I grew up watching ball in the late 60's early 70's. We had some good ballhandlers then, of course they had to KEEP THEIR HAND ON TOP OF THE BALL at all times. That's the main thing that has changed, today, you can put you hand on the side, and even the bottom of the ball and not get called for it. That's why, if you guys ever noticed, that point guards almost always took the ball up the court with their backs to the basket as if they were in the post. A lot of steals happend in those days too, the kind of steals that would pretty much seem ridiculous these days. Anyone else remember that?This was typical of what rules dictated back then, poor guy, can't even dribble the way he wants to.^^Sorry, the second photo is of Steve Nash, his hand is <u>under</u> the ball.
Yeah, who knows. But the thing is, because of that rule they wouldn't be able to dribble like the guards of today because they never would have thought to try.
Doing the moves that guys like Cousy did were so much harder then because of rules like this. To be able to do things (like going between your legs) took much more skill. The ball handlers from back then would be extremely better now because of the fact it took longer and it was harder for them to master the dribble- now (where you can barely get a palming call) it would be so much more easier for them.I can't stand some of the dribbling moves players can get away with now.
It really has elevated the game. That right there is what turned the NBA into a ''black players'' game and while I agree some players of other origins can really play the game, its still basically alot more black people then white people while in the days of cousy a black player was much rarer.
So you show a photo of West posing and an action shot of Nash to prove your point?Ball handlers have gotten better, as have jumpshooters, rebounders, etc...
The new ball-handling of players these days is great. The rules too. Handles have developed from getting from point A to B, and become a deadly weapon to get by your man, score and set up passing lanes.Of course everyone knows that, but I'm not really sure what you're comparing or trying to say. People had better handle back then? Rules?
Nitro. Unless West can palm the ball like that, that is some pose. But seriously. Those were the rules back then, that's why I hate when people say ballhandlers are sooooo much better. Look at Carlos Arroyo, the mutherfucker can't move 7 feet without carrying the ball. Look at Tony Parker, Steve Nash, Deron Williams even Jason Kidd. "Palming" obviously had a different definition back then, even as recent as the mid 80's. If you let guys like West, Frazier, Hot Rod Hundley, Hondo and Elg carry the ball like players do today, they'd look pretty sweet too.
this should just about sum up, how much players can carry the ball nowadays.I mean, a grandmother could blow by someone being able to 'pause' like that.http://youtube.com/watch?v=x2KdAxKvlCQ
yeah good point. Me and my friend talked about this the other day... ballers nowdays would kill the ballers back in the day simply because of the rules and I think, from what I see, there is more althetisism now than the past..
if they went in a time machine yeah.but you also have to consider, that the players from 30+ years ago would benefit significantly from today's modern benefits too. Back then a lot of players in the 50's and 60's had to work 2nd jobs in the off season because the majority of them didn't get paid enough. They travelled by bus from Boston to NY or Philly.If they played today, they'd fly first class, 5 star hotels, better information about nutrition and diet, WAY better training facilities and able to practice and stay in shape in the off season too.I think they'd be almost or as good as they were back then.
I don't know if any of you heard Rick Barry's interview a week ago on Mike and Mike (morning radio show, aired on ESPN2), but he said that ballhandling and overall skill level is much higher today. He even went on to say his 12 year old son can handle the ball better than Rick ever could. But, he goes on to say how players now don't utilize simple ways to use that skill. They just try to do fancy sh*t to take opponent off dribble and beat himr ather than getting from point A to point B.It was an interesting interview.
^^Well, yeah, the culture of the game has changed and there are a few things being done today that wasn't done 30-40 years ago. But, that doesn't make players today so much better, Celticfan couldn't have been more correct. That's how it was in those days, teams played back-to-back-to-back, Monday in Boston, Tuesday in New York and Wednessday in Los Angeles. They took the train and flew coach. All that adds a lot of wear and tear that todays players never experience.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Michael Bryant @ Jul 14 2007, 03:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>^^Well, yeah, the culture of the game has changed and there are a few things being done today that wasn't done 30-40 years ago. But, that doesn't make players today so much better, Celticfan couldn't have been more correct. That's how it was in those days, teams played back-to-back-to-back, Monday in Boston, Tuesday in New York and Wednessday in Los Angeles. They took the train and flew coach. All that adds a lot of wear and tear that todays players never experience.</div>Basketball is a very simple game, and there aren't a ton of new things being done ballhandling-wise. Players today are simply more skilled players and athletes...it doesn't get any more simple than that. The only real advantage that players from the '60's, '70's and even '80's had on today's era is they played to their strengths and rarely went past their limit.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Nitro1118 @ Jul 15 2007, 04:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Basketball is a very simple game, and there aren't a ton of new things being done ballhandling-wise. Players today are simply more skilled players and athletes...it doesn't get any more simple than that. The only real advantage that players from the '60's, '70's and even '80's had on today's era is they played to their strengths and rarely went past their limit.</div>well the refs, let more palming go as opposed to those earlier decades.and as I said, the training, mode of travel and consciousness of diet is all much improved over those earlier decades as well.loads of factors have changed the game.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CelticFan @ Jul 16 2007, 10:12 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>well the refs, let more palming go as opposed to those earlier decades.and as I said, the training, mode of travel and consciousness of diet is all much improved over those earlier decades as well.loads of factors have changed the game.</div>...I know...hence the player of today are more skilled, far more athletic, better built, etc...Read my posts in the old Wilt Chamberlain topic to see my list of things that have changed the game. But there are some people who refuse to believe that evolution is a part of the game and naturally players of today are more skilled, athletic, etc... That isn't to take away from players of the past and certainly doesn't mean to demote them in all time rankings, but it's just a simple fact that must be realized.
absolutely they are more athletic etc etc.. Skilled.. mmm not so sure about that. The league was rougher back than and you didn't see the double teams as much so wide open shots were harder to come by as defenders stayed at home more.my thoughts are that the top players of the earlier years of the league would fair just as well now as they did then because they too would benefit from the above mentioned improvments and would be top level players now too.Some numbers (like Wilt's) would be lower, but would still be top of the league numbers for today.EG. Wilt would still dominate any player 1 on 1 (Shaq included) but it would be the defensive schemes of double teams and hack-a-stilt ploys that would lower his eye-popping numbers to really really good numbers.
