Does the NBA stink?

[clutchcargo]

I used to chuckle at the old fogies 20 or 30 years ago who would say how the athletes and caliber of play in the "old days" was so much better than it is now ("with "now" being the 1970s and 1980s). And that was true for not just basketball.

But now, today, really today, whenever I take my hands away from my eyes long enough to watch the NBA for 10 minutes, I know I'm right in saying that this game, these players, this product is nowhere near as good as it was in the 1970s, 1980s and even early 1990s.

I"m not just talking individual players such as Walton, Maravich, Dr. J, Kareem, Magic, Bird and Jordan, I'm talking the TEAMS and the flow and strategy of the game. This sport truly has regressed and is just awful to watch. There's a lot more physical contact going on, yet there is less defense being played---if you know what I mean.

You know where I won't be on Sunday.

 

[SoSueMe]

I brought this up about five months ago and no one agreed with me. But I watch every "classic" game I can on my ESPN Classic and on Raptors TV, and I'm telling you the difference in games, players, action is like night and day.

I still like the NBA, but not like I liked it when I was in high school and college.

 

[RokSki]

The athletes are better, but the teamwork - and especially the shooting - sucks.

The shooting is abysmal. Just God-awful. And don't let people tell you it's because of better defense. Guys just don't practice it like the older guys did, between practicing dunks and taking calls on their cells.

 

[fishwrapper]

It is not the era. Not the players. You miss the shorts...

 

[RokSki]

It is not the era. Not the players. You miss the shorts...

I think I better go confess on the 'gay sportswriter' thread. :)

 

[fishwrapper]

I love those old fotos...I came across a Larry Bird shot where those shorts were so short I swear you could see his ass crease. My wife calls those shorts: "Nutters."

 

[SoSueMe]

I love those old fotos...I came across a Larry Bird shot where those shorts were so short I swear you could see his ass crease. My wife calls those shorts: "Nutters."

We used to call them "Nut Huggers."

 

[fishwrapper]

Not sure why you would call them "Nut Huggers"... ;)

 

[John]

Is it the shooting or the shot selection that sucks?

 

[fishwrapper]

Is it the shooting or the shot selection that sucks?

Yes.

 

[clutchcargo]

Talking about the days when NBA'ers wore their "Marilyn Monroes" (short shorts), true story: I remember seeing an SI cover circa 1970 that showed the Knicks' Willis Reed, having just grabbed a rebound, with elbows out and legs apart, you could clearly see part of his penis. I'm amazed SI editors didn't catch this, or at least do a better job with the airbrush.

 

[RokSki]

Is it the shooting or the shot selection that sucks?

Both. The shooting is worse, and everyone thinks they can shoot the 3-pointer, which makes the shooting appear even worse than it is.

 

[Minnesota4Ever]

Today's basketball players are just pathetic overall. I am not just talking NBA. I am talking high school hoops and college hoops. When a player has the ball, he or she just shoots immediately instead of finding an open person or going to the paint to get a layup or be in a position to be in the free throw line. It just disgusts me. They don't even know how to play defense most of the time. I go to the games at FDU and their basketball teams leave a lot to be desired. The coaching for both men's and women's team stink.

 

[Pringle]

I love watching the NBA. In fact, I can't watch a college game after I've watched an NBA game, because the level of play in college is simply pathetic. You think NBA players can't shoot? At least they can hit an open jump shot. I swear most Division I college players cannot.

NBA bashing seems to be fashionable these days. My main contention is that they recycle the same six teams - Dallas, Phoenix, Cleveland, San Antonio, L.A., Miami - into the Sunday ABC double header.

But I love the athleticism of the NBA and I also really like following the team-building. The margin for error is very small, and GMs have to be very calculating - and a little bit lucky - to build into a contender.

 

[Boobie Miles]

The level of athletes is far superior to the leagues heyday. There are definitely plenty of problems with today's NBA, and I think the biggest is expansion. The talent level is too diluted. The Pistons championship team of a few years ago probably had the best starting 5 in terms of no weak-link/no superstar in recent years... not one of those players would have started for the Celtics or Lakers of the '80s. The talent is spread so thin that unless there is another Red Auerbach somewhere able to dupe other GMs into one-sided deals, we'll never see teams as stacked as those '80s Celts and Lakers. If they whacked four teams right now, the level of play across the board would increase dramatically.

And watch the Suns, Spurs and the Mavs. It's not all bad.

 

[Claws for Concern]

My main contention is that they recycle the same six teams - Dallas, Phoenix, Cleveland, San Antonio, L.A., Miami - into the Sunday ABC double header.

When did Detroit get removed from the cycle?

 

[Taylee]

And watch the Suns, Spurs and the Mavs. It's not all bad.

Those teams aren't bad to watch because they play team basketball. My biggest gripe with the NBA is that it's usually an individual's game. Seeing a player launch 35 shots and make 9 while neglecting open teammates isn't my kind of TV enjoyment. McGrady holding the ball for 3/4 of the shot clock then going 1-on-3 isn't either. He does that and the Rockets are one of the best teams record-wise. That says everything to me. Besides, the game has become a 4-on-5 battle, because usually the guy who missed the shot is bitching at the refs while everyone else heads to the other end. The NBA has done a little to curb that this year, but it's still too common.
There are some teams I'll watch, the 3 mentioned by BMiles as well as Detroit and Cleveland. Detroit plays a team game and on most nights Cleveland tries to.

 

[clutchcargo]

Saying that the "athletes" playing today's NBA game are so much better than they were 20-30 years ago, even if true, misses the point.

Great, so these juiced-up athletes can bench press more, or jump higher, or run faster, or can do more interesting H-O-R-S-E shots. That stuff soesn't have a damn thing to do with the caliber of basketball or the fact that these gunners and ballhogs playing today can't play defense, unless, of course, you call all that thuggery and mugging going on as "good defense."

If all I want to see is great athleticism, so to speak, I'll go to the next Summer Olympics and watch the decathlon or gymnastics.

 

[RokSki]

I love watching the NBA. In fact, I can't watch a college game after I've watched an NBA game, because the level of play in college is simply pathetic. You think NBA players can't shoot? At least they can hit an open jump shot. I swear most Division I college players cannot.

NBA bashing seems to be fashionable these days. My main contention is that they recycle the same six teams - Dallas, Phoenix, Cleveland, San Antonio, L.A., Miami - into the Sunday ABC double header.

But I love the athleticism of the NBA and I also really like following the team-building. The margin for error is very small, and GMs have to be very calculating - and a little bit lucky - to build into a contender.

I'm the same way, with all sports. I'm definitely a 'pro' vs 'college' guy. I want to see the highest level being performed.

 

[Tom Petty]

if the athletes are "better" why do they suck so badly at playing defense and shooting? seems as though those are a coupla distinctions of being an "athlete" and playing basketball.

jumping sports, but the point's still the same: is vick a better athlete than montana?