witnessing.

About the actual topic, in my view:
- zone made it really more difficult for post players, incredibily more for the ones slow to read the defenses and reach. I can not imagine how good Yao would have been with the old rules
- it is of course more difficult for iso players, but the ones who are great passers can mitigate the negative impact taking advantage of the no handcheck rules. Very important, now teams have at least other three players with range contributing to the spacing that was previously artificially guaranteed by the illegal defense rule
- i believe great PG's do have an advantage, because the possibility of prerotate and trap has a lower impact than the no hand check, in pick and roll situations. Now it's almost impossible for the primary defender to do anything and you always need the third man, great passers are going to find the open man every time in this situation
- people with range and that understand the game now have a much bigger opportunity, athletic defenders with no range and no offensive game have an hard time staying in the league
- 3 and D swingman now are the hottest commodity, even more are the big men with similar attributes (very rare). The current NBA would really love Bill Laimbeer, I guess

[GYK]

No you have to play against your rules and circumstances. Did they dominate theirs better than a previous player? Yes well they're better.

[penbeast0]

...
- 3 and D swingman now are the hottest commodity, even more are the big men with similar attributes (very rare). The current NBA would really love Bill Laimbeer, I guess

With all due respect, NOBODY who actually played loved Bill Laimbeer.