30 for 30 Bad Boys

[Fabtrey]

So you think a team with multiple hall of famers is better than a team with no stars and all of the main players under 24 years old?
Ummm.... i agree

put it this way. past Jazz will look like 92 dream team and we would look like spain at best. and we never looked like that against today's team. we were actually competitive against many top teams. hell, we beat miami & okc. as bad as we are, we are only a player away from being an average team in this league.


just imagine how badly karl would own our current bigs. can a grown man make other grown make cry? not sure, but i think karl can against our pups. and imagine the flawless ball movement compared to this stagnant offense.

 

[fishonjazz]

Plus imagine how awesome keefe, foster, crotty, larue, beniot, handlogten, amechi, eisly, and b-russ would be.

 

[Fabtrey]

Plus imagine how awesome keefe, foster, crotty, larue, beniot, handlogten, amechi, eisly, and b-russ would be.

sloan vs. ty alone makes eh, 7-10pt difference.

and you could plugin any decent dudes and team will function very well as long as you have 2 HOFers in karl & stockton. plugin karl & stockton into our current lineup and we are 55-60 win team even with corbin coaching.

and not every scrubs are the same. scrubs back then still had much better overall fundamentals and much more coachable. they are much more involved in the system. it's not a rocket science. just look at the spurs. they plugin anybody and all play reasonably well in the system.


again, this young roster hung in there with many average to top teams this year. it's not like we got blown out every darn games. but if we play past Jazz, we would get blown out every time. it's a child play. and that 1989 Jazz team were above average team in that era.


it's a man's game and only real man on the court is stockton and this beast.

 

[Safetydan]

sloan vs. ty alone makes eh, 7-10pt difference.

and you could plugin any decent dudes and team will function very well as long as you have 2 HOFers in karl & stockton. plugin karl & stockton into our current lineup and we are 55-60 win team even with corbin coaching.

and not every scrubs are the same. scrubs back then still had much better overall fundamentals and much more coachable. they are much more involved in the system. it's not a rocket science. just look at the spurs. they plugin anybody and all play reasonably well in the system.


again, this young roster hung in there with many average to top teams this year. it's not like we got blown out every darn games. but if we play past Jazz, we would get blown out every time. it's a child play. and that 1989 Jazz team were above average team in that era.


it's a man's game and only real man on the court is stockton and this beast.

Lol, this is terrible. I love this fallacy that the league is somehow worse now than it was in the past. The early 2000s was bad but the overall talent level is higher now than it's ever been by far. Your point is, absolutely, unprovable at best.

 

[Fabtrey]

ask MKG about playing 1 on 1 against 50 year old MJ.

it's a team game. on paper, knicks should at least be top 5 team in the east. melo alone should make the team at least 45 win team. but guess what? they have no teamwork. they don't play D. they have awful coaching. they don't play hard. they don't complement each other. all they do is jack up shots after shots. and that's where we are at. we are not a good TEAM.

today's players are more talented in

half crossovers
stepbacks
double crossovers
hops
killer crossovers
shooting ton of 3s, and not be afraid of shooting 3s

there is a reason why NY knicks didn't make the playoffs in the east.

today's players aren't even taller avg wise. league avg height still remains same 6ft 6 3/4. players pack more muscle now. and many of them carry unnecessary weight. but don't tell me playing with additional weight helps that much. in most cases it doesn't.

there is a reason why veteran teams tend to do better than young inexperienced teams. past Jazz would make a joke out of our current jazz. we just witnessed veteran Uconn beating talented UK team. talent for talent UK destroys Uconn. i mean it's not even comparable.


also who would win between

80's lakers vs. today's heat (lol)
80's celtics vs. today's spurs (lol)
80's pistons vs. today's thunder (lol)


i mean, come on. lakers would be too big and experienced against smaller heat. showtime lakers will show how to get the job done. ball movement will make heat look like a bad half court team. kareem would skyhook them to death.

celtics would just too physical against spurs. bird would have a field day. pistons would make thunder look scared. i mean just look at how they are struggling against big bodies of memphis. pistons would sweep thunder. it won't even be a contest.


better team always wins. today's nba have many transcendent talents. bron would dominate in any era. KD too. melo can score any night. griffin will dunk over anybody anytime.

but today's era doesn't have great teams. this Heat team is not a great team. i can't consider them great yet. if they 3 peat then i would have to put them up there. but this team is too small. they will lose to past great champions (shaq's lakers, bulls, rockets, any 80's champs).


better athletic talent = / = better basketball player

 

[Safetydan]

ask MKG about playing 1 on 1 against 50 year old MJ.

it's a team game. on paper, knicks should at least be top 5 team in the east. melo alone should make the team at least 45 win team. but guess what? they have no teamwork. they don't play D. they have awful coaching. they don't play hard. they don't complement each other. all they do is jack up shots after shots. and that's where we are at. we are not a good TEAM.

today's players are more talented in

half crossovers
stepbacks
double crossovers
hops
killer crossovers
shooting ton of 3s, and not be afraid of shooting 3s

there is a reason why NY knicks didn't make the playoffs in the east.

today's players aren't even taller avg wise. league avg height still remains same 6ft 6 3/4. players pack more muscle now. and many of them carry unnecessary weight. but don't tell me playing with additional weight helps that much. in most cases it doesn't.

there is a reason why veteran teams tend to do better than young inexperienced teams. past Jazz would make a joke out of our current jazz. we just witnessed veteran Uconn beating talented UK team. talent for talent UK destroys Uconn. i mean it's not even comparable.


also who would win between

80's lakers vs. today's heat (lol)
80's celtics vs. today's spurs (lol)
80's pistons vs. today's thunder (lol)


i mean, come on. lakers would be too big and experienced against smaller heat. showtime lakers will show how to get the job done. ball movement will make heat look like a bad half court team. kareem would skyhook them to death.

celtics would just too physical against spurs. bird would have a field day. pistons would make thunder look scared. i mean just look at how they are struggling against big bodies of memphis. pistons would sweep thunder. it won't even be a contest.


better team always wins. today's nba have many transcendent talents. bron would dominate in any era. KD too. melo can score any night. griffin will dunk over anybody anytime.

but today's era doesn't have great teams. this Heat team is not a great team. i can't consider them great yet. if they 3 peat then i would have to put them up there. but this team is too small. they will lose to past great champions (shaq's lakers, bulls, rockets, any 80's champs).


better athletic talent = / = better basketball player

I'm saying that, not only is the talent level higher, the teams are deeper 1-12, and light years more sophisticated and efficient in terms of offense and defense (especially defense). Pitting this team from this era vs. this team from another era is impossible. It's fun to dream and fantasize about the past and think it's the greatest, I understand. I'm sure some of the best 80's teams could and would win some games here and there and would compete. Oh, and ball movement, lol. I'm sure you imagine that none of the modern teams could possibly match the showtime lakers level of ball movement, because this years Knicks couldn't. good point.

 

[Fabtrey]

watch any of these teams in the playoffs. you rarely see 12 deep teams. mostly it's 8 at best.

also just look at some of the 'dream teams' that lost to euro teams in mid 00's. they were clearly more talented. i remember in 2004, we had a team consists of AI, duncan, bron, marbury, and etc. how da hell did they lose to friggin argentina? argentina did have manu, but come on.
our talent was sick. why? because we weren't a team. we lost to a team.

and remember our young teams before 92 dream team? our talent kept losing to russia and other top europe teams. we had danny manning, d rob and co. but we still lost. we were athletically superior. i mean the athletic gap between us and them were ridiculous. let's face it. we had best athletic african americans in our team aged between 20-23. basically we were sending our anthony davises and kyrie irvings. and they had bunch of vlade divacs and tony kukoc. but their ball moved. they played like a team. we were busy looking at each other not really knowing each other.

my logic behind why and how 80's or early 90's nba teams would smoke us is pretty simple - fundamentals in a systemic effort. they were teams.

back then players stayed in college for at least 3 years. most of them 4 years. and back then players focused on fundamentals. there were no youtube crossover videos. there were no and1 mixed tape. you go watch some of early gerald green mixed tape when he came straight out from high school. dude in tape looked like he is next vince carter at worst. dude out hops most of nba players ever existed. but guess what doc rivers said about him? 'dude doesn't know how to play basketball'. it took him 5-6 years to kinda 'get it'. he is now getting it. this league has too many of these youngsters who has all the potential, but just didn't learn how to play yet.

athleticism is a great asset. it's one of the most important element in basketball. but it's not the most important element. watch 2nd peat MJ who no longer had hops. some even called him a floor jordan. lol but watch him play. he dominated with his insane fundamentals, and deadly mid range jumpers. nothing fancy. great post game(probably best ever by a guard), deadly fadeaway, simple passes, simple handles, etc. MJ never did anything fancy with the ball. his handle was so simple yet effective. our own john stockton? he never did any of the fancy dribbling moves of today. stockton was a simple guy. brilliantly simple. no additives. Steve nash? he won 2 back to back mvps in this era. another simple guy who only knows how to play fundamental basketball. was he a supreme athlete? i don't think so. he was good enough athlete who just knew how to ball.

yes, this is just my opinion. but i just don't like the product of most of teams. i enjoy watching good teams like spurs. but some basketball games are unwatchable. i watched pacers choking against Hawks. that's not a good basketball. i watched almost all 82 jazz games this year. it's not a good product.

i really hope age limit is 20. that would help the game alot.