Curry & Harden would've averaged 40 a game in the 90's. Change my mind

[Antinomy]

I agree.

As long as people around here actually believe that the 90s were so much better, you’ll never really get a fair discussion about it.

[GregOden]

I gotta say no. Hand checking was a thing. Curry and Harden can create space now, but back then the defender was allowed to put hands on your body to control where you went. Once hand checking was removed a lot of players blossomed. Nash instantly comes to mind. Also, Kobe Bryant. Bryant was great, but even his best scoring seasons came after hand checking was removed.

Another thing they called back then was traveling, which gets by a lot today. Honestly, I think they'd do great, but 40 pts is a bit of a stretch.

Well im not sure they called travelling that often to be honest even back then but the eurostep and 3 point step backs would be called travelling in the 90s as they werent legal moves back then. That would definitely affect Harden's game.

[picko]

I don't think the 1990s was better - the league is clearly of higher quality now. That said, there are a range of factors working against Curry and Harden averaging 40 PPG in the 1990s.

1. Slower pace and fewer possessions.
2. Fewer three-point attempts
3. Lower usage rates among stars

Harden's game in particular is basically determined by the advance stats revolution that hadn't occurred in the 1990s. It's basically impossible to determine what his game would look like without that influence. I'd certainly wager on fewer three's and less ref baiting.

[WarriorGM]

Pace keeps getting brought up as a reason. But that ignores the ability of someone like Curry to increase it.

If he is left alone as he crosses the half court and isn't defended closely at the perimeter all he needs to do is do a pull-up three repeatedly early on the shot clock and the pace will increase.

Still averaging 30 is difficult. Averaging 40 is hyperbole. They could probably do it if they took every shot but they wouldn't play like that.

[turnaroundJ]

again with the handchecking myth. michael f-in jordan got the same soft calls that stars get today. all. the. time. every game. people were NOT grabbing players all game...that's so ridiculous. not any more than how curry gets grabbed the moment he crosses the half court line. people were NOT beating each other up in the 90s. even in the playoffs. rewatch the games.

[dhsilv2]

I think they would get called for palming and traveling more than anything.

Rules were different then.

Now rules are subjective.

Handles are sick but most of the time its illegal.

Double step backs are sick but most of the time its illegal.

Back then they would be called on their ****.

Now its just whatever.

Palming in the 90's? You're joking right? The zero step might be an interesting question as while guys were using it in the 90's it wasn't as weaponized.

Still, physical play would super charge Harden given he'd have been as strong as anyone on the court minus a few big men of that era. Even Curry would be among the stronger small guards unlike today. Hand checking would impact Curry's game a bit, but it wouldn't even bother Harden.

[dhsilv2]

Some teams (the Shaq/Kobe Lakers perhaps most notably) designed their defense to protect the rim and avoid drive and kick 3's at the cost of allowing guards relatively open off the dribble jump shots. This was effective as off the dribble jump shots were relatively low % and no guards of the era could really hurt them this way.

Curry/Harden/Lillard - in this case especially Curry - would have broken those defenses. A simple 1/5 PNR gets Curry an effectively uncontested off the dribble 3 against those teams every time down the floor. If one of those teams is stubborn then Curry really could go for 50 in a half from all the open looks. I still don't see them averaging 40 ppg though. Most teams had other defensive strategies that don't give up such easy shots by design, and even the ones that generally did would redesign their defense for the special cases (likely at a big cost of either having bigs used to defending only near the rim being caught in space more or brining a lot of help D to give open looks to teammates).

In general the lower pace keeps anyone from going for 40, even if the different level of off the dribble shooting compared to the rest of the league would make them unique offensive forces.

Harden averaged 36 at a 96 team pace. 98 league average pace was 90.3. It was 96.8 in 1993.

I don't think pace is a strong argument against Harden scoring 40 as his teams traditionally have had paces not that far off from the 90's. They might be a slightly faster paced team for that era but nothing radical

[SharpyShuffle]

I don't think the 1990s was better - the league is clearly of higher quality now. That said, there are a range of factors working against Curry and Harden averaging 40 PPG in the 1990s.

1. Slower pace and fewer possessions.
2. Fewer three-point attempts
3. Lower usage rates among stars

Harden's game in particular is basically determined by the advance stats revolution that hadn't occurred in the 1990s. It's basically impossible to determine what his game would look like without that influence. I'd certainly wager on fewer three's and less ref baiting.

Chicken and egg. Did Harden make the advanced stats revolution, or did it make him? Obviously it's a bit of both; but I think his existence certainly helped accelerate the acceptence of the new order. Moreyball is synonymous with "the advanced stats revolution", and Harden is synonymous with Moreyball.

Drop Harden into the 90s and let him do his thing and I think it doesn't take too long for him to become seen as an Ohtani-level freak who is tearing up the informal rulebook on what is and isn't possible. I also think he's such a master foul-baiter than he can find a way to manipulate the rules in any era. He is truly gifted in figuring out how to take advantage of the letter of the law.

[JN61]

I gotta say no. Hand checking was a thing. Curry and Harden can create space now, but back then the defender was allowed to put hands on your body to control where you went. Once hand checking was removed a lot of players blossomed. Nash instantly comes to mind. Also, Kobe Bryant. Bryant was great, but even his best scoring seasons came after hand checking was removed.

Another thing they called back then was traveling, which gets by a lot today. Honestly, I think they'd do great, but 40 pts is a bit of a stretch.

If I remember right Iverson was on downwards spiral on efficiency and scoring numbers then they removed hand checking and he had career high PPG and one of the most efficient seasons.

[JN61]

Some teams (the Shaq/Kobe Lakers perhaps most notably) designed their defense to protect the rim and avoid drive and kick 3's at the cost of allowing guards relatively open off the dribble jump shots. This was effective as off the dribble jump shots were relatively low % and no guards of the era could really hurt them this way.

Curry/Harden/Lillard - in this case especially Curry - would have broken those defenses. A simple 1/5 PNR gets Curry an effectively uncontested off the dribble 3 against those teams every time down the floor. If one of those teams is stubborn then Curry really could go for 50 in a half from all the open looks. I still don't see them averaging 40 ppg though. Most teams had other defensive strategies that don't give up such easy shots by design, and even the ones that generally did would redesign their defense for the special cases (likely at a big cost of either having bigs used to defending only near the rim being caught in space more or brining a lot of help D to give open looks to teammates).

In general the lower pace keeps anyone from going for 40, even if the different level of off the dribble shooting compared to the rest of the league would make them unique offensive forces.

Harden averaged 36 at a 96 team pace. 98 league average pace was 90.3. It was 96.8 in 1993.

I don't think pace is a strong argument against Harden scoring 40 as his teams traditionally have had paces not that far off from the 90's. They might be a slightly faster paced team for that era but nothing radical

So what you are saying harden wasn't even close averaging 40 with one of the fastest paces of 90s?

[DCasey91]

36 is a long way from 40 fwiw. Was it only Jordan that averaged just north of 30 for that whole era and he’s a better scorer than Harden/Curry.

In fact I’d take Lebron and KD over both if going back in time.

Curry isn’t popping 11 threes a game, and Harden hasn’t made more field goals than free throws.

Look at players per 100 possessions it’s literally NBA has scoring inflation tax. Along with lower superstar usage, coaching, different rules and era.

Your looking at more toward high 20’s for Curry if that and maybe a a couple of seasons of 30 for Harden and that is well stretching it.

It’s fantasy, only Wilt has done that and he’s more unstoppable than both with a motor that’s all time.

MJ today averaging 40? Now there’s a way more realistic scenario. Couldn’t a rats butt about the 3ball. Harden isn’t a great shooter at all, look at his playoff resume it doesn’t stack well.

Whereas MJ had 5 count them 5 playoff series averaging 40+ and one which was very close to the mark.

Harden.... 2 over 30 that’s it just two in his whole playoff career

Curry has six

KD has 11

LBJ has 18 and he in fact has the highest scoring playoff series out of anyone in the NBA currently (38.5 many many years ago).

So to the OP lay off the dank and 2k lol.

[Lalouie]

i bet wilt would average 40/30 today

mj would average 40+
and on and on and on

so what. lol. only in basketball, man,,,only in basketball, smh

[LAL1947]

Curry & Harden would've averaged 40 a game in the 90's. Change my mind

Michael Jordan was super skilled but I don't think he was as good offensively as Curry & Harden.

Watch on YouTube

[Bum Adebayo]

Nope, because teams in the 90's would've adapted to try and match the new game. It is stupid to assume somehow 90's teams and players would simply watch the Currys of the world dominate from 3pt line and would change nothing.

[DroseReturnChi]

i dont think curry even survive 82 games of gary payton and mj swarming. he would get exposed.

[dhsilv2]

Some teams (the Shaq/Kobe Lakers perhaps most notably) designed their defense to protect the rim and avoid drive and kick 3's at the cost of allowing guards relatively open off the dribble jump shots. This was effective as off the dribble jump shots were relatively low % and no guards of the era could really hurt them this way.

Curry/Harden/Lillard - in this case especially Curry - would have broken those defenses. A simple 1/5 PNR gets Curry an effectively uncontested off the dribble 3 against those teams every time down the floor. If one of those teams is stubborn then Curry really could go for 50 in a half from all the open looks. I still don't see them averaging 40 ppg though. Most teams had other defensive strategies that don't give up such easy shots by design, and even the ones that generally did would redesign their defense for the special cases (likely at a big cost of either having bigs used to defending only near the rim being caught in space more or brining a lot of help D to give open looks to teammates).

In general the lower pace keeps anyone from going for 40, even if the different level of off the dribble shooting compared to the rest of the league would make them unique offensive forces.

Harden averaged 36 at a 96 team pace. 98 league average pace was 90.3. It was 96.8 in 1993.

I don't think pace is a strong argument against Harden scoring 40 as his teams traditionally have had paces not that far off from the 90's. They might be a slightly faster paced team for that era but nothing radical

So what you are saying harden wasn't even close averaging 40 with one of the fastest paces of 90s?

I don't think I'd use "one of". For example the rocket's would have had a below average pace in 1990. They've be the fastest pace in 1996-1999. Nobody would consider them a fast paced team the first four years of that decade while they'd be a touch faster paced than the kings in 1999. They would be roughly the 50th fastest paced team of the decade.

[dhsilv2]

i dont think curry even survive 82 games of gary payton and mj swarming. he would get exposed.

How many players played 82 games against these two players?

[dhsilv2]

Nope, because teams in the 90's would've adapted to try and match the new game. It is stupid to assume somehow 90's teams and players would simply watch the Currys of the world dominate from 3pt line and would change nothing.

Curry averaged 32 last year in 34 minutes a game. That's 37 per 40 which was pretty normal in those days and much easier to do due to how much less movement happened on the defensive end. Curry could easily just rest up on defense unlike now.

[dhsilv2]

i bet wilt would average 40/30 today

mj would average 40+
and on and on and on

so what. lol. only in basketball, man,,,only in basketball, smh

How in the hell would wilt average 30 rebounds today? Teams are averaging less than 45 total rebounds and 3 pointers create more long rebounds...

[Bum Adebayo]

Nope, because teams in the 90's would've adapted to try and match the new game. It is stupid to assume somehow 90's teams and players would simply watch the Currys of the world dominate from 3pt line and would change nothing.

Curry averaged 32 last year in 34 minutes a game. That's 37 per 40 which was pretty normal in those days and much easier to do due to how much less movement happened on the defensive end. Curry could easily just rest up on defense unlike now.

They would've adapted, Curry would fare neither better nor worse than today, just like softer players today would've adapted to the more physical game of 90's.