There is an issue of there being more ground to cover in today’s game. There is also an issue of more physical play in previous eras. At best it’s a wash. I lean toward the previous eras physicality being an issue for today’s players, but who knows???
It's context right. It's easy to say take today's Lebron and drop him in the 70's and say he'd dominate. The players of one era become who they are because of the ecosystem of that era. * Physical. There is better conditional training and nutritional science today. If Lebron is dropped in the 70's, does he have the same access to the same resources that he spends millions on today for his body and durability? Medicine advanced. Today's surgery techniques, medical treatments, physical therapy all allow a player to recover faster from game to game. Make a faster return from an injury. In the hypothetical, are we saying you can drop today's doctors, medical equipment, trainers and hospitals to the 70's as well? * Mental Sure the game evolved and the knowledge is deeper, players and coaches, basketball scheme became more advanced. So yea time traveler Lebron have the benefit of NBA history and tapes to draw from. But if he was born in the 70's, his B-Ball IQ would start from resources and playing experience of the 70's era. Old timers have rose color glasses. Others are effected by recency bias. I hear what Gilbert is saying but these hypotheticals just that.... hypotheticals. Just appreciate the nba stars did well in their respective eras.
I agree with the earlier posts. It's alot of give-and-take between say 70s vs 80s vs 90s vs. 2000s vs 2010s. It's kinda same thing being said from previous generations. Alot of people used to say the 90s was watered-down, because of expansion teams and bad franchise. Just many players claimed MJ was great, but not the greatest, even after 6 championships. Some said Kareem, Russell, or Big O. Others said Magic. A coaches poll in 2000 listed Oscar Robertson as the best. Wilt said that alot of players owed their thanks to MJ for those big contract , yet he said MJ was not on his level. If people think Giannis, LBJ, AD, KD, or Beard, wouldn't be successful with their combination of athleticism, speed, power, height and skills would overwhelming for almost any single defender. And, they'd also have 3-point shooting, as well. Even players, like Steph, Lilliard, and Westbrook have such unique skill set, I can't see it failing them in league where defenses concentrated on the post out to mid-range zone. Steph, especially, is what you would call an accurate, volume 3-point shooter. He's had many games where he doesn't need to get the best, very often to get points. And, he's playmaker, who can also play off the ball.
skill wise, they are better now, and they are better athletes for sure ( better conditioning, training, eating). But the game is different, it was way more phisical back in the 80s 90s, because it was allowed, and guys like curry or harden will get hand checked and will have to adjust. But the same can be said of the defenders on that era, they have to learn how to defend the 3 a lot better. Great guys on this era will be great on the 80s/90s for sure. Curry will have a bit of a harder time to find separation because he is smaller phisically and will be hand checked and shoved a lot more, but guys like thompson, durant, leonard, harden, lebron, giannis, will be great. Guys like arenas or williams, will just be role players.
Superstars of any given era was way above the average from their crop of humans. You can not compare statisticaly but if someone is so much better than rest that he wins 8 champioships like Bill Russel then he is great. You can't just drop current LeBron and compare it that way.. LeBron isn't dominating his crop of players as some greats used to. Nutrition, training, coaching, floors, baskets, balls, roids... everything changes. If you put baby LeBron in 50s would he evolve into what he was at 25? I highly doubt it. Would Bill Russel/Wilt with current knowledge and technology be bums in current era? I highly doubt it
there were a lot of bonafide scrubs getting major rotation minutes back then that would never see the floor today...all those scrub bigs with 0 athleticism, speed, or skill would be unplayable...all those guards who couldn’t shoot and had zero off the dribble game would be unplayable sh*t, the Rockets were starting scrubs like Ryan Bowen as late as 2005...dude looked like a biology teacher the NBA is far more skilled now
Great players of this era would have been great players today and vice versa, with exceptions based on skill sets that might not transfer well. But they wouldn't dominate the previous era because as noted, while modern players seem to have greater athleticism, that is a product of better nutrition, medicine, sports science, and amenities - 70's players often rode busses between games or took commercial aviation - no professional chefs - no dedicated practice facilities. Some players might struggle and I think Harden could have been one. His athleticism is not the explosive type but based on absurd balance capabilities that make his euro-step - and now step back threes - devastating. But those would never have been allowed back then by the ways the rules were interpreted. So he would have been a really good player but unlikely a top five of his generation. Not sure that small players like Curry could have survived based on the style of play back then. First time he tried a 30 ft three, he would have been benched for a month. But then again, these are all elite athletes, so they would have adapted. The tall, un-athletic centers of previous eras would be out with the style of play today. But the athletic centers and other bruising post players would have matured in a different system for a different style of play and would probably all be fine. A guy like Karl Malone would still be a superstar today, he would just weigh 25 lbs less. It is a fun thought experiment to think which superstars would be still a superstar in a different era and which role players would be elevated to stars.
The sport evolves. Offense and defense have never been as sophisticated as they are today. Sure, defenses could be more physical in past eras, but they also couldn't use zone concepts. Players have honed skillsets that no one imagined in past eras--the idea of having seven footers learn to handle the ball and make plays on the move for others was unthinkable in the past. Forget even guys like LeBron James or Kevin Durant--Nikola Jokic would be a space alien in the 1980s and 1990s. Defense in the 1990s was what it needed to be to combat far less complex and challenging offenses. The traditional pick-and-roll, drive-and-kick and post-and-kick were fairly standard actions that didn't require a ton of processing on the fly from defenders. A guy like Draymond Green might well not be so impactful as a defender back then because his genius for sussing out what an offense is planning two steps ahead and being in position would have been wasted back then. We're watching the most athletic and the smartest generation of NBA players play the most sophisticated version of basketball thus far.
I actually think Rodman would be a monster in today's NBA. They mentioned his size but what they didn't mention was even at his size he was able to guard 7 footers (many of whom were bigger than most of the bigs in todays NBA). But he was also small enough and quick enough to work in these switch everything defenses. He'd need to add a 3 point shot to be full on Draymond Green level but I think he'd be that kind of player. And wasn't Scottie 6'8? Don't mean to nit pick but he was at least as big as a guy like Jimmy Butler.
@tinman Come here and get these younguns. These man are having a go at your older generation and calling them scrubs
