Do you believe the average NBA player is more talented now than the 90s?

[D.Brasco]

Not talking superstars only, but players and the league as a whole, do you believe the average NBA player is more skilled/athletic than they were 30 years ago? Do you believe today's league has more talented players now?

[hugepatsfan]

Maybe not "more talented" exactly, but more developed. The game is more profitable now so the programs are better. It's a more lucrative dream to pursue so I'm sure guys go at it harder than before. That's not even to mention things unspecific to basketball - modern advancements in training and medical treatments.

[UcanUwill]

Yes I do.

[hauntedcomputer]

Definition of "talent" is "natural aptitude or skill."

I think the natural talent level is the same as it was 500 or 1,000 years ago, accounting for population growth (a much larger pool where more people will have talents adaptable to basketball) and specific skill development of a growing sport that is barely 120 years old. The human race isn't evolving on a stopwatch. The game is not essential to survival.

[D.Brasco]

Definition of "talent" is "natural aptitude or skill."

I think the natural talent level is the same as it was 500 or 1,000 years ago, accounting for population growth (a much larger pool where more people will have talents adaptable to basketball) and specific skill development of a growing sport that is barely 120 years old. The human race isn't evolving on a stopwatch. The game is not essential to survival.

Would you agree that, by this metric, the growth in the selective pool has been exponential due to the NBA now selecting talent from across the entire globe, whereas it was previously mostly limited to the U.S.?

[UcanUwill]

Definition of "talent" is "natural aptitude or skill."

I think the natural talent level is the same as it was 500 or 1,000 years ago, accounting for population growth (a much larger pool where more people will have talents adaptable to basketball) and specific skill development of a growing sport that is barely 120 years old. The human race isn't evolving on a stopwatch. The game is not essential to survival.

Not every person is equally talented, and the fact that now more and more people play the game, have access to learn the game, and NBA is looking at adding said people, less talented are being squeezed out by more talented. It snowballs and effects most leagues, a lot of Basketball leagues are now far more talented than 30 years ago. Guy who would have played in the NBA, now plays in Euroleague, and the guy who would have played in Euroleague, now plays in Eurocup, or Japan or whatever, etc. etc.

[scrabbarista]

More talented and more skilled, yes. (Also, the officiating allows for a lot more moves, which gives the appearance of "more skill" to the ignorant; but also, there is more skill.)

Jordan's still #1 all-time, though.

[Reeko]

More skilled yes, more talented I would lean towards no. But I also think that we have really talented players today that probably don’t get discovered 40 or 50 years ago. The globalization of scouting and grass roots basketball internationally has likely found players that would otherwise be doing whatever job in their home country.

[CBS7]

We just had this thread a couple weeks ago
The answer is 100% yes

If for nothing else, the obsolescence of the "great white stiff". Big, tall, slow centers who's entire reason for existence was to throw 6 fouls at the opposing team's dominant big (especially Shaq)

[Hair Jordan]

FT % in the 1970’s - 75.4%

FT % in the 2010’s - 76.0%

If the modern player is so much more skilled, why have FT% for the league as a whole remained virtually the same over the past 50 years? Athletes are better, training is better, sports science is better, players practice more and yet the percentages are nearly identical. Can’t wait to read the mental gymnastics used to justify the responses.

[JRoy]

They chuck more threes and flop for calls more.

[One_and_Done]

Without question. Not even close.

[pipfan]

I've been watching the NBA since the late 70's, and it is CLEAR that players are more talented now. OF COURSE, the officiating has something to do with it, but there is a much bigger pool of players now (bball more popular, higher population, worldwide growth) and the focus on skills is higher.

Now, I don't know if the game is better to watch now, but sometimes I see scrubs hitting crazy shots like it's nothing.

[CIN-C-STAR]

More athletic?
Marginally, sure.
More skilled?
Of course. Every generation builds on the skill and innovation of previous generations.
Manu’s euro step is now commonplace, not because players are more talented than at his time, but because he showed everyone how to use that skill at a high level and they smartly copied him because it works.
Now we teach it to elementary school kids.
That’s how progress works.

[Lalouie]

they're not BORN MORE TALENTED - let's get that out of the way. there's this inferred misconception that players today are simply better.

they are not..today's players ARE REQUIRED to be more skilled by rules changes. if these very same players today were growing up in the70s/80s/90s they would NOT be as "skilled" as they are now

and let's face it - the de rigueur definition of "more skilled" is shooting from 30'.

[Bornstellar]

No. I believe players today have honed specific skillsets much more than before but not that they're necessarily more talented/skilled than players in the 90s. The way players play is a function of the time period they play in.

In some ways I think guys are less skilled overall because the league has become more homogenized and certain styles of play have been fazed out leading to less variation in playstyles and guys more focused on developing certain aspects of their games only.

I do believe players now have access to much better training and are the beneficiaries of analytics that simply didn't exist back then. But are guys more talented or skilled now? I don't think so. Perhaps marginally, because as time goes on players have more history to study and benefit from. I think a lot of this is just a perception based on rule changes though

[dockingsched]

FT % in the 1970’s - 75.4%

FT % in the 2010’s - 76.0%

If the modern player is so much more skilled, why have FT% for the league as a whole remained virtually the same over the past 50 years? Athletes are better, training is better, sports science is better, players practice more and yet the percentages are nearly identical. Can’t wait to read the mental gymnastics used to justify the responses.

WNBA FT% hovers around 78-80%. Are they simply more talented than the nba or is ft% may be not the most comprehensive measure? Tough call.

[NZB2323]

Yes, the game is more popular internationally, more popular in America, and the game has grown.

If you look at a guy like Bill Wennington, he was big but didn’t have much skill. I feel like the league in the 90s had a bunch of players like Bill Wennington, while the average player now is probably a small forward who is skilled(but not elite) at everything.

[hauntedcomputer]

Definition of "talent" is "natural aptitude or skill."

I think the natural talent level is the same as it was 500 or 1,000 years ago, accounting for population growth (a much larger pool where more people will have talents adaptable to basketball) and specific skill development of a growing sport that is barely 120 years old. The human race isn't evolving on a stopwatch. The game is not essential to survival.

Would you agree that, by this metric, the growth in the selective pool has been exponential due to the NBA now selecting talent from across the entire globe, whereas it was previously mostly limited to the U.S.?

Of course. Basketball emerged as largely an obscure regional sport in northwestern US and now it is international. Larger selection pool, but the average newly born human is not much different over thousands of years once you account for nutrition, health care, and generally stronger social structures. If tossing an object into a hole ten feet above the ground would have been necessary for survival, almost everyone would be good at it. Most of human existence has been spent on survival, not leisure.

That's one reason I celebrate the greats of yesterday. They were competing against the best in the world at that time. Seems like a lot of people confuse "talent" with "the early training and advanced development of specific skills."

[SeattleJazzFan]

with all the foreign players in the league they draw from now, how could it not be? not to mention just how much more popular and advanced the game is from an international standpoint. not only are there more international players in the league, but the international players themselves are better.

and that's even if you think the american players haven't gotten better - which seems like insanity in its own right.