og15 wrote:brackdan70 wrote:Athletically gifted yes, that’s just a trend as time goes on in general, but the difference is t as much as people make it out to be. I see less players willing or able to play good defense, and understand transition nowadays though.
Athletic ability is actually NOT the thing that would have changed, okay, well the average has changed, but that's due to larger pool, has nothing to do with the average person being more athletic, but there just being more people and more people playing at a high level, which means there are more above average, good and great basketball athletes, meaning the previous average ones get moved down in their level over time. The top ones don't ever get displaced though because they are already the outliers.
Also by athletic ability, we should talk about basketball athletics in total, so everything (speed, quickness, strength, size, length, jumping, balance), not simply run and jump which people seem to limit it to.
The top level of athleticism is exactly the same, top athletes all the way to whenever you want to go back are still top athletes now, but a larger population and pool to choose from would just give more players with the best basketball traits. This can mean that guys who would have made the cut before don't make it anymore.
It's the reality in many professions. Some professional jobs used to have 2.7 GPA's to get in, and now the average is 3.5. Some didn't have licensing exams, now they do. The barrier for entry is higher, no because the best ones then are less smart than the best ones now, but simply because there are a lot more people fighting for those spots, so the average to get in has changed.There's an upper limit on average FT shooting, and it's similar to something like track, where small seconds of improvements are a bigger deal, small percentage improvements after a certain level are a big deal. Just like 3PT shooting, if the whole league goes from 34% to 36%, that's a big deal even if it's "just" 2%, of course that one has more factors than FT, we would have to compare like to like for a more accurate comparison (percentage on catch and shoot vs pulls ups for example).Hair Jordan wrote:hardenASG13 wrote:
So you're equating free throw percentage to talent at basketball? The one time in a game where play is stopped everywhere except for the shooter? The free throw hasn't changed, it's an uncontested shot from 15 feet where the shooter doesn't jump. It makes sense percentages have stayed the same. It has little to do with the skill of the players in the era. Players are better now, they are way more versatile and more athletic during actual gameplay.
If modern athletes are better and more skilled than their 80’s counterparts, FT% should be significantly higher as well but it’s not. It’s actually the perfect measuring stick because FT’s are static. It’s hard to judge eras because rules change, philosophies change, coaching changes etc but FT do not. It’s an unguarded shot 15 ft from the basket. The fact that current FT% are nearly identical to the 70’s and 80’s proves that athletes haven’t improved as much as you think. It’s the game that’s different. It’s the rules that are different and that’s what creates the illusion that modern players are better. FT% suggest otherwise.
Decade by decade FT shooting:
50's: 73.2%
60's: 72.5%
70's: 75.4%
80's: 75.8%
90's: 74.6%
00's: 75.4%
10's: 76.0%
20's: 77.8%
We definitely do see an increase in FT shooting percentages, and of course that would only be one aspect of skills that could possibly have changed. FT shooting is such a basic skill and one that for a sport like basketball can peak the earliest in the sport, so it's really not a very good argument to simply say, "look at FT shooting", the end.
Last season the league wide FT% was 78.4%. The top 5 FTA seasons in NBA history are all in the 2020's. Out of the top 10 FTA percentage seasons, only two of them, #8 and #9 were not in from 08-09 or later.
So even if we focus on FT%, just as a no other analysis view, FT% would actually still suggest that the average skill level has improved.
Of course you reach a level when a sport, profession, whatever matures and the amount of improvement you can make to the average becomes very incremental and no longer noticeable.
You can’t use the 20’s because we’re only 4 years into the decade. The sample size is too small. That’s why used the 10’s for comparison.
Can’t wait to read the mental gymnastics used to justify the responses.
