LeTravel, LaQween, LaDouche - La Going to LA

[Severn Hoos]

Maybe he just decided to take his Talents to the Riverwalk. Facing the media is for the little people.

[fishercob]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pT-I8jQDQ7c[/youtube]

"The way we gonna challenge each other in practice, once the games start it's gonna be easy."

[Dat2U]

So sick how the general board obsesses over athleticism to compare eras. Factors much more important than the slight increase in athleticism...

1) Education. The number of "years of college" have dramatically decreased. And the quality of that education has as well. Why? It starts because Jr. high schoolers are being scouted (and know it). Try to teach some kid on the 2016 NBA mock draft board about the hard work involved in learning fundamentals -- when he is dunking over everyone in his county. Then, how many schools allow athletes to skate by without actually learning anything? And then they are drafted younger. Which leads to...
2) Entitlement and money. The average NBA salary in 1980 was $20,000 (roughly $70000 adjusted for inflation). Most weren't rich after one contact -- unlike say Thabeet. You had less players just cashing in, but not doing the work. Coaches are less coach now and more CEOs of kids with a million reasons not to play basketball. Lots of Blatches and Kwames in the league -- guys who feel entitled minus the fundamentals or work ethic.
3) Number of expansion teams watering down the league.
4) Hard fouls. If you know driving into the lane means a receiving a good smack, and you do it anyway, that takes more determination than driving knowing you'll be rewarded (often for minimal contact). It also means you have to develop a set of fakes in order to avoid said smacks.

I could go on... The gross basketball IQ in today's game is much less than previous decades. How many bigs ever reach half their potential today? Remember fully-developed bigs with fully-developed hook shots? It reminds me of Magic's comeback game after he was diagnosed. The announcers were hyping how this "new generation" of guards were so quick. I believe the opposing team was the Warriors w/ Spreewell -- whomever the player was was an All Star and considered a great defender by the announcers. Spreewell would fit the bill having just earned defensive second team. So, the announcers wondered if an older Magic could manage Spree's speed and defense. First quarter. Lakers grab the rebound and outlet to a breaking Magic. It's Spree vs Magic alone at the opposite end. Spree sets-up determined not to allow Magic to take him to the hoop. Magic dips his shoulder and fakes the drive. Spree "quickly" bites on the fake. And Magic smiles and steps back for the trey. Whole crowd laughed. Give me basketball IQ and heart over entitled, athletic children every time.

I disagree, I think players are simply better nowadays. It's not just athleticism, it's about the training and year round committment that it takes to be a pro athlete these days. There are no longer offseasons. There may be two or three weeks of rest and back to working on your game and improving your skillset. There have been so many advances in the fields of nutrition and sports therapy. Players now how to make themselves stronger, quicker, leaner and more explosive. The level of scouting, preparing and analyzing opponents and future picks have also increased a hundred fold.

[barelyawake]

Development of skill sets? I don't see that at all. You think modern players have more "skills" than Magic, Ewing, Jordan, Kareem, Bird? I especially don't see the development of the main organ that drives the others -- the brain. It's as simple as this, adversity breeds character and pampering leads to mental weakness. And I don't see much character in LeBron James (and a good majority of the league). People say the Spurs play "old school" basketball because they grasp the mental portion of the game. And they have used those skills to beat stronger, faster athletes.

[montestewart]

Development of skill sets? I don't see that at all. You think modern players have more "skills" than Magic, Ewing, Jordan, Kareem, Bird? I especially don't see the development of the main organ that drives the others -- the brain. It's as simple as this, adversity breeds character and pampering leads to mental weakness. And I don't see much character in LeBron James (and a good majority of the league). People say the Spurs play "old school" basketball because they grasp the mental portion of the game. And they have used those skills to beat stronger, faster athletes.

Good points. I do agree that today's players are bigger, stronger, faster, and benefit from the enhancements Dat2U mentioned (did he mention steroids?) and when you look at the Spurs, you see what happens when you combine modern enhancements with more traditional dedication. Watching the Spurs last night, I could easily see them competing, and beating, and of the teams from the past. But given the benefit of modern conditioning, scouting, etc., I easily see many of the greats from the past being greats in the present era.

[Nivek]

The game today is different than it was back in whatever "golden" era folks prefer. There's more (and better) long range shooting. Ball handling is better from PG to PF. Guys with size are doing things on the floor that used to be the domain of wings and PGs. Strength and conditioning are unquestionably better today. That doesn't make guys better players, though -- it's still a game of skill.

It makes no sense to me to proclaim one era better than another, and then to support that claim by citing the top 5 or 10 players from a particular era.

Coaching and scouting is better today because there's been so much research into what works and why. In the 80s, the 3pt shot was a gimmick. Now every NBA coach knows the corner 3 is the most valuable shot in the game. How many times in the 70s and 80s did NBA players shoot pull-up 18-foot jumpers on the break? Now we know that's a bad shot -- either take it to the hoop, pull up for a 3, or drive and kick to a teammate for that corner 3.

A lot of this "the old days were better" stuff has that tangy aroma of nostalgia.

[verbal8]

The game today is different than it was back in whatever "golden" era folks prefer. There's more (and better) long range shooting. Ball handling is better from PG to PF. Guys with size are doing things on the floor that used to be the domain of wings and PGs. Strength and conditioning are unquestionably better today. That doesn't make guys better players, though -- it's still a game of skill.

How has FT shooting changed over the years? I know it is a crude metric, but it is at least consistent over the years.

[FreeBalling]

Nivek, do you think the ball handling has gotten better because of the relaxation of, carries, palming and traveling? The game seems to have evolved. However, I'm not sure the rules have. You provide great answers. What are your thoughts?


Just win baby!

[Nivek]

The game today is different than it was back in whatever "golden" era folks prefer. There's more (and better) long range shooting. Ball handling is better from PG to PF. Guys with size are doing things on the floor that used to be the domain of wings and PGs. Strength and conditioning are unquestionably better today. That doesn't make guys better players, though -- it's still a game of skill.

How has FT shooting changed over the years? I know it is a crude metric, but it is at least consistent over the years.

FT% has been amazingly steady, right at 75%.

So, "baseline" shooting ability hasn't really changed much through the years. What has changed is the mix of shots. More threes, fewer mid-range attempts.

Here's an interesting look at the change:

Code: Select all

DECADE  FG%     eFG     2pt%    3pt%    3Share
1980-89 .485    .491    .493    .289    3.9%
1990-99 .465    .488    .483    .347    13.6%
2000-09 .448    .482    .470    .356    19.4%
2010-13 .456    .496    .485    .356    22.8%


FG% continues to drop because players are attempting more 3s. 2pt% over the past 4 years is back up to where it was in the 90s, which is a bit lower than it was in the 80s. 3pt shooting is better today than it was in the 80s or 90s. If we throw out the three "short 3pt line" years, the 3pt% in the 90s falls to .335.

3Share is the percentage of all FGA that were 3pt attempts. In the 80s, the 3pt shot was a gimmick. Nowadays, it's a vital part of the offense.

I'm not saying that players in the 80s were incapable of shooting the 3 accurately. It's a skill, and I'm sure guys then could have learned that skill if it had been valued. Just like guys today would be able to shoot the mid-range shot better if it had more value.

[Nivek]

Nivek, do you think the ball handling has gotten better because of the relaxation of, carries, palming and traveling? The game seems to have evolved. However, I'm not sure the rules have. You provide great answers. What are your thoughts?

I definitely think that's part of it. I'm not sure how much traveling has been relaxed -- at least as compared to the 80s and 90s.

Probably more important -- the league started tracking turnovers and coaches have come to understand their value.

Another big factor -- many players work on their ball handling skills in ways that didn't happen in the past. Really tall guys stayed under the basket many years ago. Now some play on the perimeter, handle the ball, shoot jumpers, etc. Dribbling between the legs or behind the back used to be considered showy (and still is to an extent), but has become a fundamental today.

I wouldn't describe today's game (or players) as "better" than the guys who came before them. One of the reasons they play the way they do is because of what we all learned from watching those guys who came before.

I heard Czaban on the radio one day snickering at the notion of Bill Russell in today's game -- Russell was 6-10 and 215. I think he ballooned all the way to 220 later in his career. But the game was different then. No one was lifting weights. Wilt was one of the first, and he didn't start until later in his career. It was much more of a running game -- constant motion -- than today's more walk-it-up style. If Russell came up today, he'd have lifted weights and entered the league at 250-260 (minimum). He'd probably have been a Dwight Howard-like athlete.

Conversely, Shaq would have been far more powerful than anyone in Russell's era, but could he have kept up with the constant running at 7-1 and 325+? If he'd come of age in the 50s, he probably would've been a Wilt-like athlete -- strong, but 50-60 pounds lighter and leaner.

This is why I like the concept of relative dominance when comparing players of different eras -- how a player compared to his own competition. I also like era-translating stats. Player "shares" of their team's stats haven't really changed all that much through the years. I did a couple "era translations" over at the old blog a few years ago. Here and here.

[go'stags]

For me the biggest difference in watching old games versus games today is the complexity of defensive schemes. watching old games I'm sometimes baffled by the 'looks" on defense-very basic. Now, as you say if the schemes/scouting were as complex back then i'm sure players and teams would have adjusted, and you would see similar stats to the ones we see today. the cream will always rise, and the best players will always be roughly comparable to other greats.

[barelyawake]

I suppose I broadened the conversation to league-wide (a conversation I'm willing to have). But, this discussion was about LeBron James and his place in history. That is why I used the top players. And I fail to see how scouting and how one is coached in game affect a player's skillset. Coaching developmentally does that. And if you are saying that LeBron has been better developmentally coached or that his ability to use that coaching is greater, or even as great as say Magic or Jordan, then I think that is poppycock.

PS Magic's era had what six draft rounds? I'm sure they got everybody. So, how does scouting become an issue? Scouting also brings you 7 foot Kenyans who can't play a lick of basketball.

[go'stags]

Scouting other NBA teams schemes, tendencies, hot spots, etc.

I do agree that too often Lebron puts his head down and barrels into guys, forcing refs to make a call which he usually gets. That is tiresome and frustrating to watch, and not a skill. I am not old enough to know if this happened back in the day, or how often. I do still think that Lebron has impressive "skills".

[Nivek]

I suppose I broadened the conversation to league-wide (a conversation I'm willing to have). But, this discussion was about LeBron James and his place in history. That is why I used the top players. And I fail to see how scouting and how one is coached in game affect a player's skillset. Coaching developmentally does that. And if you are saying that LeBron has been better developmentally coached or that his ability to use that coaching is greater, or even as great as say Magic or Jordan, then I think that is poppycock.

What skill exactly is Lebron missing? In what way is he deficient skills-wise as compared to Magic or Jordan or anyone else who's ever played? He used to have a suspect jumper -- not anymore. He used to lack a post game -- not anymore. He's an elite defender.

He may be lacking in mental toughness in comparison to Jordan, Magic and a few other greats, and -- if that's the case -- it will show up in the number of championships he wins and will therefore affect his place in league history.

In terms of regular season performance, Lebron is dominating his competitors at Jordan's level. He hasn't had the post-season success...yet. And he might not.

PS Magic's era had what six draft rounds? I'm sure they got everybody. So, how does scouting become an issue? Scouting also brings you 7 foot Kenyans who can't play a lick of basketball.

The scouting I was referring to was opponent scouting. Teams know way more about player tendencies and how efficient they are versus various defensive looks than they ever did back in Magic or Jordan's time.

Also, the draft was reduced to two rounds because the league figured out that going beyond two was a waste of time. They were already divvying up more than 90% of players in the league in the first two rounds.

[barelyawake]

Ok, scouting other teams schemes. That affects a player's skill set how? That affects how a coach plays a player in game. It may affect what a coach drills on. It does not affect a player's ability to shoot, pass, lead, play through pain, etc...

[Nivek]

Again, what basketball skill is Lebron missing? He may be lacking in mental toughness. But I don't see deficiencies in his game. There were some previously, but he does just about everything well.

[barelyawake]

I have already outlined the skillset I believe LeBron is deficient in. His basketball IQ is vastly overrated, and he is obviously lacking in character/will. He makes the obvious pass, but is unable to see the court like other greats. He isn't clever. I don't know how a stat can show that, nor how one could prove it in an argument. It's my firmly held opinion. And not just mine by any stretch.

[montestewart]

What skill exactly is Lebron missing? In what way is he deficient skills-wise as compared to Magic or Jordan or anyone else who's ever played? He used to have a suspect jumper -- not anymore. He used to lack a post game -- not anymore. He's an elite defender.

He may be lacking in mental toughness in comparison to Jordan, Magic and a few other greats, and -- if that's the case -- it will show up in the number of championships he wins and will therefore affect his place in league history.

In terms of regular season performance, Lebron is dominating his competitors at Jordan's level. He hasn't had the post-season success...yet. And he might not.

Agreed on all that. Say LeBJ never wins another championship, and he retires with the knock that he couldn't win the big one and lacked mental toughness, or some other variation of his shortcomings. At a minimum, he's still up there with Oscar Robertson, Wilt Chamberlain, Jerry West, Elgin Baylor, Dr. J, Karl Malone, Hakeem Olajuwon, etc. That's not shabby company.

[Ruzious]

I have already outlined the skillset I believe LeBron is deficient in. His basketball IQ is vastly overrated, and he is obviously lacking in character/will. He makes the obvious pass, but is unable to see the court like other greats. He isn't clever. I don't know how a stat can show that, nor how one could prove it in an argument. It's my firmly held opinion. And not just mine by any stretch.

I think there'd be a tiny minority that would agree with you on his passing ability and ability to see the court. For a guy his size, he's as good as it gets - and as good as it's been gotten - with the exceptions of Bird and Magic.

[Nivek]

I agree, Ruz. I think Lebron is a self-absorbed prick, but his hoops IQ is excellent and his passing ability is superior. This season, B-R classified Lebron as a PF...and he had the most pace-adjusted per minute assists of any PF in the database except for Magic in his comeback when he playing PPF (point power forward). In 2009-10, he had the top mark in the same stat for SFs. The previous season, he had the 6th best mark for a SF.

This probably doesn't address BA's contention. Which, I agree, can't be proven.