I don't know about that. Those guys helped elevate the game to levels it has never seen before. This is especially so on a global level. There's a reason Kobe has consistently had the level of jersey sales abroad that he has. We also obviously know the impact of Yao (another early 00's guy). Basketball is bigger than ever in Europe and Asia. Canadian Basketball is on a surge with kids who grew up watching Vince "Air Canada" Carter. I think the talent level that these guys brought in to the league took the NBA to heights it had never seen. None of the new guys come close to the star power of those players they're having to replace. Does anyone think Klay Thompson, the second best shooting guard has as much appeal as Kobe, Iverson, T-Mac, Allen type players did?
This is an era of information. The fans are much smarter than before. They are much more well educated. That's why the Spurs became one of the most likable team in the league, they have very little star power now. Time has changed. Fans will appreciate more when a team win day in and day out than a so called star to score 35 points night in and night out. People will learn to appreciate efforts, and they will understand the importance of the front office. That's why the 76ers fans are actually happier right now than the Lakers fans. At least for now.
The league is no longer about just LeBron and Durant. I think this is a watershed year where we are witnessing a new breed of superstars takeover the game. From hereon, it's all about Harden, Curry, Davis, Wall, etc. Though, it's still sad to see old giants slowly fade away. My childhood heroes are now broken, washed up, and has-beens. Still, Duncan to me had the most prolific career of the modern era.
Ehh. This is era is the worst. Why? Because the league rules & officiating give offensive players WAY too much leeway. The league is as less physical now than it's ever been. They've taken every aspect of phsyicality out of the game. The officials literally control the game now. I HATE that. It's just not as competitive. Lebron, KD and even Harden would NOT be able to put up the same numbers in the 90's-2000's.
That has literally nothing to do with anything. It doesn't matter how much more "educated" the fans are. Sports are a spectacle and people like seeing hyper athletic players who ooze talent dominate the competition. They want to see highlights and heroics to live vicariously through athletes. This is just about pure star power. Not necessarily about the evolution of the game. So far in the league I don't see how all the great players of the recent past can be replaced by the upcoming generation. There's just not enough star power. When Bird, Magic, Kareem, Hakeem, Robinson, Malone, Ewing, Drexler, Barkely, and Jordan retired there was a ton of emerging stars in the league who had similar talent level. Like J.R. said about the current crop:
I think by "physical" you mean "athletic." Today's players are bigger, faster and stronger, just like in almost all other sports. It's a result of progress in medical science in general, and the increased money that is invested in developing athletes. It has nothing to do with basketball in particular.
I'm not sure if fans really are that much smarter. Unless you're restricting that definition to NBA fans who post online frequently and watch 100+ games of basketball each year. There are still way too many people voting Kobe for an all-star and not nearly enough people buying Spurs jerseys. People may like or tolerate the Spurs, but they're also a small market team with mostly humble guys. Put them in LA or New York and give them some attitude, they could play the same type of team ball and still get people to hate them. This also relates to how everyone is propping up the whole Curry vs Harden theme this year. Because the media and the NBA is obsessed with highlighting individual players despite basketball results being highly team driven. People are still eating it up just as much as in older days when it was Kobe vs McGrady or can Jerry Stackhouse / Vince Carter fill MJ's shoes? There is very little analysis nor coverage nationally of how the Spurs won the championship, and way more TV time regarding who's the best scorer in the NBA, who's the most exciting guy to watch, who's most deserving of the MVP etc...
I get what you mean but you have to differentiate the type of fans. Yes, there are a lot more educated fans who appreciate basketball for different aspects but there is still a lot of "common" fans.
I disagree. For one, the rose color glasses nostalgia feeling is making you overvalue the old players and undervalue the new players. If Thompson finishes this season on the same pace, he'll at least have matched Ray Allen's peak season, imo. Is Thompson on AI, Kobe, T-Macs level? Well, generally no. BUT... whether they were a victim of their era, or otherwise, one thing to note is that MANY of the "star" players of the late 90's and early 00's played a horrible brand of basketball, or which AI was the poster child. Great player.. but if you look up volume shooter, iso - ball in the dictionary, it's him. Led the league in usage rate repeatedly, despite never tallying any other great advanced statistical numbers. MJ led the league in usage a bunch, too, but he also led the league in PER, win shares, +/-, value over replacement player multiple multiple times. Obviously MJ is the greatest, but there's a reason why AI's VORP (value over a replacement player) never exceed 5, while MJ's didn't go below 5 until his final year in Chicago. Look, Kobe's an all-time, all-time great, clearly, but it's the Iverson in his game, that era of me-ball that doesn't define his game, but is clearly in there, that just isn't a great brand of basketball to watch. If you've watched basketball consistently throughout the last 30-40 years, it is obvious. Style of play during that era stands out as the least enjoyable to watch, imo. Too detailed, but that said, yes, SG is probably at a low at the moment. To be fair, Harden is amazing. He's leading the league in VORP this year (which makes a lot of sense) and can more than hold his own against the greats you mention, though still needs to work on his defense a bit. I think Thompson is really really good... again, Ray Allen level, though probably never much above that. But where SG and C were dominant in the past, PG, PF and SF are great today. Lebron and Durant SHOULD go down as the top 2 SFs of all time and top 10 players of all time (depends on rings with Durant). There's too many really really good point guards to name. And great PFs are all over the league. I find basketball as enjoyable to watch today as I did during the mid 80's to mid 90's. But that's just my opinion
I also think that comparing the stars of this era than the 80's or 90's will not be that fair. I expect the career of the stars in this era will be much shorter than the previous. Take Dwight as an example, he should be still in his prime if he is playing in those era in his age, but I think because of the game changed - not in the sense of only physical contact but more like the schedule, training and the pace ect, demands more from the players nowadays than before. Wade also is another good example. You will see the players to get injured easier and more frequent than before. You will see the life of the contract shorter, players could change team more frequently. More difficult to build a dynasty and eventually, the concept of individual star power will be less than before. Longevity should not be the major criteria to evaluate the stars of this era, because time has been changed. As great as Kobe's career had been, the last couple years he is just a sad story, I think the same could happen to a lot of good players when they start to turn 30s.
Not sure if Billups should go on this list. Yea finals MVP yada yada, but who honestly thinks of Billup when they remember the TMac, VC, and Webber of the days?
Nice post. While none of the later stars could touch Jordan's greatness, IMO, he was one of the major reasons that brought the me-ball to the late 90's-early 00's. Lots of young players in that era wanted to be "like Mike." In their eyes, and in a lot of fans eyes, Jordan's game is flashy moves, athletic dunks, beating the opponent one on one, etc. It didn't help that David Stern saw the value of pushing the league to the public by selling individual stars. Kids growing up did not value team ball. There's a thread comparing Euro players and American players. Many posters lament how the AAU corrupts kids. I think ironically Michael Jordan's greatness as the ultimate basketball role model has something to do with that culture, probably unintentionally.
Never liked blek member from his rookie season and I'm glad I still feel the same. As good as he was, I'm glad he's irrelevant and will be gone soon enough.
OK, where are those era's CP3, Harden Lebron and Durant? Personally I like this era the best because the average fan is way more knowledgeable now then back then, you have advanced analytics like TS% and win shares, PER, RAPM etc. helping everyone determine who is a good baller vs who is not. In the past everyone just depended on the box score which is why Juan Howard got paid like a max dude despite being incredibly inefficient for a big man and a lousy defender/rebounder.
I like this post overall but the bolded part raised my eyebrows. What about Larry? That's a very bold prediction there.
Good point. Larry Legend was amazing. Though I don't think I can fault anyone for putting Lebron and KD right up there with them as part of the top 3. Of course, depending on how their career ends.
