take up watching Rugby, it's the same thing as those two teams... ruined the game of basketball in the 90's IMO. 'oh look we don't have enough talent to win playing basketball, lets tackle everybody and grind out boring ass 80-78 wins.' you can keep that sad era of ball. the Knicks-Rockets finals was one of the worst things I've ever seen on a court.
Back then the East was dominant and very physical. The Western teams were considered soft but skilled.
I just tried to envision any of the players on the current Blazers team involved in any of that action and I literally laughed myself blue in the face
Sorry Celtic, but I disagree with you. It wasn't about talent, it was about pride. How many players in the NBA today have the pride to put their team, and winning, above their own personal goals? The reason why we don't have any good rivalries anymore is because the players have no pride. No sense of team. No sense of honor. They only care about money. They only care about endorsements. The NBA has sold out. 100%. It's a league of mercenaries. These are a league of men who chose basketball because many of them wanted to be rich and famous. Not because they love the game, but because basketball was an avenue towards wealth. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it has severely taken away from the game that I grew up watching, loving, and am now very much missing.
Why is putting personal excellence ahead of team success an issue of pride, even if players do this? It seems that wanting to be great, or as good as one can be, is just as much a form of pride. I think you're a bit off the mark if you think players in the 1980s and 1990s didn't see basketball as an avenue to wealth. Were the stars and superstars making commercials out of a deep, abiding love for commercials? Signing larger and larger endorsement deals out of a deep and abiding love for the endorsement business? It's cool to romanticize the memories of your youth, but I don't think you're correct in your characterizations. The game may have changed, but not due to the character of the people playing it. Basketball players have, for at least the last three decades, been motivated by both love for the game that they've played all their lives and desire to become famous and rich playing it. It hasn't suddenly become a league of joyless mercenary pirates (which would actually be pretty cool, if only it were true).
I think you're wrong. The mindset has changed. There are guys in the NBA who don't even like the game of basketball. They only play because they can make a lot of money doing it. Darius Miles was a perfect example. The NBA shifted towards "potential" and fell into the pitfall of drafting a number of high school players and European players during the late 90's and early 2000's. That was a far cry from where the NBA was in the 80's and 90's. I think we've seen the NBA retract from that mindset a bit, but they still do it. You don't see the change in attitude? I've read many books by players from the 80's and 90's who speak about hating their opponents. The Knicks and Pacers were a perfect example. Those were two teams who hated each other. How many teams are like that in the NBA today? The money wasn't the same either. Compare the salaries of today to those in the 80's and the early 90's and it's not even close. Sure, they were making really really good money, but not the astronomical contracts that players today have signed. It's a completely different game.
if you saw the game played in the 80's you'd know the difference between pride and teamwork and thuggery because you couldn't put the ball in the hoop enough. beyond the obvious Lakers and Celtics teams that played great team ball, teams like the Mavs,Nuggets,Bucks, Sixers and Sonics played really great team ball as well. THen Chuck Daly developed that crappy brand of overly aggressive D that boderlined on mugging and Pat Riley mimicked it in NY because the Knicks didn't have the offensive talent to win games so he slowed thing down to a crawl and relied on Ewing to be able to score baskets as the game crawled towards the end. ugh ugly,ugly basketball to watch IMO. I also feel that with the rule that HS players cannot join the league, the level of play has improved and the college experience is giving guys who woulda jumped from HS just enough seasoning that they can play a more team oriented game. Yeah there are more me first guys than before, but right now there are more team first guys than in the last decade too with LBJ, Wade, Dirk, Nash, CP3, Derron Williams etc, etc.
The no-high-school rule was to protect teams from themselves. Too many GM's got caught up in potential, and threw away draft picks like they meant nothing. Kwame Brown is a perfect example.
agreed, just like the looming strike is to protect the owners/GM's from themselves. however a byproduct of the no HS'ers rule is that the quality of play on the court improved too.
Yeah, but I still miss the physical play. The NBA is so touch-foul now. Guys like LeBron, Wade, and Kobe can't even be defended because if you touch them it's an auto-foul. It's bullshit. I understand they need a balance. Jordan used to be pounded by the Pistons. But this is ridiculous.
Seems to me that most of the HSers turned into very good pro players, if not excellent ones. Even in the old days, Moses Malone is a great example, though Bill Willoughby is one of the few who failed. I think the NBA is trying to act responsibly - to keep guys like OJ Mayo from not getting any college education.
Sure, there were a number of HSers who turned out great. KG, Kobe, T-Mac, Jermaine O'Neal, LeBron, etc. The problem is, there were also a number of guys who never should have come out.
