One of the things I hate most about this new NBA

[KnixtapeH20]

Every single single single single play there's a screen run for the ball handler.... Growing up especially in the and1 mixtape era the NBA was heavily influenced by the streets simply bc the youth coming into the NBA was... It was all about the crossover which u rarely if ever see anymore. Everyone needs a screen....

Combine that with going to the rack is becoming less and less, the fouls are ridiculous even the slightest tap there's a whistle... If they reffed the game the same for Steph / Melo they would of spent the entire game at the foul line.

Iverson, Kobe, McGrady, steph (marbury) , francis, skip, crawford, jason williams, Tim Hardaway, Wade, Rose, Rondo, Wall, Arenas.... Can't say I'm loving the change of the direction from of raining 3s, soft defense, lack of ball handlers

[knicks94]

What I hate about the new NBA is that there are 30 teams and 20 of them get rewarded with a postseason birth. The playin tournament is like the GED of professional basketball. What other league rewards mediocrity as much as the NBA?

[KnixtapeH20]

What I hate about the new NBA is that there are 30 teams and 20 of them get rewarded with a postseason birth. The playin tournament is like the GED of professional basketball. What other league rewards mediocrity as much as the NBA?

Agreed but I'd much rather watch this new system in the 90s / early 2000s.. I feel like today's NBA is almost predicated on needing a star to shine, prolly bc there's fewer now than before also...

[knicks94]

What I hate about the new NBA is that there are 30 teams and 20 of them get rewarded with a postseason birth. The playin tournament is like the GED of professional basketball. What other league rewards mediocrity as much as the NBA?

Agreed but I'd much rather watch this new system in the 90s / early 2000s.. I feel like today's NBA is almost predicated on needing a star to shine, prolly bc there's fewer now than before also...

To tell you the truth, I am glad that there are less superstars today than they were 10 years ago.Too many bandwagoners, especially in NY, who root for whichever team their superstar is on. I root for the orange and blue, I could care less about the individual stats that Lebron or Giannis put up on a regular basis if they are doing it for a team I do not root for. I wish the NBA would go back to the pre Kobe/T-Mac era in which the focus was on actual teams instead of superstars.

[thebuzzardman]

Every single single single single play there's a screen run for the ball handler.... Growing up especially in the and1 mixtape era the NBA was heavily influenced by the streets simply bc the youth coming into the NBA was... It was all about the crossover which u rarely if ever see anymore. Everyone needs a screen....

Combine that with going to the rack is becoming less and less, the fouls are ridiculous even the slightest tap there's a whistle... If they reffed the game the same for Steph / Melo they would of spent the entire game at the foul line.

Iverson, Kobe, McGrady, steph (marbury) , francis, skip, crawford, jason williams, Tim Hardaway, Wade, Rose, Rondo, Wall, Arenas.... Can't say I'm loving the change of the direction from of raining 3s, soft defense, lack of ball handlers

Watch on YouTube

Lots of screens are legal now that would be illegal 15,20,30,40 etc years ago. Why not do it, since there's all the advantage and very little disadvantage?

Just like lowering the shoulder, pushing off etc - almost always called as fouls on the defender, generally called on the offensive player 20 years ago etc.

NBA wants scoring and not defense.
Plus rule changes on handchecking etc.

Besides athleticism, the leagues of 50, 30 ,20 years and now almost different sports.

[DOT]

There were fewer fouls per game (and by extension, per100) last year than any year in the 00s

What's happening is selective memory combined with nostalgia. It's the same way people have erased all the bad songs from decades ago from their memories so they think only good songs were made then and only bad songs are made now.

[nykballa2k4]

There were fewer fouls per game (and by extension, per100) last year than any year in the 00s

What's happening is selective memory combined with nostalgia. It's the same way people have erased all the bad songs from decades ago from their memories so they think only good songs were made then and only bad songs are made now.

Nah it's a taste thing. Right now, the refs are very loosey-goosey with how they make calls. Every drive there is contact, which is fine, but despite the same level and location of contact, based on the ref's view at a given moment (or if you are more conspiracy-based, what the league want/needs) will sometimes call a foul sometimes not.

For example RJ, if we are 'getting calls' he goes inside, gets the call, takes the FT's. If we are not, he goes in, gets hit, falls, we are man down on defense, he tries again soon thereafter, same result, now we are stuck with looking at perimeter shots (all contested).

I have no idea what is/is not a foul any more because of how the calls go. I never had the problem watching in the 90's.

[DOT]

I never had the problem watching in the 90's.

Yeah man, like I said

Nostalgia and selective memory go a long way

It's like 90% just "old man yells at clouds"

[nykballa2k4]

I never had the problem watching in the 90's.

Yeah man, like I said

Nostalgia and selective memory go a long way

It's like 90% just "old man yells at clouds"

Nah, always been blown calls and "superstar calls" but this new era I honestly can't tell what is/is not a foul. From rim contact, to charge calls, to moving screens. Manu - as fun as he was- you could say was the architect for creating fouls with his arms (a forefather of the swing through), KG was the only guy getting away with the moving screens. But we all knew this.... The at-the-rim plays are complete dice-rolls now.

[thebuzzardman]

There were fewer fouls per game (and by extension, per100) last year than any year in the 00s

What's happening is selective memory combined with nostalgia. It's the same way people have erased all the bad songs from decades ago from their memories so they think only good songs were made then and only bad songs are made now.

The video outlines step by step how the game has changed in rules enforcement over the past 50 years. And makes passing reference to rule changes like 5 second rule, eliminating post centric play - I'm not necessarily complaining, and of course famously the hand check rule, or anti hand check.

People always do the nostalgia thing; I've been saying that for years. In fact, when I was 15 I made a pact with myself that I would never say "back in the day" as I got older because I knew it was BS then and it surely is. Different? Sometimes. Better? Nah.

[Kidknick!]

What I hate about the new NBA is that there are 30 teams and 20 of them get rewarded with a postseason birth. The playin tournament is like the GED of professional basketball. What other league rewards mediocrity as much as the NBA?

Ahh yes, the Laker rule. This new playoff system rewards star "Load Management". If almost everybody gets in, WTF is there to fight over? And the Refs make having home court advantage USELESS.

[Chanel Bomber]

@buzz

I think the game has evolved and teams/players have generally gotten better. Most (I reckon) competitive environments do over time. Not all, probably, maybe. But NBA teams are better informed analytically than their predecessors, and they benefit from having had the opportunity to watch, analyze, and learn from the ones who came before them.

The 1990s are my favorite era of basketball, and probably forever will be due to emotional attachment, but you rewatch the games and these teams just wouldn't be able to keep up offensively against today's teams with their lack of spacing and 3-point shooting. Defensively, let's see how tough they really are when the big 7-footer has to guard Steph Curry behind the 3-point line. These teams didn't know better and it's not a slight against them. It doesn't diminish their talent or their greatness. They just didn't yet know some of the things we take for granted now. Teams are much smarter today in terms of the shots they seek and the mismatches they hunt, and the players are better equipped (i.e., skilled) to excecute those plans. Evolution.

This is not a "today's better" spiel. In 2045 we'll probably look at the NBA of today and think of how little we knew then. Who knows where the game is heading, all I'm sure of is that it's not done evolving.

And this isn't limited to just basketball. But for some reason there is strong pushback against that in basketball.

I will say this however, the OGs had to play under much stricter rules, and a lot of players from today's era wouldn't get away with the amount of carrying (Ja), travelling (Giannis), or flopping (Luka, Harden, Trae, CP0) that is - for some reason - allowed today. There's no denying also that players got away with more in terms of physicality and that the game (not necessarily the inherent character of the players) was tougher as a result.

And secondly, the game today wouldn't exist if it weren't for the people who built it, and who progressively amassed all the information we enjoy now. I like JJ Redick, and I understand his frustration against this reactionary view whereby the game isn't just not evolving but actually regressing, but his plumber rant was out of bounds and completely disrespectful, if not entirely ungrateful.

[thebuzzardman]

@buzz

I think the game has evolved and teams/players have generally gotten better. Most (I reckon) competitive environments do over time. Not all, probably, maybe. But NBA teams are better informed analytically than their predecessors, and they benefit from having had the opportunity to watch, analyze, and learn from the ones who came before them.

The 1990s are my favorite era of basketball, and probably forever will be due to emotional attachment, but you rewatch the games and these teams just wouldn't be able to keep up offensively against today's teams with their lack of spacing and 3-point shooting. Defensively, let's see how tough they really are when the big 7-footer has to guard Steph Curry behind the 3-point line. These teams didn't know better and it's not a slight against them. It doesn't diminish their talent or their greatness. They just didn't yet know some of the things we take for granted now. Teams are much smarter today in terms of the shots they seek and the mismatches they hunt, and the players are better equipped (i.e., skilled) to excecute those plans. Evolution.

This is not a "today's better" spiel. In 2045 we'll probably look at the NBA of today and think of how little we knew then. Who knows where the game is heading, all I'm sure of is that it's not done evolving.

And this isn't limited to just basketball. But for some reason there is strong pushback against that in basketball.

I will say this however, the OGs had to play under much stricter rules, and a lot of players from today's era wouldn't get away with the amount of carrying (Ja), travelling (Giannis), or flopping (Luka, Harden, Trae, CP0) that is - for some reason - allowed today. There's no denying also that players got away with more in terms of physicality and that the game (not necessarily the inherent character of the players) was tougher as a result.

And secondly, the game today wouldn't exist if it weren't for the people who built it, and who progressively amassed all the information we enjoy now. I like JJ Redick, and I understand his frustration against this reactionary view whereby the game isn't just not evolving but actually regressing, but his plumber rant was out of bounds and completely disrespectful, if not entirely ungrateful.

If I had to guess, things not being called are in the interest of "flow", where they want as few stoppages as possible while maintaining the integrity of the game.

You see it in Hockey, definitely basketball, I'd assume everywhere but USA football, less calls mean more entertainment.

Look at introducing the take foul penalty in an effort to discourage stoppages

[Fury]

There were fewer fouls per game (and by extension, per100) last year than any year in the 00s

What's happening is selective memory combined with nostalgia. It's the same way people have erased all the bad songs from decades ago from their memories so they think only good songs were made then and only bad songs are made now.

The only thing I disagree with about this, at least with hip hop, is that it's clear that there was more skill than there is now in this soundcloud migos and lil wayne wannabe BS era

[DOT]

The only thing I disagree with about this, at least with hip hop, is that it's clear that there was more skill than there is now in this soundcloud migos and lil wayne wannabe BS era

The bad stuff has more visibility now

Back when, if you sucked and you didn't have a relative at a label, you just didn't get air time. Now anybody with a mic and an internet connection can put their stuff out there

But the good stuff is still just as good, and in 30 years, we won't remember any of those guys, just the good ones.

[Fury]

@buzz

I think the game has evolved and teams/players have generally gotten better. Most (I reckon) competitive environments do over time. Not all, probably, maybe. But NBA teams are better informed analytically than their predecessors, and they benefit from having had the opportunity to watch, analyze, and learn from the ones who came before them.

The 1990s are my favorite era of basketball, and probably forever will be due to emotional attachment, but you rewatch the games and these teams just wouldn't be able to keep up offensively against today's teams with their lack of spacing and 3-point shooting. Defensively, let's see how tough they really are when the big 7-footer has to guard Steph Curry behind the 3-point line. These teams didn't know better and it's not a slight against them. It doesn't diminish their talent or their greatness. They just didn't yet know some of the things we take for granted now. Teams are much smarter today in terms of the shots they seek and the mismatches they hunt, and the players are better equipped (i.e., skilled) to excecute those plans. Evolution.

This is not a "today's better" spiel. In 2045 we'll probably look at the NBA of today and think of how little we knew then. Who knows where the game is heading, all I'm sure of is that it's not done evolving.

And this isn't limited to just basketball. But for some reason there is strong pushback against that in basketball.

I will say this however, the OGs had to play under much stricter rules, and a lot of players from today's era wouldn't get away with the amount of carrying (Ja), travelling (Giannis), or flopping (Luka, Harden, Trae, CP0) that is - for some reason - allowed today. There's no denying also that players got away with more in terms of physicality and that the game (not necessarily the inherent character of the players) was tougher as a result.

And secondly, the game today wouldn't exist if it weren't for the people who built it, and who progressively amassed all the information we enjoy now. I like JJ Redick, and I understand his frustration against this reactionary view whereby the game isn't just not evolving but actually regressing, but his plumber rant was out of bounds and completely disrespectful, if not entirely ungrateful.

While teams are more analytical and try to be as efficient as possible, efficiency doesn't necessarily mean better product or more visually appealing. It's the same issue with baseball. Everyone is trying to hit home runs or walk because it's more efficient. But it makes the game boring.

That being said, I could understand why the game might be more visually appealing to people today. But again, with analytics and maximizing every possession, it seems like most teams play the same way. It felt like there were more styles back then, teams all playing differently than one another. At least more so than what's successful today.

[Stannis]

Game is just evolving.

I like the midrange & post game as much as the next guy. Yeah, it's more aesthetic. But it's very difficult to do and hard to learn. Not everyone is Michael Jordan, Kobe or Durant. If the 3 & D players were encouraged to be midrange shooters, they'd still be viewed as shot chuckers when inefficient. And it'd still be an eyesore watching players with a lower skillset hold the ball for +5 seconds only to brick a 12 foot jumper or a 7 foot fadaway. It's only pretty when it goes in.

I also think the "harder defense" back in the day was over embellished. Yeah, hard foul would probably not get you a flagrant 1 or 2 back in the day. But that's a good change for the game today. Players get injured more often. No need to make things worse and allow WWE-esque defense.

[Fury]

The only thing I disagree with about this, at least with hip hop, is that it's clear that there was more skill than there is now in this soundcloud migos and lil wayne wannabe BS era

The bad stuff has more visibility now

Back when, if you sucked and you didn't have a relative at a label, you just didn't get air time. Now anybody with a mic and an internet connection can put their stuff out there

But the good stuff is still just as good, and in 30 years, we won't remember any of those guys, just the good ones.

We can only judge what''s being played on air. And what's being played on air now compared to back then isn't as good.

I strongly disagree with the good stuff being just as good as it was 30 years ago. Like Kendrick Lamar would be the only rapper who would be still be considered great back then. We will remember more good guys from 30 years ago than we will remember "good guys" from today.

[DOT]

I strongly disagree with the good stuff being just as good as it was 30 years ago.

And in 30 years, people who grew up listening to this are gonna say the same

It's like 90% nostalgia. There's no definitive way to judge quality, but people have been saying the same stuff for generations at this point, and we have records of it

That's not good or bad, it just is. You get older, you don't vibe with new music. And since we can't objectively measure quality, it's a pointless discussion, but I just don't subscribe to the philosophy that no matter what point in time you're at, music (and to a greater extent, culture as a whole) will have peaked around 20 years before that.

[Fury]

I strongly disagree with the good stuff being just as good as it was 30 years ago.

And in 30 years, people who grew up listening to this are gonna say the same

It's like 90% nostalgia. There's no definitive way to judge quality, but people have been saying the same stuff for generations at this point, and we have records of it

That's not good or bad, it just is. You get older, you don't vibe with new music. And since we can't objectively measure quality, it's a pointless discussion, but I just don't subscribe to the philosophy that no matter what point in time you're at, music (and to a greater extent, culture as a whole) will have peaked around 20 years before that.

It is subjective but clearly you don’t have to be as skilled today. Like you said, more bad stuff gets played on air.