What point are you arguing? You initially said that guards were rebounding more because of more long shots coming off farther from the basket. Grantland shows that no matter how far the shot is taken from, it's still going to come off within 8 ft of the hoop. That's where the bigs operate. Rebounds are still being grabbed in the same area. Guards are able to grab a few more because there's not as many big men to compete with in that area. That was the whole point of the discussion. Now you want to differentiate between 2 feet when the resultant rebound is still in the big man's rebounding area? You're reaching. I've shown you the stats. The vast number of rebounds are being grabbed by big men, same as always. Guards do get a few more but they aren't getting them all over the court as you asserted. The rebounds are still going to the same areas they always went to it's just that the guards have a better opportunity without all of the big guys to battle. That was my point, that's what the numbers and analysis showed.
Again, what are you arguing? The original discussion was about how would today's players perform under the old rules. You said that they would run over the older generation players and couldn't be guarded. You even claimed that it was more physical in the modern game. I pointed out why that wasn't true. Now you've conceeded that it was more physical under the old rules and you seem to have acknowleged that it was harder to score but you now want to argue about what made it more difficutlt...handchecking vs illegal defense. It doesn't matter, the point is that it was harder to score under the old rules. Scoring picked up after handchecking was abolished that's a fact. You, yourself said that scoring picked up in the same season that the handcheck went away. If you don't want to believe that there's a correlation, then you're free to believe that just like you don't believe anything that former players and coaches say. Fine, but it was much harder to score under the old rules, you seem to have now conceeded that's that case too. That was the point of the discussion. The idea that current players could play the same way and dominate under a different set of rules is absolutely incorrect. That's been shown. You want to attribute that to the illegal defense rules changes? Fine, that doesn't change the fact that your original point was incorrect and had no basis in fact. We've already hijacked this thread enough, let's not dive into why it was harder to score back then now that you seem to agree that it was. The were different era and they were played with very different rules. Those rules were advantageous to different skillsets. The old rules favored size and strength, the new rules favor speed and athleticism. If players from either generation played under the other set of rules, they'd be at a disadvantage. Most players would play differently if the rules were different. You want to know who would win a matchup between the '96 Bulls and the current Warriors? Decide which set of rules that they have to use and that's your answer. Both those teams were optimized to play under the rules of their eras.
No I've shown that illegal defenses affected scoring far more than hand-checking. hand-checking was allowed in 1995 and scoring was higher in 1995 than it was in 2005. How can you make the claim that hand checking has this big impact when the data doesn't support that? Curry is stronger and quicker than Harper and Payton and would still excel under the old rules. The thing that would slow him down the most isn't hand checking - it's pace!
You contradicted yourself here - saying rebounding is about positioning but that the reason is actually less big men. So I am not sure what you are arguing anymore. I've shown you the ball travels farther and the increased spacing allows guards to get more rebounds but you just don't want to believe it.
You do understand that teams still scored in the '90s right? The difference was that it was the big men doing most the scoring. Guys like Olajuwon, Ewing, Malone, Shaq and Robinson were the scorers. The whole point, which you are chosing to ignore is that guards, especially little guys like Curry, didn't have the freedom to drive and didn't automatically get the space that they do today. You may be the only person in the world that considers Curry strong. He's not exceptionally quick either. He's quick with the ball because of his ball handling but he's not a great or even good athlete. Even if you want to pretend that Curry was some freak athlete, he'd still be at a hug disadvantage due to handchecking. A guy being able to put his hand on you and guide you while you're trying to handle the ball is a problem. A hand on your body pushing you isn't a battle of strength. It's a one sided advantage for the defender. That's why it was such a big deal, because it didn't matter how strong you were, you still had an advantage if you could put your hands on your man. Every single player who played or coached under those rules says that it was incredibly hard to move around the court due to handchecking. You dismiss that because you claim they are all bias. So every single player of those generations is lying and not a single one is telling the truth? Sure, that's plausible. If hand checking wasn't a big deal then you don't think that there's be at least one ex-player or coach that would say that? Not one? Come on. So we're going to completely discredit the opinion of every ex-player and coach because a poster on a bbs says differently? I've shown you numerous quotes of ex players and coaches saying how much handchecking effected penetration and perimeter play. At this point, I seriously doubt that you still believe what you originally said but you're never going to admit that, I get that. When the conversation has degraded to Steph Curry being "too strong" then I think that we've reached the point of diminishing returns.
@aelliott and @Sweet Lou 4 2 i respect the both of you guys but this thread got derailed many pages ago by your discussion. could we steer it back to how badass Harden is?
Harden's defense this year: 2nd in the NBA in deflections per game (3.7), ahead of Paul George, Robert Covington, Jimmy Butler and Kawhi Leonard 4th in the NBA in steals per game (2.1), ahead of Jimmy Butler, Kawhi Leonard, Marcus Smart, etc. Among guards that get significant PT (for this data, I used 30 games played and >10 DFGA), Harden's DFG% is better than Jimmy Butler, John Wall, Ricky Rubio and Bradley Beal, all guards who are mentioned to be average to very good defenders
Honestly, I've enjoyed the read. Yes, it sort of goes off-topic where Harden's greatness is concerned, but if you look at Harden and ponder how he would have fared in the Hakeem/Jordan era, it becomes a little more on point. I think James would have thrived under the old rules. As an example, he's strong enough to bull his way to the basket despite the contact allowed back then, and he would be an excellent defender in the post for a guard, as he is today, in my opinion. Most important for Harden? He's incredibly intelligent and very, very crafty. He would dissect the rules and figure out how to take advantage of them using his skills. It's what Harden does now. Unlike Curry, who I think Harper and Payton would have driven crazy with their physical play on defense (sorry, SL42 - gotta disagree), Harden would have his own physical play to impose on others. If we had a time machine, I would love to see how he would fare back then. How would he play against the big men of the era? They seem to be an endangered species today.
The content is relevant and the debate civil. Keep it up. My personal opinion is someone that's watch basketball for the better part of 25 years.... The bottom tier(s) of the players in the league are mich better overall than the bottom tiers in the Joe Klein eras. I think the elite players would transcend the rule changes that have taken place.
Glad Tillman finally shelled out for Harden Prime. That free 2-day shipping is nice, plus all those Harden Prime videos are nice. I hear Creed from the office is about to do a show on Harden Prime Video. Might have to stream that.
Don't get me wrong--I always appreciate well thought out discussions on this board and this is a great example of it. I just think it deserves it's own thread because it's one of those debates that we can all learn from.
My point is that RELATIVE to the 90's, Curry is stronger and quicker than those guys. You didn't have anyone like Harden back in the 90's - a guy who was over 200lbs and that quick. The idea that a lighter Payton and Harper would stop Curry is nonsense. They didn't body guys up at the 3 point line in the 90's - that's not what hand checking was about - handchecking was about touching a guy on their torso as they dribble penetrated. And if you were handchecking it was because you were trying to maintain the perfect distance. Curry would simply pull up and shoot with that kind of space. His release is quicker than anything those guys have ever seen. Do you see how little space Curry needs coming off a pick? So yeah, I think players remember hand checking being a difficulty but the stats don't support that case. If hand checking was such a hindrance for Kobe, then why did the percentage of his shots in the paint GO DOWN substantially in the 2004-2005 season?? The changes in offense we see today are not because of hand checking, it's because teams are exploiting the rules made to increase the pace and teams have adopted the 3 pointer as a greater part of the game increasing spacing. The revolution we are seeing is because of guys like Rudy T, MDA, and Steve Kerr - not handchecking. @steddinotayto I will try to shorten my posts - I think we're towards the end of the discussion anyway.
After listening to hours of Inside the NBA I have been lead to believe the NBA used to allow fights like Hockey does, now we make players wear pillows and mean words are a flagrant 2. How things have changed so greatly. Sigh.
All I got from that is that MJ needed the game to get softer so he could finally win. So Harden is the new MJ? Sounds about right.
This. Harden needs to get the Rox into the finals (let alone win them) for him to be mentioned in the same class as the others cited above.
This. Harden needs to get the Rox into the finals (let alone win them) for him to be mentioned in the same class as the others cited above.
Yep. Harden was a big part of that missed-consecutive-threes record. Then add in game 6 with SA in Houston the year before. He's done better than McGrady, but IMO he has yet to come up really clutch.
