Is the league watered down?

He is right its watered down their is no defense because of the rule changes that favor the offense more than ever and its become a perimeter oriented game and that's why you see these playoff series go back and forth. Its hard for a team to consistently shoot well from long range game after game. Thats why the inside oriented teams of the past were usually some of the best because higher percentage shots equaled more consistent results.

Another proof is the fact that Kyle Lowry and Derozen were all stars those two shouldn't be able to get near an all star game without a ticket.

There is also another factor its how teams draft players now the league has become so specialized that teams want players who do one thing well and they don't develop all around players. Its why Leonard is such a blast from the past is because he is good in all facets of the game in an era where there are few very players like that.

 

Yeah but this isn't the 90s. The 90s ended a long time ago. 90s basketball exist only only YouTube.

There's a whole generation of NBA fans that don't give a crap about the 90s

 

i remember when people complained about how much better things used to be a lot better than they do now.

 

The makeup of the league has definitely changed.

You can't really refer to lack of Superstars when talking about a watered-down league. They are 2 different things.

Superstar status is about hype, media coverage and reputation. The only on-court measures that mattered back then were traditional stats. It's why stat padders and good dunkers like Nique are considered an all-time great even though he couldn't get far in the playoffs. Hell, put Chuck in that boat too. He did win an MVP though.

At the end of the day, the league is just as competitive as ever. The difference being that the spoils are being shared between the whole team, not just a main superstar. That was evident when this generation's version of MJ from a media sense (Lebron) proved that being a media hype machine Superstar didn't always equal championships. His superstardom couldn't beat the Spurs in the finals, nor the Mavs. Note both the title winning Spurs and Mavs were built on all-around team game. Sure they had "stars" like Dirk, Duncan, Kawhi, but those teams started a new way of thinking that NBA GM's are now striving for (Morey being the exception in his superstar chase).

What this also means is that this generation's "Superstars" are merely elevated because they're style of play fits really well in the team "system". Curry and Kawhi, case in point. This then allows the 90's generation to argue how bad these players would be if they were in the 90's and couldn't make an allstar game.

The problem with that argument is you are just looking at individuals to make your point that this is a watered down league, when the whole point of competitiveness in today's NBA is predicated on total team play. Take the whole team into account, and this league is still very strong. With the analytics movement proving the importance of role players, it lifts the competitiveness up even with less do-it-all stars like MJ/Hakeem/Magic/etc.

 

OK I'm not taking anything from curry he awesome,but u think it tmac point should of been that it is crazy a guy wins it when he doesn't guard the other teams best guy..ever period. He really is just a offensive player when Jordan dream kobe n lebron. Where two way players. U canthink be th r best if u don't take on that responsibility I'm sorry

 

I get that the person who said it is a polarizing player, not the best winner but he got a point

I do not care who says it, but what is the content of their agenda.

 

Agreed. They should introduce a lower pay and pay players more money as they win playoff games or championships. Just a thought. I think it would bring back real competition.

 

Nope. But I like that it takes away from Curry, lol.

Harden
Curry
Lebron
Westbrook
Durant

Thats about as big time as you can get. As food as the 80's or 90's, possibly even better given most of them are triple doubles nightly.

 

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/gc2fG5AnjSk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Also calls Rockets a sinking ship when asked if Kenny would take the job.

 

Curry is a very good defensive player, but he is 6'3. When u have taller wings who can smother other taller wings/guards, you do the best for the team and put taller wings on them... It's about physique and roles. Just like Jordan is never out to guard shaq or d-rob... Would u ever complain about that?

Let's get this one in one more time: dubs have tons of other taller options to defend taller players. Curry is just not better than them, but is himself very good.

 

Wow a player from the end of the 90 beginning 00 should really not talk about quality. That was the worst era in basketball..

 

He's right. When T-Mac was a true superstar back in 02/03, All-NBA first team was about three-peat Shaq, Afro-Kobe, MVP-Duncan, Prime KG and T-Mac with Iverson, Dirk and Kidd (two NBA Finals appearences) right behind them. 8 obvious superstars

Modern day's All-NBA first team is zero at center, LeBron, Durant, Curry, Westbrook. Add Kawhi, CP3, Harden and Davis to the list and among those eight players probably "superstar" status is questionable for probably a half of them.

5 to 3 in his days in favor of the West, 7 to 1 now. Cavs are 8-0 in the playoffs, despite the fact that the East is the most powerful for the last 10-12 or maybe even more years

 

Lol at the visual of j. Rome's welding hood analogy, t Mac wearing one.

 

What did happen to AntiSonic?

 

I think the overall level of talent is higher than it was in T-Mac's era. The only era that was even more loaded was the late 80's - if you consider they didn't have the rest of the world to draw from, it's all the more impressive.

The game is less star-based now as well, so for bigs the game has changed dramatically.

Anyway, I'll accept if you think the 80's were more loaded, but I can't accept that T-Mac's era was better. That was one of the low points of NBA history and prompted a slow of rule changes to make the game watchable again.

 

The mid-to-late-80s was one golden age for the NBA. I think the current era is another golden age. The '90s were great for us because of Olajuwon and, of course, Jordan was always fun, but the league itself was nothing amazing. The play style of the league was dull and while it was probably the best big man era ever, I wouldn't call it a magical decade by any means. The 2000s were even worse.

The current era has a flourishing, dynamic play style, ever more sophisticated defensive schemes and plenty of all-time great talents. If you feel that the game is best when it revolves around a classic center, I can see why you'd dislike the current game, but I've never thought that was the most interesting and entertaining style, Olajuwon aside.

 

Currently, a team has to have three superstarts to win a NBA title. Before, you can have one or two superstarts to win it. Tmac just can not figure it out.

 

t-mac owns.