Legler and JJ break down modern offenses, why scoring is up, etc.

[Ruma85]

No shot is the best if you missed it, which you'll never even know if you don't take it in the first place.

lol, what kind of point do you think you're making here?

My point is if you tone down the 3's for a better shot specifically in the mid range area, efficiency goes up

Again, this is false. Maybe not on a particular possession, or game, or even a stretch of games. But over the course of a season, it's been proven beyond any possible refutation that the correct strategy is to focus as much on the 3-point line at the expense of mid-range jumpers as possible. I don't know how many more ways I can spell this out and I'm not going to waste any more time trying.

It's fine to disagree, though I don't see how it's waste of time, why be on here at all.

[Sedale Threatt]

My point is if you tone down the 3's for a better shot specifically in the mid range area, efficiency goes up

Again, this is false. Maybe not on a particular possession, or game, or even a stretch of games. But over the course of a season, it's been proven beyond any possible refutation that the correct strategy is to focus as much on the 3-point line at the expense of mid-range jumpers as possible. I don't know how many more ways I can spell this out and I'm not going to waste any more time trying.

It's fine to disagree, though I don't see how it's waste of time, why be on here at all.

It's not a matter of disagreeing. Pizza vs. hamburgers or blue vs. purple are disagreements. You're trying to argue that 2+2 = 9. It's dumb. NBA offenses won't get more efficient by taking more midrange shots. They've gotten more efficient by taking less. The only thing that's going to change that is to make 3-point shots less valuable by pushing the line back. That's it.

[IamBBAnalysis]

Old heads can't cope with the fact that today's players are better. The fact that the 3 pt line was there for decades, and they were too stubborn/dumb to use it, is also a source of embarrassment.

For whatever reason NBA players are especially sensitive about this. They struggle so much to give modern players their due. You don't see it as much with ex-MLB or NFL players.

Keep in mind its mostly about the average or lower level NBA players than the high level players, although it affects them too. and its mostly about the shooting from deep. Older players had better post games, there were tons of high flyers, and great finishers. As well as mid range play. So its not "all or nothing" either way.

Also, the shooting and skill of the role players or non stars enhances the effectiveness offensively of the other players. That does not mean the other players are better though. It just means they are playing with other guys that space the court more often. Its like if Jordan played with a bunch of Craig Hodges on the perimeter instead of Rodman and Luc Longely. It really opens things up.

[Ruma85]

Again, this is false. Maybe not on a particular possession, or game, or even a stretch of games. But over the course of a season, it's been proven beyond any possible refutation that the correct strategy is to focus as much on the 3-point line at the expense of mid-range jumpers as possible. I don't know how many more ways I can spell this out and I'm not going to waste any more time trying.

It's fine to disagree, though I don't see how it's waste of time, why be on here at all.

It's not a matter of disagreeing. Pizza vs. hamburgers or blue vs. purple are disagreements. You're trying to argue that 2+2 = 9. It's dumb. NBA offenses won't get more efficient by taking more midrange shots. They've gotten more efficient by taking less. The only thing that's going to change that is to make 3-point shots less valuable by pushing the line back. That's it.

I'm certainly not arguing 2+2 = 9

[IamBBAnalysis]

Old heads can't cope with the fact that today's players are better. The fact that the 3 pt line was there for decades, and they were too stubborn/dumb to use it, is also a source of embarrassment.

They weren’t too stubborn or dumb, they lacked the skill to be able to do it. Thats the reason anything but a wide open 3 was considered a bad shot, because shooting off the dribble, stepback 3s and so on are insanely harder to hit and no one back then was good enough at that skill yet. If Steph Curry showed up to training camp any year in the 80s or 90s, there isn’t a coach in the league that would’ve been dumb enough to start preventing him from chucking 3s from anywhere that feels good to him. The reality is we didn’t have anything even close to Curry back then.

Miller was my favourite player and probably the guy who took the most high difficulty 3s for back then and its a joke compared to what even role players can do nowadays. I remember him talking about how he used to train with his big sister and she would make him shoot 1000 shots everyday. Cool story right. Now imagine an entire league where players shoot like 2000 shots everyday instead and the top players like Steph are probably closer to 5000. THATs the difference between back then and today lol.

Its truly amazing to me how much fans my age and ex players want to refuse that today’s players are much better basketball players than back then.

Chris Jackson?

Please with the better basketball players thing...geez. Yes, some are. Some aren't. It depends. On average, yes. Reggie Miller is still a way better shooter than most today. You sound silly.

[IamBBAnalysis]

im mid-30s and I grew up watching basketball in the 90s.


for me there are 2 or 3 things that stick out on the differences.


1/ pace. in the 90s you walked the ball up in half court and then dump it into the elbow. that's how possessions started. you play 2 bigs and each of them are inside the 3pt line on each elbow.

2/ fouls. JJ is both right and wrong. yes, the league today is so much more highly skilled and everyone can shoot and move. no offense to players like Steve Kerr, but his type of player-profile would see 0 playing time in today's nba because he couldn't shoot and move and defend.

but theres a huge difference when you argue "physicality"

90% flagrant fouls today were common fouls in the early 90s. Today on a chase down block if u catch the opponents head on a swipe its a flagrant atleast 50% of the time. in the 90s it was 5%.

if you dunked on a guy with contact and gave him a brief stare down in the 90s, the ball gets inbounded and no one blinks, even the guy that got stared down. part of the game. today, you get teched up and refs today still cant even figure out the difference between you hanging on the rim to stop your momentum and calling a tech for hanging on the rim.


3/ defense. for me this is the biggest difference in today's game. in a single game you can see a 2-3 zone, a strong side flood to clog the paint with defenders pre-rotating on the weak side 1 pass before the strong-weak side ball swing actually happens, and every single type of pnr coverage invented all in a single game. in the 90s you didnt see this level of sophistication at all.

Shaq couldn't shoot. Would he be able to play in today's nba?

[Edrees]

- The number of drives going to the hoop is UP, but free throws are at an all time LOW. This disproves the notion that ticky tacky fouls are always called now.

A lot of good analysis, but I disagree with them on this one. Ticky tack fouls on drives to the hoop are low, but ticky tack fouls on 3point shooters and jump shooters are definitely high.

I'm sure drives to the hoop is UP because overall posessions are up due to faster pace. But the relative number between overall drives in and shots taken from the outside clearly has decreased. With less incentive to drive in (because you wont get a foul call driving in as easily) players shoot more 3's, leading to more scoring, especially because they will call a ticky tack foul for you from the outside, where you can get brutally murdered on your drive to the rim without a call.

[ScrantonBulls]

Efficiency is big thing for the last decade or so, correct, well if your jacking up 3's and missing isn't really the best shot?

No shot is the best if you missed it, which you'll never even know if you don't take it in the first place.

lol, what kind of point do you think you're making here?

That's not my point, my point is if you tone down the 3's for a better shot specifically in the mid range area, efficiency goes up, if you watch a game when team is down say 15 to 25 right, which I'm pretty sure you have do they not shoot 3's to try to catch up, the point is it's not always effective when coming back, for example I watched Wolves vs Raptors from October 25th 2023 Edwards was 4-7 from 3 which is fine, he took 27 shots & made 8, he took one mid range shot, which means 19 shots he took at rim. all I'm saying is if teams work with space from 3 to the rim and took more midrange the efficiency would go up.

Do you have any examples of teams taking less threes and shooting more midrange shots, resulting in a better efficiency?

[Biff]

For the last couple of years I've been saying the same exact thing on here, reddit and other forums and have gotten so much pushback. Finally some damn validation. So sick of all the nostalgia posts complaining about how nobody plays defense anymore and how we need to make the NBA great again.

[stuporman]

Young heads can’t handle they’re soft
Old heads can’t handle they have no skill
Everyone gets to feel aggrieved!

...and mid heads can't handle they're...mid.

[Ruma85]

No shot is the best if you missed it, which you'll never even know if you don't take it in the first place.

lol, what kind of point do you think you're making here?

That's not my point, my point is if you tone down the 3's for a better shot specifically in the mid range area, efficiency goes up, if you watch a game when team is down say 15 to 25 right, which I'm pretty sure you have do they not shoot 3's to try to catch up, the point is it's not always effective when coming back, for example I watched Wolves vs Raptors from October 25th 2023 Edwards was 4-7 from 3 which is fine, he took 27 shots & made 8, he took one mid range shot, which means 19 shots he took at rim. all I'm saying is if teams work with space from 3 to the rim and took more midrange the efficiency would go up.

Do you have any examples of teams taking less threes and shooting more midrange shots, resulting in a better efficiency?

It happens in playoffs, more in the finals, it's silly to think it can not work, if your struggling, why is it so bad to take some midrange shots instead of hosting up 3's can 3's not be a bad shot?

[knickabocker88]

JJ is acting like he magically got better, from his senior year at Duke (National Player of the Year) where he played in a system that played to his strengths to almost not making it out of his rookie contract.

Then the league opened up, valued his shooting and he played 15 years in the league.

To his credit he worked on his weaknesses and stopped impregnating strippers but his overall game didn't change too much.

Grayson Allen is 50/40/90

[Jaqua92]

More players are more skilled then ever. The top 10 across any era is comparable. It's the roleplayers who are so much better today.

It's also true that scoring today is easier than it's ever been. The game has officiated defense out of it. Foul baiting, and ticky tack fouls made offense easier than ever.

Today's players, with the returning of 90s physicality, and hand checking would result in probably 1 30ppg scorer per season, lower scoring games, and the best damn basketball product weve ever seen.

As far as scoring being up simply because players are better than ever? JJ's point?

Well, if you find yourself agreeing with JJ, just know that you're aligning with a man who thinks dinosaurs never existed.

[Peregrine01]

Just because free throw attempts went down while drives went up doesn't mean that the whistle hasn't gotten a lot softer for offensive players.

Drives go up because it's easier to get into the lane since defense is so handicapped and the floor is so spread. Free throw attempts go down because the paint is less crowded and defenders are fearful of being aggressive.

Ben Taylor of Thinking Basketball had some excellent examples of defensive fouls that would've been offensive fouls in a previous era. A defender can take a full shoulder in the chest from a guy like Giannis or Embiid and be CALLED for a defensive foul in today's game.

[ScrantonBulls]

More players are more skilled then ever. The top 10 across any era is comparable. It's the roleplayers who are so much better today.

It's also true that scoring today is easier than it's ever been. The game has officiated defense out of it. Foul baiting, and ticky tack fouls made offense easier than ever.

Today's players, with the returning of 90s physicality, and hand checking would result in probably 1 30ppg scorer per season, lower scoring games, and the best damn basketball product weve ever seen.

As far as scoring being up simply because players are better than ever? JJ's point?

Well, if you find yourself agreeing with JJ, just know that you're aligning with a man who thinks dinosaurs never existed.

The "90s physicality" myth needs to die.

[NiceLikeChrist]

regardless of what you think about physicality, the fact remains that hand-checking existed in the 90s and the removal of it benefited the offense greatly

[DavidSterned]

More players are more skilled then ever. The top 10 across any era is comparable. It's the roleplayers who are so much better today.

It's also true that scoring today is easier than it's ever been. The game has officiated defense out of it. Foul baiting, and ticky tack fouls made offense easier than ever.

Today's players, with the returning of 90s physicality, and hand checking would result in probably 1 30ppg scorer per season, lower scoring games, and the best damn basketball product weve ever seen.

As far as scoring being up simply because players are better than ever? JJ's point?

Well, if you find yourself agreeing with JJ, just know that you're aligning with a man who thinks dinosaurs never existed.

The "90s physicality" myth needs to die.

Serious question: Do you honestly believe the game today is more physical than it was pre-2015?

[Jamaaliver]

Shaq couldn't shoot. Would he be able to play in today's nba?

They'd make him a 2nd round pick and bring him off the bench because he can't guard on the perimeter.

He'd go from the most dominant post scorer in the last 40 years to a backup rebounder.

A complete waste of incredible talent...

[JDR720]

The biggest reason why "Players are more skilled" and that is the reason for increased scoring argument is so flawed is because other sports exist to. Yet they have not had this offensive explosion. So that must mean NBA players are improving so much quicker than they are, which is dumb and obviously not true. Or the rules have benefited offense a lot.

[JN61]

Old heads can't cope with the fact that today's players are better. The fact that the 3 pt line was there for decades, and they were too stubborn/dumb to use it, is also a source of embarrassment.

And young people ''can't cope with the fact that'' entire game is now built to pad offensive players stats because that is deemed to be the most exciting part of the game which is easily marketable to casual fan and way to make revenue. Unlike young fans old fans have decades of experience of following the sport´and how rule changes affected it.