NBA So LeBron is the second greatest player ever...right?

If he was as ahead as you claim he would not had not been swept in his first finals. You really think he was ever built for western conference basketball... Really. <LikeReally5>
That Spurs team is better than any MJ team you moron lmao
 
What @Unknown Pleasures said.

No, most players from the 2000s wouldn't transition to todays game. There are players from the 2010s still playing championship level basketball so idk what the fuck the point of adding the 2010s is. LeBron, KD, Curry, Kawhi Leonard and James Harden are all still good players.

damn ur right. Kobe, KG and Timmy D, Shaq would be bums today LOL. LeBron is already dominant and hes from this era, Wade would be good today too.

You also do realize the league was way weaker when Jordan retired? 1999-2003 basketball wasn't loaded with talent and was worse when MJ was playing.

Kobe would love playing today, his stats would be amazing. KG would be the perfect bigman today. And 2010s player include 2000s players like LeBron and KD......
 
Last edited:
damn ur right. Kobe, KG and Timmy D, Shaq would be bums today LOL. So what year in basketball is the year where old school players couldn't adapt?

Kobe would love playing today, his stats would be amazing. KG would be the perfect bigman today. And 2010s player include 2000s players like LeBron and KD.....
Well, Kobe didn't transition to the new era but he was old.

Tim Duncan could have, he was fast and athletic enough. KG probably would have been a good defender but his footspeed was never elite. His scoring would have been relatively inefficient. Young Shaq could run the floor but fat ass Shaq gets shot out of the building.

KG wouldn't be the perfect big man. all the guys who relied on creating a seal and working iso/post would get obliterated by the 2 man game. You dont know what the fuck youre watching lmao
 
LeBron had to create super teams to win a chip. Even failed in his first attempt and shrunk in the finals.

MJ never cheated the league. He wouldn’t team up with top 5 players, he tried to beat them instead.
 
Well, Kobe didn't transition to the new era but he was old.

Tim Duncan could have, he was fast and athletic enough. KG probably would have been a good defender but his footspeed was never elite. His scoring would have been relatively inefficient. Young Shaq could run the floor but fat ass Shaq gets shot out of the building.

KG wouldn't be the perfect big man. all the guys who relied on creating a seal and working iso/post would get obliterated by the 2 man game. You dont know what the fuck youre watching lmao

Imagine Shaq in a era where draymond green was the best defender LOL

Every coach today would kill to have a big like KG. He could work in the post and pick n pops, guard 1 to 5, protect the rim and passed the ball. He got 6 APG in his mvp season as a fuckin PF. He would be top 5 today. Get outta here
 
Imagine Shaq in a era where draymond green was the best defender LOL

Every coach today would kill to have a big like KG. He could work in the post and pick n pops, guard 1 to 5, protect the rim and passed the ball. He got 6 APG in his mvp season as a fuckin PF. He would be top 5 today. Get outta here
Coaches today have more skilled and more athletic players than KG.

Paolo Banchero is better than KG.

Btw, I went to 36 regular season games games KGs MVP season. I know how good we was for his era. That doesnt mean his outdated game works in 2026.

You wanna know who compares to older players? Julius Randle. Julius Randle is not a #1 option in todays NBA.
 


For sure what constitutes travelling has changed over the years and it's a business decision. Dunks and blocks (especially dunks) are the most glamorous plays in the sport and the league hypes them and the folks that do them. I'm not a fan of the "I travelled the full length of the court and only had to bounce the ball twice".
 
Regarding the battle of the eras, a lot is rather indeterminate when it comes to a specific player. I mean younger players have benefits of the most modern training and nutrition. In general, being around good competition can actually make you better and bring out the best in you. Standout players of the past with those benefits would have a chance to have been even better of around today.

But we can't deny 25% of whatever of the league is now international and before they it was like 1%. I'm not sure on exact numbers, but you get the gist. And coaching and tactics are on different levels. The floor is higher, I think that is undspituable, but it's more up in the air if the elite players of the past would also stand out just as much

Shaq was mentioned and yeah, he's a great example. Guy was dominant under the rim, but offensively the league gave him carte blanche for dislodging fouls which probably wouldnt fly today, his side advantage would still exist but would be diminished, and defensively he can't camp out under the rim if he's playing a KAT or a Turner or a Jokic who can shoot the three and consequently totally change floor spacing from what is ideal for Shaq. I really have no good gauge of his value in today's modern game but I have no reason to believe he would have been more of a force than less of one.
 
Last edited:
Because they had 2 Lakers dynasties in there lmao

Those Lakers team would also have battered the Shitcago Bulls
Because ht western conference is a mean place and it would have made LeBron just another kinda famous player instead of the face of the league.

Spurs also lost to Mavericks and Phoenix around that time.

Oh i am sorry, since when do we call a team that won 6 championships in a decade shitty teams?
 
Basketball has evolved in iterations, looking for one year in particular is pointless, but I think the overall increase in the three pointer is the biggest change of the more recent ones.

Like evolution itself, it's usual slow and gradual and not well perceptible on a day to day, but is when comparing now to say 20 years ago, or 20 years before that.

Basketball hasn't been a sport in decline in participation like boxing or whatever, it actually became much more globalized and money in the sport has exploded, perhaps gaining most momentum during dream team and Stern's intentional globalization initiative. Talent is deepest now, deeper than it has ever been. Things like dunking from the free-throw line which would get all sorts of hype and coverage in the past is a roll-eyes thing now.

Statistical analysis also showed the inefficiency of how the game was played prior with the perimeter two point shot being used too much in the past. Now the entire court gets stretched out, even some bigs are three-point threats. It's laughable to me when people suggest some team from the 70's through 90s that makes 5 three pointers a game is gonna compete with modern basketball teams filled with sharp shooters today. They also over-estimate the "toughness" of the players back then relative to today; yeah there might have been more hard fouls but so many of those players of yesteryear that were "big" , were big for then, not big by today's standards. That's not even getting into things like amount of schemes being run today etc.

LOL

League 3 point percentage in 1992 was 33.6%. Top player, 45%.

In 2023 is was 36.6%. Top player, 46%.

Hopefully you don't work in analytics. The game is fucking garbage now, it's an embarrassment to watch. Nothing skill wise has changed at all, the game has simply focused more on the thing that gets you more points. The skill at shooting the 3 has barely improved, it's simply the volume. That's it. Every other aspect of the game has gotten LAZIER as teams just swing the ball around like women looking for the open 3.

Modern NBA is trash.
 
LOL

League 3 point percentage in 1992 was 33.6%. Top player, 45%.

In 2023 is was 36.6%. Top player, 46%.

Hopefully you don't work in analytics. The game is fucking garbage now, it's an embarrassment to watch. Nothing skill wise has changed at all, the game has simply focused more on the thing that gets you more points. The skill at shooting the 3 has barely improved, it's simply the volume. That's it. Every other aspect of the game has gotten LAZIER as teams just swing the ball around like women looking for the open 3.

Modern NBA is trash.

I'm aware of those stats. Thing was in the past three's were way more poorly contested than they are now.

Edit: to add, the number of three's were way lower, and generally a greater % of them taken by players who specialized in them and not much else. Fast forward, way more players, including non-specialiats, are capable of taking the shot at a higher clip so they are more contested. Basically westbrick and a few others are players that you can try to bait into taking open three's hoping they will attempt the shot and miss, and a decent amount of time it's not viable. In eras past there were way more players defenses were willing to and did give all day to shoot an open 3 of they wanted.

Maybe think better before making condescending remarks.
 
Last edited:
I'm aware of those stats. Thing was in the past three's were way more poorly contested than they are now.

Maybe think better before making condescending remarks.
Anybody advocating that the modern NBA is a good game at all, let alone in comparison to what is was 30 years ago....isn't thinking.
 
Anybody advocating that the modern NBA is a good game at all, let alone in comparison to what is was 30 years ago....isn't thinking.

I'm assessing talent levels, not which style ought to be to one's personal taste. So another swing and a miss. You are coming in awfully hot and making shit or off topic points so suggest you start over and talk like a normal person.
 
I'm assessing talent levels, not which style ought to be to one's personal taste. So another swing and a miss. You are coming in awfully hot and making shit or off topic points so suggest you start over and talk like a normal person.

Talent levels? How can talent levels be better when 30% of the game disappeared?

I'm coming in swinging a fire poker buddy. Ain't nobody going to sit there with a straight face and opine such ludicrous ideas...lol
 
Listen, I'll agree that as a whole, the league is simply better shooting in general. That's bound to occur with the shift in gameplay we've seen.. And it's entertaining to see some shooting bigs dominating outside the paint and with court vision (Jokic is a freak for sure....but again, absolute terrible at D)

So much flopping, so much travelling, so many air balls, so much palming, so much awkward movement. I'm still in awe at how drastically it's changed for the worse in such a short period of time.....in my opinion of course :)
 
Because ht western conference is a mean place and it would have made LeBron just another kinda famous player instead of the face of the league.

Spurs also lost to Mavericks and Phoenix around that time.

Oh i am sorry, since when do we call a team that won 6 championships in a decade shitty teams?
Cool, the Mavericks and Suns were also great teams. They just werent the best teams. The healthy Celtics lost to the Heat, does that mean they aren't a super talented or great team? Denver has 1 Championship in like 8 years of Joker dominating. They must really not be very good.

Both those teams speed run the 90s with hilarious ease.
 
Cool, the Mavericks and Suns were also great teams. They just werent the best teams. The healthy Celtics lost to the Heat, does that mean they aren't a super talented or great team? Denver has 1 Championship in like 8 years of Joker dominating. They must really not be very good.

Both those teams speed run the 90s with hilarious ease.
Like i said, Lebron as memorable to the public as a Marc Gasol or a Blake Griffin to the public not even close to how famous he is if he starts his career on a bad team out West.
That was the topic of discussion...

The 2000s mavericks speed run the 90s NBA? Why?
Hilarious ease? Like the best nba team beating division 1 college team? Are you kidding?
 
Back
Top