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

[MavsDirk41]

Could Charles Oakley be a starter in the NBA today?

Sent from my SM-S9080 using RealGM mobile app

Yea why not?

You think he has the foot speed to keep.up with the modern 4? He couldn't keep up with athletic 4s in the 90s.

Sent from my SM-S9080 using RealGM mobile app

He would play the 5 like a Looney for GS or a Tristian Thompson played for Cleveland.

[Capn'O]

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.

The guy who immediately came to my mind was Scott Brooks, who was basically the Bill Wennington of point guards. That class of players likely doesn't make the league today.

[Mavrelous]

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.?

It is not just the selection pool getting larger, the incentive to invest in Basketball is much larger, the 90s put NBA basketball on the map, since then, just getting selected in the 1st round sets you for life, making an NBA roster for 1-2 years is the equivalent of middle class income of double digits number in years, Euroleague salaries are also very high, so Euroleague as a fallback plan also has high financial incentive, so people invest more in learning Basketball if they feel they have the tools.

[CodeBreaker]

The best international player was Kukoc. That tells you everything.

[prophet_of_rage]

Yea why not?

You think he has the foot speed to keep.up with the modern 4? He couldn't keep up with athletic 4s in the 90s.

Sent from my SM-S9080 using RealGM mobile app

He would play the 5 like a Looney for GS or a Tristian Thompson played for Cleveland.

Oakley as a starter versus 7 footers? You think a 6'9 non-leaper with slow foot speed can play center? Again he couldn't play it full time in the 90s and the Knicks got rid of him for it.

If an all star power forward has to change positions to play now you've answered your question.

Sent from my SM-S9080 using RealGM mobile app

[prophet_of_rage]

Would Latrell Sprewell be a first team All-NBA fuard at any time in this era?

Would a guy like Milt Palacio even start let alone make the league?

Problem with comparing eras is people talk about the superstars. Forget them. The question is the average player.


Sent from my SM-S9080 using RealGM mobile app

[Bergmaniac]

I said from the very first post, this thread is not about saying today's superstars are better than older superstars but comparing the majority of the league who are not actually superstars.

When I rewatch games from the 90s I see good superstars but as soon as I pay attention to the role players and bench players I see the differences from today.

Exactly. It's one of the things which is immediately noticeable to me when I watch pretty much any game from this era. Many of the bench players who were getting rotation minutes or even the 4th/5th men on good teams would struggle to make the rotation of a non-tanking team today. Or even to make the league at all in many cases. And that's exactly what you'd expect, the sport has become much more popular globally since then and the talent pool is much higher. ALso the training methods have improved a lot too.

[MavsDirk41]

You think he has the foot speed to keep.up with the modern 4? He couldn't keep up with athletic 4s in the 90s.

Sent from my SM-S9080 using RealGM mobile app

He would play the 5 like a Looney for GS or a Tristian Thompson played for Cleveland.

Oakley as a starter versus 7 footers? You think a 6'9 non-leaper with slow foot speed can play center? Again he couldn't play it full time in the 90s and the Knicks got rid of him for it.

If an all star power forward has to change positions to play now you've answered your question.

Sent from my SM-S9080 using RealGM mobile app

Looney and Thomson are both 6’9” bigs without hops, but Looney has longer arms than Thompson and Oakley.

4s and 5s were bigger and primarily played in the paint in the 90s. The Mavs starting power forward is listed at 6’7” and 230. That is a small forward in the 90s. Players are smaller nowadays because of the emphasis on 3 point shooting. Teams want players who can switch defensively on the perimeter. The days of post play are gone. Oakley could play today but he would be a 5.

[MavsDirk41]

The best international player was Kukoc. That tells you everything.

No Detlef Scremph was way better than Kukoc.

[prophet_of_rage]

He would play the 5 like a Looney for GS or a Tristian Thompson played for Cleveland.

Oakley as a starter versus 7 footers? You think a 6'9 non-leaper with slow foot speed can play center? Again he couldn't play it full time in the 90s and the Knicks got rid of him for it.

If an all star power forward has to change positions to play now you've answered your question.

Sent from my SM-S9080 using RealGM mobile app

Looney and Thomson are both 6’9” bigs without hops, but Looney has longer arms than Thompson and Oakley.

4s and 5s were bigger and primarily played in the paint in the 90s. The Mavs starting power forward is listed at 6’7” and 230. That is a small forward in the 90s. Players are smaller nowadays because of the emphasis on 3 point shooting. Teams want players who can switch defensively on the perimeter. The days of post play are gone. Oakley could play today but he would be a 5.

So one you are honestly saying Oakley has the footspeed of Lonney and Thomas? You believe he can switch on defence in the high pick and roll like Looney or Thompson? And then you think he has the length to bother the 7 foot centres in the league?

And you're wrong saying post ups are dead. They are not. They just do not end plays with post ups.

Oakley waa an all-star 4. Do you think he's an all-star 5 in this era? That's what he'd have to be to keep pace. 1 all-star appearance at centre.

And you admit he cannoy physcially play his old position any more? Doesn't that answer your question.

Sent from my SM-S9080 using RealGM mobile app

[MavsDirk41]

Oakley as a starter versus 7 footers? You think a 6'9 non-leaper with slow foot speed can play center? Again he couldn't play it full time in the 90s and the Knicks got rid of him for it.

If an all star power forward has to change positions to play now you've answered your question.

Sent from my SM-S9080 using RealGM mobile app

Looney and Thomson are both 6’9” bigs without hops, but Looney has longer arms than Thompson and Oakley.

4s and 5s were bigger and primarily played in the paint in the 90s. The Mavs starting power forward is listed at 6’7” and 230. That is a small forward in the 90s. Players are smaller nowadays because of the emphasis on 3 point shooting. Teams want players who can switch defensively on the perimeter. The days of post play are gone. Oakley could play today but he would be a 5.

So one you are honestly saying Oakley has the footspeed of Lonney and Thomas? You believe he can switch on defence in the high pick and roll like Looney or Thompson? And then you think he has the length to bother the 7 foot centres in the league?

And you're wrong saying post ups are dead. They are not. They just do not end plays with post ups.

Oakley waa an all-star 4. Do you think he's an all-star 5 in this era? That's what he'd have to be to keep pace. 1 all-star appearance at centre.

And you admit he cannoy physcially play his old position any more? Doesn't that answer your question.

Sent from my SM-S9080 using RealGM mobile app

Oakley in the 80s was more mobile than Oakley in the 90s with the Knicks. Looney has a 7’4” wingspan, Thompson does not. What 7 footers are you talking about other than Joel and Joker? The game is perimeter based nowadays where guys like Porzingis and Wemby are 7”4” guards. Oakley is from a different generation where bigs wresteled in the paint but Thompson and Looney are no quicker than Bulls Oakley in the 80s.

Im sure i can give you the names of players today who would struggle with the physicality of basketball in the 90s.

[ballzboyee]

You could argue 4 of the top 10 players right now are second generation NBA athletes. Curry, Booker, Brunson, and Sabonis. It's kind of hard to argue that the genetics and skill are so superior when you look at NBA bloodlines and come to grasp just how many NBA players come from families of professional athletes. For example, you could even say 5 of the top 10 players are 2nd generation professional athletes if you count guys like Jaylen Brown whose dad was a professional champion boxer. If their parents were not professional athletes, many NBA players have extended family who played college, international, or NBA ball. The international scouting has made the NBA more diverse, but it is still an incredibly tiny percentage of humans born on this planet who have the physical gifts to play in the NBA.

I just can't buy the idea that these humans today are somehow more special than the humans that played 25 or 30 years ago and have created new skills that elevate them above former players. If you eliminated the 3p shot, these teams today would not stand a chance against teams from the 90's. They are very few true PF's in the league today and no true elite centers that can play in the post with their back to the basket. Having small PG's like Stockton and Thomas with low center of gravity and elite ball skills and first step quickness in a true, physical man-to-man half court game is an advantage not a weakness. You have to somebody that can really protect a possession. Also, you can't guard guys like Stockton with a 6'6" combo guard.That player would be too slow in my opinion. In today's game you can be a generalist because the 3p shot allows players like the 6'6" 3&D combos playing PG/SF/PF to shoot over the defense. But if you actually have to run a motion offense in the half court to get a good mid-range shot, it's not so simple anymore. Those little guys are a lot more effective than people realize.. Taller is not always superior. It all depends on the rules and the era.

[prophet_of_rage]

Looney and Thomson are both 6’9” bigs without hops, but Looney has longer arms than Thompson and Oakley.

4s and 5s were bigger and primarily played in the paint in the 90s. The Mavs starting power forward is listed at 6’7” and 230. That is a small forward in the 90s. Players are smaller nowadays because of the emphasis on 3 point shooting. Teams want players who can switch defensively on the perimeter. The days of post play are gone. Oakley could play today but he would be a 5.

So one you are honestly saying Oakley has the footspeed of Lonney and Thomas? You believe he can switch on defence in the high pick and roll like Looney or Thompson? And then you think he has the length to bother the 7 foot centres in the league?

And you're wrong saying post ups are dead. They are not. They just do not end plays with post ups.

Oakley waa an all-star 4. Do you think he's an all-star 5 in this era? That's what he'd have to be to keep pace. 1 all-star appearance at centre.

And you admit he cannoy physcially play his old position any more? Doesn't that answer your question.

Sent from my SM-S9080 using RealGM mobile app

Oakley in the 80s was more mobile than Oakley in the 90s with the Knicks. Looney has a 7’4” wingspan, Thompson does not. What 7 footers are you talking about other than Joel and Joker? The game is perimeter based nowadays where guys like Porzingis and Wemby are 7”4” guards. Oakley is from a different generation where bigs wresteled in the paint but Thompson and Looney are no quicker than Bulls Oakley in the 80s.

Im sure i can give you the names of players today who would struggle with the physicality of basketball in the 90s.

Joel, Joker, KAT, Robinson, Davis, Zubac, Adams, Porzingus, Capela, Wemby ... you think Oakley becomes an all star center amongst this group? You think even 80s Oakley can handle them? Kevon Looneyband and Thompson are low level now and were forced intonthe spoy because they couldn't hang at the 4.

Does Oakley become an all star at 4 or 5 today? Answer that please.

Sent from my SM-S9080 using RealGM mobile app

[prophet_of_rage]

You could argue 4 of the top 10 players right now are second generation NBA athletes. Curry, Booker, Brunson, and Sabonis. It's kind of hard to argue that the genetics and skill are so superior when you look at NBA bloodlines and come to grasp just how many NBA players come from families of professional athletes. For example, you could even say 5 of the top 10 players are 2nd generation professional athletes if you count guys like Jaylen Brown whose dad was a professional champion boxer. If their parents were not professional athletes, many NBA players have extended family who played college, international, or NBA ball. The international scouting has made the NBA more diverse, but it is still an incredibly tiny percentage of humans born on this planet who have the physical gifts to play in the NBA.

I just can't buy the idea that these humans today are somehow more special than the humans that played 25 or 30 years ago and have created new skills that elevate them above former players. If you eliminated the 3p shot, these teams today would not stand a chance against teams from the 90's. They are very few true PF's in the league today and no true elite centers that can play in the post with their back to the basket. Having small PG's like Stockton and Thomas with low center of gravity and elite ball skills and first step quickness in a true, physical man-to-man half court game is an advantage not a weakness. You have to somebody that can really protect a possession. Also, you can't guard guys like Stockton with a 6'6" combo guard.That player would be too slow in my opinion. In today's game you can be a generalist because the 3p shot allows players like the 6'6" 3&D combos playing PG/SF/PF to shoot over the defense. But if you actually have to run a motion offense in the half court to get a good mid-range shot, it's not so simple anymore. Those little guys are a lot more effective than people realize.. Taller is not always superior. It all depends on the rules and the era.

They guarded Stockton with Pippen. Pippen's athleticism is no longee special.

Are the 90s players more talented than the 60s players?

Sent from my SM-S9080 using RealGM mobile app

[prophet_of_rage]

Serious questiin. Why do peoole believe that basketball peaked in the 90s? And why was thr pacr so slow and scoring down so much in the latter half of it if players were si talented?

Sent from my SM-S9080 using RealGM mobile app

[D.Brasco]

I just can't buy the idea that these humans today are somehow more special than the humans that played 25 or 30 years ago and have created new skills that elevate them above former players. If you eliminated the 3p shot, these teams today would not stand a chance against teams from the 90's. They are very few true PF's in the league today and no true elite centers that can play in the post with their back to the basket. Having small PG's like Stockton and Thomas with low center of gravity and elite ball skills and first step quickness in a true, physical man-to-man half court game is an advantage not a weakness. You have to somebody that can really protect a possession. Also, you can't guard guys like Stockton with a 6'6" combo guard.That player would be too slow in my opinion. In today's game you can be a generalist because the 3p shot allows players like the 6'6" 3&D combos playing PG/SF/PF to shoot over the defense. But if you actually have to run a motion offense in the half court to get a good mid-range shot, it's not so simple anymore. Those little guys are a lot more effective than people realize.. Taller is not always superior. It all depends on the rules and the era.

To break it down, do you believe Olympic athletes of today are better than 30 years ago? Most people do, but it's not that they believe individual humans evolve every generation, it's that every aspect of sport and sports science grows and moves forward. Training, knowledge, techniques, nutrition and yes, the expanded genetic pool to pick talent from. That always moves forward in popular sports.

We've seen the impact on the league of all the expanded European talent, imagine once the continent of Africa starts catching up in basketball infrastructure and the potential talent that awaits coming from there.

[MavsDirk41]

So one you are honestly saying Oakley has the footspeed of Lonney and Thomas? You believe he can switch on defence in the high pick and roll like Looney or Thompson? And then you think he has the length to bother the 7 foot centres in the league?

And you're wrong saying post ups are dead. They are not. They just do not end plays with post ups.

Oakley waa an all-star 4. Do you think he's an all-star 5 in this era? That's what he'd have to be to keep pace. 1 all-star appearance at centre.

And you admit he cannoy physcially play his old position any more? Doesn't that answer your question.

Sent from my SM-S9080 using RealGM mobile app

Oakley in the 80s was more mobile than Oakley in the 90s with the Knicks. Looney has a 7’4” wingspan, Thompson does not. What 7 footers are you talking about other than Joel and Joker? The game is perimeter based nowadays where guys like Porzingis and Wemby are 7”4” guards. Oakley is from a different generation where bigs wresteled in the paint but Thompson and Looney are no quicker than Bulls Oakley in the 80s.

Im sure i can give you the names of players today who would struggle with the physicality of basketball in the 90s.

Joel, Joker, KAT, Robinson, Davis, Zubac, Adams, Porzingus, Capela, Wemby ... you think Oakley becomes an all star center amongst this group? You think even 80s Oakley can handle them? Kevon Looneyband and Thompson are low level now and were forced intonthe spoy because they couldn't hang at the 4.

Does Oakley become an all star at 4 or 5 today? Answer that please.

Sent from my SM-S9080 using RealGM mobile app

The only allstar talent in that group are Anthony Davis, Joker, and Joel who are future HOF inductees. Towns and Porzingis play like they are 6’4” guards. Wemby looks to be a generational talent but lets see, Capela can dunk, rebound, and block an occasional shot. No Oakley is not an all star among that group but half those players are not all star talent either. The best American born players are who, SGA, Tatum, Durant? Great players but come on. Its the international talent that has created the gap.

[prophet_of_rage]

I just can't buy the idea that these humans today are somehow more special than the humans that played 25 or 30 years ago and have created new skills that elevate them above former players. If you eliminated the 3p shot, these teams today would not stand a chance against teams from the 90's. They are very few true PF's in the league today and no true elite centers that can play in the post with their back to the basket. Having small PG's like Stockton and Thomas with low center of gravity and elite ball skills and first step quickness in a true, physical man-to-man half court game is an advantage not a weakness. You have to somebody that can really protect a possession. Also, you can't guard guys like Stockton with a 6'6" combo guard.That player would be too slow in my opinion. In today's game you can be a generalist because the 3p shot allows players like the 6'6" 3&D combos playing PG/SF/PF to shoot over the defense. But if you actually have to run a motion offense in the half court to get a good mid-range shot, it's not so simple anymore. Those little guys are a lot more effective than people realize.. Taller is not always superior. It all depends on the rules and the era.

To break it down, do you believe Olympic athletes of today are better than 30 years ago? Most people do, but it's not that they believe individual humans evolve every generation, it's that every aspect of sport and sports science grows and moves forward. Training, knowledge, techniques, nutrition and yes, the expanded genetic pool to pick talent from. That always moves forward in popular sports.

We've seen the impact on the league of all the expanded European talent, imagine once the continent of Africa starts catching up in basketball infrastructure and the potential talent that awaits coming from there.

Simple. More people competing for a static number of jobs.

Sent from my SM-S9080 using RealGM mobile app

[MavsDirk41]

Serious questiin. Why do peoole believe that basketball peaked in the 90s? And why was thr pacr so slow and scoring down so much in the latter half of it if players were si talented?

Sent from my SM-S9080 using RealGM mobile app

Who is saying basketball peaked in the 90s? In the 90s teams ran plays for bigs to post up or you had players isolating offensively. Nowadays offensively its swing the ball around until someone gets an open 3 or drive and kick to an open 3 point shooter. A player scoring 50 in the game today doesnt even make the highlights anymore. Less focus on defense and physicality and more focus on spreading the court and scoring. Thats all im saying.

[D.Brasco]

I just can't buy the idea that these humans today are somehow more special than the humans that played 25 or 30 years ago and have created new skills that elevate them above former players. If you eliminated the 3p shot, these teams today would not stand a chance against teams from the 90's. They are very few true PF's in the league today and no true elite centers that can play in the post with their back to the basket. Having small PG's like Stockton and Thomas with low center of gravity and elite ball skills and first step quickness in a true, physical man-to-man half court game is an advantage not a weakness. You have to somebody that can really protect a possession. Also, you can't guard guys like Stockton with a 6'6" combo guard.That player would be too slow in my opinion. In today's game you can be a generalist because the 3p shot allows players like the 6'6" 3&D combos playing PG/SF/PF to shoot over the defense. But if you actually have to run a motion offense in the half court to get a good mid-range shot, it's not so simple anymore. Those little guys are a lot more effective than people realize.. Taller is not always superior. It all depends on the rules and the era.

To break it down, do you believe Olympic athletes of today are better than 30 years ago? Most people do, but it's not that they believe individual humans evolve every generation, it's that every aspect of sport and sports science grows and moves forward. Training, knowledge, techniques, nutrition and yes, the expanded genetic pool to pick talent from. That always moves forward in popular sports.

We've seen the impact on the league of all the expanded European talent, imagine once the continent of Africa starts catching up in basketball infrastructure and the potential talent that awaits coming from there.

Simple. More people competing for a static number of jobs.

Sent from my SM-S9080 using RealGM mobile app

Yes, the NBA has become even more the elite of the elite in the whole world competing for only about 500 roster spots. The 499th man in the NBA 30 years wouldn't make the cut today.