RealGM

How did the Twin Towers of Duncan/Robinson work in an era where there was not much spacing?

They both had a decent mid range game but their offense was not that great and it worked more due to both of them being elite defenders.

what is next? shaquille o'neal was a terrible player because he didn't shoot 3 pointers?

Spacing isn't everything bro.

Every team wanted two bigs back then. The PF position was a completely different animal from today's game. You had guys like Malone, Oakley, and Mason playing the 4 back then. At most they'd step back for some midrange shots. The entire game revolved around the paint.

By being the twin towers.. of that era.. in that space..

Maybe it wasnt much spacing because of twintowers?

No Zone defence so you had to stay a certain space around your man, Unless it was a hard double team you couldnt play double teams like you did today, So thus less open shooting, So you had more of a role for guys who were defensive monsters who couldnt shoot in the 90's and early 00's untill teams kinda moved away from it.

So a more efficient shot was getting the ball into the paint with a big man and letting them work, higher % shot over contested 3's.

Nowdays much easier to move it, spread defense,

Because nobody had spacing. Sure other teams could fill the paint with defenders and it would affect Spurs offense, but because other team didn't have spacing either, so Spurs could do the same thing against them. And because their paint fillers were called 'Twin towers' they did it better than other teams.

Spacing was less important then. There were fewer offensive uses for space or defensive uses for lack of space.

Well, that's the shortest-summary view. More detail would cover how even mid-range shots could feel like 3-pt kick-outs do today.

Less spacing worked both ways. They were even better defensively because of it. They just grinded to get the points, and could outgrind other teams

It worked because teams weren't punishing them on the other end for doing it. The NBA was not yet aware that it was possible to do that and the rules also didn't favor it very much. All people would talk about back then was rebounding and playing tough and having dogs on the floor. It was a slightly different game.

That was near the end of the era where big men would sag heavily (stay near the top of the key) when switched onto a perimeter player. Shaq especially never bothered to challenge them for example. At some point guys like MDA realized the absurd efficiency with which you can score on those types of plays and forced more of those switches. Further by going small you're saying you're willing to give them an extra 5-6 points beating up a smaller defender, but that defender can score (for example) 10 more points than a big man could muster against a twin towers or an elite defensive big like Robinson/Duncan. This is what made coaches start to push the C's to be more professional on closeouts against perimeter players, and when it was clear many of them couldn't do that those players died out of the NBA. What was left was a new breed of C that could hold their own better on the perimeter. They evolved into a better species you can say.

It worked because players were more rounded back then. They had more skills.

Two top 20 players of all time will work in any era.

They had more spacing than many other teams in the league back then, they both had very good midrange shots while a lot of centres and PFs had no range at all. And of course, they were both elite defenders so the offense didn't need to be great for their team to be dominant.

The Spurs actually played Tim at SF along with Robinson and Will Perdue for a few games. Defenses were different back then, and what it meant to space the floor didn't require players shooting threes. Even in 2014, the Spurs got by on spacing with Tim taking 18-footers at PF while Splitter basically couldn't take a jump shot at all. The modern concept of spacing hasn't been around all that long.

Because back then, your traditional PF was more like a C, and it was entirely common to run 2 bigs. Nowadays, teams play 4 or 5 out, making the PF more like another wing. It worked because that was the league meta at the time.

Fencer reregistered wrote:Spacing was less important then. There were fewer offensive uses for space or defensive uses for lack of space.

Well, that's the shortest-summary view. More detail would cover how even mid-range shots could feel like 3-pt kick-outs do today.

Robinson always had a decent 18 footer in my memory and the stats back it up.

For the seasons we have data [96-02, the latter end of his career mind you] he shot 42% from 16-3P.

That's plenty of "spacing," for the way the game was played at the time. People get so laser focused on hand checking that they forget about illegal defense and the "space," it provided players.

Robinson is habitually underrated. He was an absolute monster defensively and could face up and get to the rim on offense at will. The only way to stop him was to foul him, but he was also an above average foul shooter for the position.

Just check his per100 numbers and take a quick glance over to the far right. ( https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/r/robinda01.html#per_poss ) You can debate how much value to place on these types of stats, but a career 116 ORrtg / 96 DRtg paints a pretty clear picture.

---------------------------------------------------

All of this without even having to mention how amazing Tim Duncan was or the variety of two-post offenses that have always been effective given the proper players.

Tim Duncan screamed future hall of famer before he even stepped foot in the league. The Spurs seemed destined then and do now when you look back on the success they had with Tim.

I was never surprised that Tim Duncan returned to Wake Forest for his senior season. For an odd reason, I felt like he was avoiding being drafted by the expansion teams first draft, Toronto, and the Vancouver Grizzles. It was just a thought.

David Robinson knew what he could expect from Tim Duncan as a teammate. Both greatly benefited by the experience they had together and the maturity level of the two was amazing. Both #1 overall picks, Tim played his senior year at Wake Forest, and David Robinson's Military experience at Navy. David entered the league at 24 years of age and he was 32 years old when Tim Duncan was drafted.



Sent from my SM-N975U using RealGM mobile app

This isn’t meant as a glib but a real suggestion: before posting all these threads about 90s and 2000s ball, can folks just go on YouTube and watch clips of games or players or eras they’re talking about? Most of the answer will be obvious in a few minutes of watching, and a lot of times it’ll be really interesting to see. The game is totally different now from the 80s or 90s or 2000s and you have to see what the concepts and strategies of the time were are to see how players were effective or what worked and what didn’t.

When there are just open questions like this, people mostly seem to rehash little pet theories about the NBAs history (that often aren’t super informed by what’s happened on the court) or complain or defend or smear the reputations of certain players. Good questions but need some real evidence to draw conclusions from or else it ends up in sports yelling.