Chanel Bomber wrote:K-DOT wrote:Thugger HBC wrote:
Due to a lack of defense.
Due to people figuring out that 3>2, and that shooting a 60% layup is better than a 45% mid range
You put a team from the 90s in today's league, they're not gonna be nearly as good on defense as they were back then. Sure, team like the Bulls or Knicks would still be good, but they'd still give up well over 100 points a game, especially if they're playing a 90s front court out there
NBA offenses are just much smarter nowadays. Watching tape of the 90s Bulls or the 90s Knicks knowing how the game would evolve really makes you wonder how they would keep up with modern day offenses. There was little to no spacing, players kept running into each other’s space and their shot selection was questionable at best by today’s standards. Phil Jackson thought that giving up open 3s would lead to long rebounds and fastbreak opportunities if I remember correctly. Put the modern day Warriors or Rockets in the 90s (my favorite era btw) and it’s a damn bloodbath in my opinion. The 90s are by far my favorite era btw.
Defenses were tougher back in the day, not better. It’s harder to play defense now because of how NBA offenses have evolved. Defenses are stretched out. Players need to cover more ground. Bigs need to able to protect the rim and switch onto quicker guards and contain them, otherwise they’re leaving 40% 3pt shooters open and then they’re toast. Good offenses mercilessly hunt mismatches. I think defenses are far more versatile now than they were back in the day because of these challenges. In fact, that’s one area where the Bulls were ahead of the curve with MJ, Scottie and Rodman being able to guard multiple positions. The only significant advantage that modern day defenses have is the zone defense which has in large part spelled the end of post-up play. The handchecking rule has made it easier as well but I think its impact is completely overblown and doesn’t affect defenses nearly as much as the rise of 3 point shooting and the improved shot selection league-wide.
The championship Knicks teams played strong man to man and team defense. Hand checking was allowed, of course. On offense, the Knicks did well because they had ball movement that rivalled the best there has been in the last 10 years. Each player knew his role, where he could hit his shots, and very few shots were ever taken outside of their comfort zone. There was even one big, Jerry Lucas, who hit very long jumpers that would now be 3's. They were widely credited as having won because of their intelligence as individuals and as a team. Each offensive player knew the defensive capabilities of his opponent, and every defender knew the offensive skill of his opponent. At least 4 starters were capable of 20 point games, as they were good shooters but, more importantly, they took smart shots.
I'm sure the athleticism was less and training wasn't as advanced, but basketball was exciting. How did the Knicks win? Other teams hated playing them because they often scored well under their averages due to smothering defense. So Knicks games were usually lower scoring than those of other teams, and you could predict the winner of most games. High scoring game = loss, low scoring game = win.
* We have a Brunson Burner™ * 
