NBA players are better than ever, despite what the legends say

[C_Alejandro]

This NBA season has the deepest level of talent we’ve ever seen. We have players from Jokic, Embiid, Luka, Steph, Ja, Kyrie, and many other talents. Even the role players are incredibly versatile and skilled.

Yet every single day, I see constant comments from older heads like Charles Oakley saying that Giannis wouldn’t make an NBA roster in the 1990s. Or that Steph would get bullied by the likes of Isiah Thomas

I’m all for respecting the NBA older-heads, but no other sport does this. NFL and soccer fans aren’t constantly listening to legends denigrating the current game. They barely even do analysis anymore.

I see guys like SHAQ who didn’t even know who Rui Hachimura was, despite his literal job being paid to talk about basketball. Yet this same guy will denigrate the current talent and say they’re “soft.”

It’s honestly killing the product. Fans believe what these legends say, and their nostalgia leads them to believe that NBA superstars today would struggle in the 1990s. That’s false. The opposite is true. Yet I’m seeing 21 year olds who falsely believe that they missed out on the golden era of basketball.

Again, no other sport does this. Basketball is beset by this cancer of nostalgia bias and Jordan worship, and it needs to stop if this sport is to thrive.

You are correct in your assumption that yes people who undermine superstars today as if they could not compete in past years is hyperbole. That does not at all support the claim that you then follow it up with that "NBA players are better then ever", that also is equally an exaggeration. Guys today in general put way too much focus on pure shooting and not enough on the other fundamentals of the game, and that's not their fault, that's just what the game has evolved into. The league having its best shooting period ever and its highest scoring period ever does not make the players the best they have ever been or the most talented players have ever been.

Truth is Steph in the 90's would have topped out somewhere between his Dad's career and Reggie Millers career, which is by all means still a great NBA player, it was just literally a different game at the time. Giannis totally would have had a career, they may have groomed him more in development as a wing instead of a center just because of what other "bigs" there were to play against but I mean Cliff Robinson and Rashard Lewis both had excellent careers he could have developed along that path and maybe surpassed those guys with better man to man defense.

^^This is the exact poisonous mentality I’m talking about

What do you mean players lack fundamentals today? Players today are literally better shooters, passers, and dribblers than before. Their skill sets are more versatile than ever. I know old-heads love to harp about the previous era having better “fundamentals” but the current era is more athletic AND more skilled than ever

And Curry wouldn’t have “topped out as a role player” in the 1990s. He would’ve been the MVP. Players wouldn’t know what to do with him.

Same with Giannis. Look at the size of wing players in the 90s, and Giannis would’ve steamrolled all of them. He would be BETTER back then than today.

This is the incorrect old-head mentality I was talking about. Assuming Jordan would somehow dominate if he played today, but Curry would be a role player? Despite Curry being a more impactful and superior offensive player than any 90s player? You’ve gotta be kidding me

[Quattro]

Why are you quoting Charles Oakley? I mean everything that comes out of his mouth for pretty much his entire career and retirement is borderline outrageous.

People generally go way too far no matter what side of this argument they’re on. It’s just as stupid to say Giannis and Curry would be role players in the 80s as it is to say Jordan and Bird would be ordinary today.

[Ambrose]

The league is a lot deeper now. I think top players are comparable but 6th to 15th guys on rosters are absolutely better now. Rule changes both ways impact things stylistically so people are arguing different things. Overall talent and depth is undeniably greater today.

[Sedale Threatt]

Defense and rim protection is also at some of the worst level ever seen.

This year, all 30 teams are shooting at a ridiculous clip in the restricted area. Denver is at the top at 72% and OKC is at the bottom at 62%

Compare that to 1997 where the best team was 61% and the worst team was 44% at the rim. The best team at the rim back then would be the worst in the league today.

Its easy to get high percentage buckets when there is no resistance at the rim.

and the reason there isn't much resistance at the rim is because guys can score from everywhere at crazy efficient rates with insane volume. you have to guard the entire court which opens up the rim. the overall skill level of players has made defense nearly impossible from all over the court - not just at the rim.

in those days, if you protected the paint, you won. period. simply doesn't work that way today - you have to defend the entire court.

This is such a huge point that gets overlooked. The 3-point shot is basically a math/efficiency problem that only took the NBA 30-plus years to figure out, and rosters have been shifted to accommodate. You have to at least try to contest shots out to 24-25 feet or you run the risk of getting run off the court if the other team is having even a half-way decent night at the line. And on the flip side, you have to try to capitalize.

In sharp contrast to, say, the 80s, where teams ran their offenses pretty much exclusively from 18-20 feet and in, and despite an almost complete lack of spacing they were still playing smooth, free-flowing games. That should tell you all you need to know about both offenses and defenses at the time. It was super fun to watch and probably my favorite era from a purely aesthetic standpoint. But it was also basically the dark ages in terms of tactics.

Just review the Jordan Rules, which everybody freaked out over as the height of sophistication at the time: force him left, double-team him on the drive and foul the sht out of him if he gets past you. And that's it. That constituted high-level game planning back then. Fast forward to present day, when teams might spend an entire practice working on defensive rotations.

The Pistons did, however, reveal a huge inefficiency -- defense wasn't being emphasized nearly enough -- which teams addressed to the point that, within 10 years, the NBA had turned into a halfcourt slog that was almost unwatchable. And that's basically pro sports, or any industry really: Somebody comes up with a new way to approach an old thing, people copy them if it's successful enough and you have a paradigm shift. Like fourth downs in football. It used to be a huge gamble even inside your own 5. Now we have irrefutable statistical proof that you're costing your team points if you don't go for those.

So I'm pretty much in the same boat as NO-KG-AI a few pages back. If this was a video game, I'd definitely turn the sliders down on the scoring and allow for a little more physicality. But compared to where the league was 20-some years ago, it's a vast, vast improvement. I've said this probably 100 times in recent years, but I thought the fast break was permanently dead in the NBA so I'm just happy to see teams running and pushing the pace again.

Also, hand checking suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuucks. Play defense with your feet, not your hands.

[Nate505]

On another note, why care about what the older generation says about your product. If you have a better product people will believe it. If you don't, they won't. That's just how the world works.

[lobosloboslobos]

I'm thinking about the NBA in relation to other sports and trying to see where it measures up in terms of players being better.

If we look at baseball, I think that you could argue that some players today are a little better in some aspects of the game, especially pitchers throwing hard. Sure you had Feller and later Marichal and Koufax back in the day breaking 100 mph but these days that happens all the time. But overall I would say there is at best a marginal difference in the skills of baseball players of today vs 50 years ago. Wouldn't shock me if I was proven wrong but that's my somewhat casual take.

Hockey wise i'd say that players are generally better in a lot of ways, but the game itself interests me way less than it used to because defenses are so sophisticated now compared to when the game was more open. But my impression is that the drills and year round training that players do now gives average players technical skills that only offensive stars had back in the day. Not that everybody today is as good as the greats of the past, but the overall skill level seems to have gone up a lot.

Football well it is obvious that the revolution in quarterback skills has transformed the league in recent years. Arguably its akin to the 3 ball revolution in the NBA. There is really no argument that can be made to say that QBs or wide receivers or tight ends were better back in the day.

TV and then the internet have also had a huge impact because when people can see what the greats of the past are doing they can copy them and eventually improve on them. it's normal. NBA players of today should be better than those of the past.

[C_Alejandro]

On another note, why care about what the older generation says about your product. If you have a better product people will believe it. If you don't, they won't. That's just how the world works.

Because the older generation of guys are the ones in NBA Media. That’s why.

Because Shaq said that the Golden State Warriors would be an 8th seed in his era. Because Scottie Pippen said that his team would easily sweep the Warriors. The outright disrespect is too much to bear. If Charles Barkley was to step down and be replaced by JJ Redick and other new-school analysts, I’d be a very happy camper.

This poisonous mentality has filtered through to the younger fans. Watch every Twitter thread, Instagram comment section, or YouTube video, and you’ll see literally thousands of fans saying, “Man I wish I was old enough to witness the 90s. These new school players are soft compared to the previous era. Even Shaq says it.”

They need to fire these guys and replace them. Just because you were a legendary player doesn’t mean you’re any good as a basketball analyst and ambassador of the game. Again, NO OTHER SPORT does this. No other sport denigrates the current era quite like basketball. These people are supposed to be ambassadors of the game

Watch on YouTube

Fire them all.

[C_Alejandro]

Defense and rim protection is also at some of the worst level ever seen.

This year, all 30 teams are shooting at a ridiculous clip in the restricted area. Denver is at the top at 72% and OKC is at the bottom at 62%

Compare that to 1997 where the best team was 61% and the worst team was 44% at the rim. The best team at the rim back then would be the worst in the league today.

Its easy to get high percentage buckets when there is no resistance at the rim.

and the reason there isn't much resistance at the rim is because guys can score from everywhere at crazy efficient rates with insane volume. you have to guard the entire court which opens up the rim. the overall skill level of players has made defense nearly impossible from all over the court - not just at the rim.

in those days, if you protected the paint, you won. period. simply doesn't work that way today - you have to defend the entire court.

This is such a huge point that gets overlooked. The 3-point shot is basically a math/efficiency problem that only took the NBA 30-plus years to figure out, and rosters have been shifted to accommodate. You have to at least try to contest shots out to 24-25 feet or you run the risk of getting run off the court if the other team is having even a half-way decent night at the line. And on the flip side, you have to try to capitalize.

In sharp contrast to, say, the 80s, where teams ran their offenses pretty much exclusively from 18-20 feet and in, and despite an almost complete lack of spacing they were still playing smooth, free-flowing games. That should tell you all you need to know about both offenses and defenses at the time. It was super fun to watch and probably my favorite era from a purely aesthetic standpoint. But it was also basically the dark ages in terms of tactics.

Just review the Jordan Rules, which everybody freaked out over as the height of sophistication at the time: force him left, double-team him on the drive and foul the sht out of him if he gets past you. And that's it. That constituted high-level game planning back then. Fast forward to present day, when teams might spend an entire practice working on defensive rotations.

The Pistons did, however, reveal a huge inefficiency -- defense wasn't being emphasized nearly enough -- which teams addressed to the point that, within 10 years, the NBA had turned into a halfcourt slog that was almost unwatchable. And that's basically pro sports, or any industry really: Somebody comes up with a new way to approach an old thing, people copy them if it's successful enough and you have a paradigm shift. Like fourth downs in football. It used to be a huge gamble even inside your own 5. Now we have irrefutable statistical proof that you're costing your team points if you don't go for those.

So I'm pretty much in the same boat as NO-KG-AI a few pages back. If this was a video game, I'd definitely turn the sliders down on the scoring and allow for a little more physicality. But compared to where the league was 20-some years ago, it's a vast, vast improvement. I've said this probably 100 times in recent years, but I thought the fast break was permanently dead in the NBA so I'm just happy to see teams running and pushing the pace again.

Also, hand checking suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuucks. Play defense with your feet, not your hands.

This X1000

Thank you for this post. You’ve summed it up better than I ever could’ve done. I agree with everything you said here.

[JonFromVA]

Too bad there aren't more Cavs fans on this forum, because LeBron career nicely spans the end of the hand check era up until now and just so happens to overlap the period where analytics got serious.

I tie those two things together because of how long it took to put shooters around James inspite of the analytical evidence that doing so would lead to crazy offensive efficiency even though he's never been much of a shooter himself.

To this day we still struggle to identify shooters who can also defend and big men who can move, so just wait for that.

Also ... Eric Snow is one of the only players I can think of that had his career harmed by the end of hand checking, but dude was slow, couldn't shoot, and near the end of his career.

The op is making an important point. Not sure why some people always feel the need to turn an argument inside out and take it as an insult to previous generations.

We can't know what Jordan would do in this era, but we do know what LeBron has done across generations and anyone thinking he's on a clear downwards slope but that the league is somehow propping him up needs to understand how much his understanding of the game and opponents has increased while the rules have been the same since his 2nd season.

[Nate505]

On another note, why care about what the older generation says about your product. If you have a better product people will believe it. If you don't, they won't. That's just how the world works.

Because the older generation of guys are the ones in NBA Media. That’s why.

Because Shaq said that the Golden State Warriors would be an 8th seed in his era. Because Scottie Pippen said that his team would easily sweep the Warriors. The outright disrespect is too much to bear. If Charles Barkley was to step down and be replaced by JJ Redick and other new-school analysts, I’d be a very happy camper.

This poisonous mentality has filtered through to the younger fans. Watch every Twitter thread, Instagram comment section, or YouTube video, and you’ll see literally thousands of fans saying, “Man I wish I was old enough to witness the 90s. These new school players are soft compared to the previous era. Even Shaq says it.”

They need to fire these guys and replace them. Just because you were a legendary player doesn’t mean you’re any good as a basketball analyst and ambassador of the game. Again, NO OTHER SPORT does this. No other sport denigrates the current era quite like basketball. These people are supposed to be ambassadors of the game

Watch on YouTube

Fire them all.

If there's a demand for Barkley to step down, he would. People like him, despite his supposed biased analysis. If there was a demand for JJ Reddick to be on tv he would be. Heck, he's on ESPN now, so it's not like he's not around.

And the analysts can talk all the way, but if what they are saying isn't true it won't resonate much. The problem is, when Shaq calls new players soft, and people see new players load managing, and people turn on a game expecting to see Jokic and Embiid play and don't see it, and they see examples of this sort of thing time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time again, all of a sudden calling new players soft resonates with them.

You can hate that all you want, and you can go out there and try to make the argument that they have to do so much more out there and their bodies need more of a rest, but it really doesn't matter. People want to see the top players play against each other, and not for just a handful of games in late April thru June.

[C_Alejandro]

If there's a demand for Barkley to step down, he would. People like him, despite his supposed biased analysis. If there was a demand for JJ Reddick to be on tv he would be. Heck, he's on ESPN now, so it's not like he's not around.

And the analysts can talk all the way, but if what they are saying isn't true it won't resonate much. The problem is, when Shaq calls new players soft, and people see new players load managing, and people turn on a game expecting to see Jokic and Embiid play and don't see it, and they see examples of this sort of thing time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time again, all of a sudden calling new players soft resonates with them.

You can hate that all you want, and you can go out there and try to make the argument that they have to do so much more out there and their bodies need more of a rest, but it really doesn't matter. People want to see the top players play against each other, and not for just a handful of games in late April thru June.

Because Charles Barkley is funny and charming; that’s the real reason. Some people just have a personality that resonates well. Barkley has done a lot to shed his “hater” image that he had during the first Warriors title run in 2015, but he still unduly hates on the current game. So does Shaq, and Stephen A Smith, and Skip Bayless. Max Kellerman was the one guy who respected the current NBA era, until he was browbeaten and bullied by Stephen A Smith to change his tune.

BTW, Embiid and Jokic did play one another recently. And Embiid dominated him.

And stop making it seem like today’s players don’t suit up to play games. They play a lot. It’s just that players have to move more on the court, leading to more fatigue and wear/tear on your body. But if that’s your only argument; then I fail to see any reason to claim today’s game is somehow inferior to the 1990s game

Question: Do you think the KD-led Warriors would be an 8th seed in Shaq’s era? Because that’s what Shaq thinks, and he’s a Hall of Fame player. Should we take Shaq seriously here?

[okboomer]

Nostalgia is great.

[Sprewell4Three]

On another note, why care about what the older generation says about your product. If you have a better product people will believe it. If you don't, they won't. That's just how the world works.

Because the older generation of guys are the ones in NBA Media. That’s why.

Because Shaq said that the Golden State Warriors would be an 8th seed in his era. Because Scottie Pippen said that his team would easily sweep the Warriors. The outright disrespect is too much to bear. If Charles Barkley was to step down and be replaced by JJ Redick and other new-school analysts, I’d be a very happy camper.

This poisonous mentality has filtered through to the younger fans. Watch every Twitter thread, Instagram comment section, or YouTube video, and you’ll see literally thousands of fans saying, “Man I wish I was old enough to witness the 90s. These new school players are soft compared to the previous era. Even Shaq says it.”

They need to fire these guys and replace them. Just because you were a legendary player doesn’t mean you’re any good as a basketball analyst and ambassador of the game. Again, NO OTHER SPORT does this. No other sport denigrates the current era quite like basketball. These people are supposed to be ambassadors of the game

Watch on YouTube

Fire them all.

Dude you’re complaining about a clip posted a couple of years ago. Who cares? Only thing i agree with chuck is that load management BS and 3 point shooting contest teams have now a days.

You saying players are 100% better is your opinion. Players today are better in different skill sets then some of the players before. That’s it. The rules that the NBA has allowed or not calling does make certain guys look better then they are. The Carrying, traveling is absolutely ridiculous today. Ja Morant literally has a high lights of all his carry’s on YouTube .

[Dmagic]

people just dont get it. always trying to imply some dumb ****

[Yoshun]

The greats of any era would be great in any era. Guys like MJ, LeBron, Curry, Magic, Bird, etc... Could play in any time period.

[Ontario]

This NBA season has the deepest level of talent we’ve ever seen. We have players from Jokic, Embiid, Luka, Steph, Ja, Kyrie, and many other talents. Even the role players are incredibly versatile and skilled.

Yet every single day, I see constant comments from older heads like Charles Oakley saying that Giannis wouldn’t make an NBA roster in the 1990s. Or that Steph would get bullied by the likes of Isiah Thomas

I’m all for respecting the NBA older-heads, but no other sport does this. NFL and soccer fans aren’t constantly listening to legends denigrating the current game. They barely even do analysis anymore.

I see guys like SHAQ who didn’t even know who Rui Hachimura was, despite his literal job being paid to talk about basketball. Yet this same guy will denigrate the current talent and say they’re “soft.”

It’s honestly killing the product. Fans believe what these legends say, and their nostalgia leads them to believe that NBA superstars today would struggle in the 1990s. That’s false. The opposite is true. Yet I’m seeing 21 year olds who falsely believe that they missed out on the golden era of basketball.

Again, no other sport does this. Basketball is beset by this cancer of nostalgia bias and Jordan worship, and it needs to stop if this sport is to thrive.

You are correct in your assumption that yes people who undermine superstars today as if they could not compete in past years is hyperbole. That does not at all support the claim that you then follow it up with that "NBA players are better then ever", that also is equally an exaggeration. Guys today in general put way too much focus on pure shooting and not enough on the other fundamentals of the game, and that's not their fault, that's just what the game has evolved into. The league having its best shooting period ever and its highest scoring period ever does not make the players the best they have ever been or the most talented players have ever been.

Truth is Steph in the 90's would have topped out somewhere between his Dad's career and Reggie Millers career, which is by all means still a great NBA player, it was just literally a different game at the time. Giannis totally would have had a career, they may have groomed him more in development as a wing instead of a center just because of what other "bigs" there were to play against but I mean Cliff Robinson and Rashard Lewis both had excellent careers he could have developed along that path and maybe surpassed those guys with better man to man defense.

^^This is the exact poisonous mentality I’m talking about

What do you mean players lack fundamentals today? Players today are literally better shooters, passers, and dribblers than before. Their skill sets are more versatile than ever. I know old-heads love to harp about the previous era having better “fundamentals” but the current era is more athletic AND more skilled than ever

And Curry wouldn’t have “topped out as a role player” in the 1990s. He would’ve been the MVP. Players wouldn’t know what to do with him.

Same with Giannis. Look at the size of wing players in the 90s, and Giannis would’ve steamrolled all of them. He would be BETTER back then than today.

This is the incorrect old-head mentality I was talking about. Assuming Jordan would somehow dominate if he played today, but Curry would be a role player? Despite Curry being a more impactful and superior offensive player than any 90s player? You’ve gotta be kidding me

A) I didn't say Steph would be a role player I said he'd be somewhere between his dad, (a sixth man of the year winner) and Reggie Miller (x5 all-star, x3 all-NBA HOF'er), that'd be a good couple of steps up the ladder from role player but not what he is today because no coach in the 1990's would allow him such a green light to fire up threes.

B) today's fundamental shooting is drastically better but no the ball handling and passing and rebounding and shot blocking, driving and post up footwork is not improved, (fundamentals other than shooting). The handling, passing and finishing around the rim use to have to take place through a lot more contact and more often against a set half court defensive system. The athletics today certainly is not improved, guys who were genetic freaks back then are just as much around in either era, the big lumbering mutombo-esque centers are gone but so too are any of the rim running dunkers who cannot hit a tree point shot so people do not focus on developing that kind of explosiveness.

So again being much better at one skill does not equal being more "Skilled", for sure a lot of guys who are great today however totally could have carved out careers back then, it was just a different time so they would have developed a different in a different style is all.

[JonFromVA]

You are correct in your assumption that yes people who undermine superstars today as if they could not compete in past years is hyperbole. That does not at all support the claim that you then follow it up with that "NBA players are better then ever", that also is equally an exaggeration. Guys today in general put way too much focus on pure shooting and not enough on the other fundamentals of the game, and that's not their fault, that's just what the game has evolved into. The league having its best shooting period ever and its highest scoring period ever does not make the players the best they have ever been or the most talented players have ever been.

Truth is Steph in the 90's would have topped out somewhere between his Dad's career and Reggie Millers career, which is by all means still a great NBA player, it was just literally a different game at the time. Giannis totally would have had a career, they may have groomed him more in development as a wing instead of a center just because of what other "bigs" there were to play against but I mean Cliff Robinson and Rashard Lewis both had excellent careers he could have developed along that path and maybe surpassed those guys with better man to man defense.

^^This is the exact poisonous mentality I’m talking about

What do you mean players lack fundamentals today? Players today are literally better shooters, passers, and dribblers than before. Their skill sets are more versatile than ever. I know old-heads love to harp about the previous era having better “fundamentals” but the current era is more athletic AND more skilled than ever

And Curry wouldn’t have “topped out as a role player” in the 1990s. He would’ve been the MVP. Players wouldn’t know what to do with him.

Same with Giannis. Look at the size of wing players in the 90s, and Giannis would’ve steamrolled all of them. He would be BETTER back then than today.

This is the incorrect old-head mentality I was talking about. Assuming Jordan would somehow dominate if he played today, but Curry would be a role player? Despite Curry being a more impactful and superior offensive player than any 90s player? You’ve gotta be kidding me

A) I didn't say Steph would be a role player I said he'd be somewhere between his dad, (a sixth man of the year winner) and Reggie Miller (x5 all-star, x3 all-NBA HOF'er), that'd be a good couple of steps up the ladder from role player but not what he is today because no coach in the 1990's would allow him such a green light to fire up threes.

B) today's fundamental shooting is drastically better but no the ball handling and passing and rebounding and shot blocking, driving and post up footwork is not improved, (fundamentals other than shooting). The handling, passing and finishing around the rim use to have to take place through a lot more contact and more often against a set half court defensive system. The athletics today certainly is not improved, guys who were genetic freaks back then are just as much around in either era, the big lumbering mutombo-esque centers are gone but so too are any of the rim running dunkers who cannot hit a tree point shot so people do not focus on developing that kind of explosiveness.

So again being much better at one skill does not equal being more "Skilled", for sure a lot of guys who are great today however totally could have carved out careers back then, it was just a different time so they would have developed a different in a different style is all.

Chicken & the egg ... can't say what a coach would do with a player who could do what nobody had ever done.

Look at what Jim O'Brien had to work with when he tried to see what a 3pt shooting team could do and then consider one of those key players inspite of his inefficient chucking helped Wade and Shaq win a chip because a PF who can get out of the paint is valuable even in 2006.

[druggas]

They're so soft today and one dimensional.

[Nate505]

Because Charles Barkley is funny and charming; that’s the real reason. Some people just have a personality that resonates well. Barkley has done a lot to shed his “hater” image that he had during the first Warriors title run in 2015, but he still unduly hates on the current game. So does Shaq, and Stephen A Smith, and Skip Bayless. Max Kellerman was the one guy who respected the current NBA era, until he was browbeaten and bullied by Stephen A Smith to change his tune.

BTW, Embiid and Jokic did play one another recently. And Embiid dominated him.

And stop making it seem like today’s players don’t suit up to play games. They play a lot. It’s just that players have to move more on the court, leading to more fatigue and wear/tear on your body. But if that’s your only argument; then I fail to see any reason to claim today’s game is somehow inferior to the 1990s game

Question: Do you think the KD-led Warriors would be an 8th seed in Shaq’s era? Because that’s what Shaq thinks, and he’s a Hall of Fame player. Should we take Shaq seriously here?

So the new guard apparently isn't charming and funny. So it goes I guess.

Embid and Jokic were just two random names I thought of at the moment. The thing is though there's a ton of other ones I could pull out that make this theory true. Plus, there's a reason the term "load management" came into existence and it's not because a couple people are whining about it. People see what they see.

The problem is that you keep getting upset that players today are called soft, but that's why. They don't play as many games as the, well how do you put it, "old-heads" did. As to whether today's game is inferior to the game in the 90s, that's more about what aesthetics you prefer than anything else. I can't say I'm a big fan of them myself, but to each their own. Some people might love seeing 40% of shots be 3s and rules that allow no defense to be played. I don't, but again, to each their own.

Finally, no. The Snake Led Warriors in Shaq's era would be a #1 seed in that era. I do wonder how they would handle getting mugged more, but they are most likely too talented to not win a ton of games. That said, I've never taken Shaq seriously about anything in my life.

[MavsDirk41]

If there's a demand for Barkley to step down, he would. People like him, despite his supposed biased analysis. If there was a demand for JJ Reddick to be on tv he would be. Heck, he's on ESPN now, so it's not like he's not around.

And the analysts can talk all the way, but if what they are saying isn't true it won't resonate much. The problem is, when Shaq calls new players soft, and people see new players load managing, and people turn on a game expecting to see Jokic and Embiid play and don't see it, and they see examples of this sort of thing time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time again, all of a sudden calling new players soft resonates with them.

You can hate that all you want, and you can go out there and try to make the argument that they have to do so much more out there and their bodies need more of a rest, but it really doesn't matter. People want to see the top players play against each other, and not for just a handful of games in late April thru June.

Because Charles Barkley is funny and charming; that’s the real reason. Some people just have a personality that resonates well. Barkley has done a lot to shed his “hater” image that he had during the first Warriors title run in 2015, but he still unduly hates on the current game. So does Shaq, and Stephen A Smith, and Skip Bayless. Max Kellerman was the one guy who respected the current NBA era, until he was browbeaten and bullied by Stephen A Smith to change his tune.

BTW, Embiid and Jokic did play one another recently. And Embiid dominated him.

And stop making it seem like today’s players don’t suit up to play games. They play a lot. It’s just that players have to move more on the court, leading to more fatigue and wear/tear on your body. But if that’s your only argument; then I fail to see any reason to claim today’s game is somehow inferior to the 1990s game

Question: Do you think the KD-led Warriors would be an 8th seed in Shaq’s era? Because that’s what Shaq thinks, and he’s a Hall of Fame player. Should we take Shaq seriously here?

Why does it bother you so much what Shaq and Barkley say? Everybody is entitled to their opinions.