The Last Dance - Comparing Eras, Your Choice?
I've been enjoying the Last Dance documentary thus far and really enjoyed watching late 80's to mid 90's basketball. I hear a lot about comparing eras and how it's tough. Old school guys love the physicality of the 80s/90s NBA, while modern basketball analytics folk love to point out how much more efficient today's 3 point shooting teams are and how the game has evolved. I also hear a lot of the "they are soft now" vs. the "everyone is more athletic now."
Frankly, I think today's players are incredible and fun to watch, with some like LeBron and Steph Curry transforming what their listed position means and what is considered a "good shot."
That said, I'd take the Celtics, Lakers, Pistons, and Bulls of yester-year over today's squads, simply because they played with a true animosity for one another. The playoff series were absolutely brutal and there was nothing like that NBC prologue with Bob Costas narrating before the games to get you pumped. Maybe it's because I was a kid back then and there's a nostalgia, but I just can't see an era as exciting as that one, despite all the great talent that is in the league now. Also, the games back then were so balanced in terms of offense-defense and not officiated to push up scoring numbers, that guys like Harden and Curry would have gotten completely exploited on the defensive end in my opinion.
And per the GOAT debate, there really isn't one. MJ was just a different dude - all his contemporaries said as much. Magic, Bird, and Isiah basically said they knew he was the best they'd ever seen from the moment he entered the league, and those that came after, from Reggie Miller to Allen Iverson to Kevin Garnett considered him "Black Jesus". His aura and his game were just different.
Kobe was special, Lebron is uniquely great, but nobody combines the raw athleticism, skill, mental toughness, and sociopathic desire to win quite like MJ.
So what era you all rolling with? And who's your GOAT?
90s, because everything was better in the 90s and that is a scientific fact.
80s, because everything was better in the 80s and that is a scientific fact.
The 80's did have the Talking Heads. So that's 1 for 1.
You and Balki had some great times indeed.
Outside of Jordan (who was an all-time great player even if I personally disliked him) the 1990s NBA was pretty bad. Adding all those expansion teams (Charlotte/Miami/Orlando/Minnesota and then Toronto/Vancouver a few years later) watered down the talent pool, especially since international players were still a new thing. All of a sudden scores were routinely like 82-75 when they had been in the 100s just a few years earlier.
But the '80s NBA was awesome.
April 27th, 2020 at 11:28 PM ^
Yeah, I don't get the 90s NBA love. Most of the franchises OP mentioned were better in the 80s. Actually all of them, except the Bulls.
Outside of the Bulls, who surprisingly won only one "Finals" in less than six games, the Rockets and Spurs just didn't wow folks as champs.
Username smh
If you put my face next to Penny Hardaway, you'd understand. Coworkers gave me the nickname in the 90s and I was already on the Tyra Banks bandwagon (Fresh Prince of Bel-Air).
With the exception of the Bulls (because I don't really consider them to be from the same era, especially during the 2nd 3-peat), the best teams today would wipe the floor with the Lakers, Celtics and Pistons.
Interesting. I think guys like Curry and Durant wouldn't have physically survived the Celtics and the Bad Boys playing under the rules of that era. Hell, Durant and Curry have already had numerous serious injuries playing in a league designed to protect player's health at all costs.
I think Lebron has the size, strength, and durability to play in any era, but if the Dallas Mavs were able to shake his confidence, I could only imagine what some Bird and MJ trash talk would have done to his psyche.
I think people who grew up watching 80s basketball have a romanticized view of how physical it was and what players were allowed to do to each other. I think players are generally bigger, faster, stronger now than they were in the 80s. Kevin McHale was only 20 lbs heavier than Steph Curry, but was 7 inches taller than Steph. How much damage is he really going to be able to do on a guy like Steph? Clip montages of guys being thrown down or throwing punches during the 80s don't mean that every play ended like that.
April 27th, 2020 at 10:51 PM ^
Yeah. I don’t think people realize the players back then we’re so thin. Robert Parish, who went head to head with Bill Laimbeer was thinner than Kevin Durant. Durant is 6-11, 240, Robert Parish was 7-1, 225. Bill Laimbeer was 5 lbs heavier than Durant at the same height. Steph Curry is the same size as Joe Dumars was.
And today’s game is actually more physical. They just don’t allow the cheap shots like they did back then.
Kevin Durant would wreck a prime Scottie Pippen and he wouldn’t even have to get to the hoop to risk a cheap shot. He could easily shoot over him from 15 feet all day long. Today’s athletes are bigger, stronger, faster, leaner, and more well conditioned.
Why basketball? Why don’t people say 90s football teams would beat today’s top teams? Well it’s easy to see the difference in size and strength. Today’s football players are trained to a level 90s football players couldn’t compete with.
Sports evolve, quickly, basketball is no different.
April 27th, 2020 at 11:07 PM ^
Guys might do weight-training nowadays, but it's definitely not as physical a game now. Hand-checking was legal back then which alone was a huge difference. There was more tolerance in the league for all kinds of contact.
BTW, this doesn't get mentioned enough. I remember Karl Malone decking Isiah.
April 28th, 2020 at 10:59 AM ^
I think this is the point...it's the rules and style of play, not the size of the players or how much they could bench press or how hard they could punch you in the face that we are debating.
When Jordan was playing, the defense could grab and pull on jerseys, hand fight, hand check and literally guide a player to a spot on the floor by pushing him there. The reason it was thought that you needed a "big man" to win championships was because they were less likely to be pushed all over the floor like a guard, and could post up in a spot, get position, and create a platform from which the offense could run sets.
Bird and Magic were a revelation in that they were not being ridden off the court by defenders physical play.
- Magic was point forward that was simply too big for other guards to push around, and he could see and shoot over them.
- Bird's size and shooting stroke (from almost behind his head) allowed him to score from anywhere with defenders all over him.
That said, both Bird and Magic had legit big men on their team (Parish, Mchale and Kareem and Worthy) so the offense was not alway run through them.
Jordan was the evolution in that he was 6'6 190 pound guard that was too fast and strong to push and pull around the court. The entire Bulls offense was being run through a 2 guard, something seemingly impossible for that era. From the Cavs to the Celtics to the Pistons they were all grabbing him and pushing him and still couldn't hold him under 30+ ppg in his early years. He was not yet a great jump shooter with the iconic fadeaway, and most his points came off drives or one on one moves.
This is why many believe Jordan would average 40-45 ppg in today's NBA. Hell, he averaged 37 his 3rd year in the league and 41 in the 93 Finals.
How old are you? I'm betting under 30.
Playoff basketball, in the 80s and now, is a totally different game then a run of the mill regular season game. The regular season is a grind... Larry bird once played left handed to break the monotony of the regular season (and had a 47 point triple double).
I think this gets lost quite a bit when comparing eras. Everyone always remembers, and rightfully so, the great teams/games in the 80s/90s and the playoff series. If you are contrasting that with a modern regular season game in March you are going to come to the conclusion that people played harder and more physical in the 80s.
So... I think the question is would you take a desperation mode game 7 86' Celtics or 98' bulls vs a game 7 17' Warriors or 13' Heat?
April 27th, 2020 at 10:26 PM ^
Guys like Boogie Cousins would have ended Bill Lambeers career in the first fight. Just go look at the size of guys back then. Kevin McHale vs Anthony Davis would be hilarious.
Just because the guys today don't brawl, doesn't mean they can't. The size and athleticism of today's players is too much.
I think this is true. Although it's also an impossible comparison to make, because the game EVOLVED from those teams 30 years ago; the resulting teams are the successful evolution of the game to beat teams that came before them.
Of course, teams from 30 years ago couldn't keep up with the 3pt shooting ability of teams today, because teams today increased the amount of 3s taken to beat successful older teams.
So yes, the best teams from today would beat the best teams from the 90s.
I'm not so sure...How do you beat the Warriors? - With crazy length and interchangeability on the perimeter. Between Jordan, Pippen, Harper and Rodman the Bulls had an absurdly long, quick and physical defense that could go over screens and give the Warriors fits, imo.
Durant is essentially unguardable at 6'11 shooting 3's, but the rest could be corralled.
On the other end, who's covering any of these guys...Jordan, Pippen, Kukoc. It would be absolute abuse on that end. Klay Thompson would put up a fight, and Draymond would stir up some antics, but MJ and Pippen would go for 50 and 35 a game in that series. Kukoc gets 25 a game, and an open Bulls shooter like Kerr would be dropping 20 from all the open looks off doubles.
April 27th, 2020 at 10:15 PM ^
So a team that averaged 105 ppg during the best year in their 2nd 3-peat would get 130 ppg from just 4 guys vs the Warriors?
April 27th, 2020 at 10:54 PM ^
You tried to make a logical argument against the assumption that former basketball players were WAY better? How dare you, sir! HOW DARE YOOOUUUU.
/s, the old era are overrated as hell
April 27th, 2020 at 11:33 PM ^
Yes, that's my point. Jordan averaged 41 against the Suns in the Finals. Pippen average 20 in 5 of 6 finals appearances. I expect 50 and 35 from Jordan and Pippen in today's game to be realistic.
Kukoc is 6'11 with a 3 point shot..who's covering that?
No hand checking and yeah, I'd expect them to score 140 a game as a team.
Bulls wouldn’t have a chance vs the Durant/Curry Warriors or the Lebron Cavs.
April 27th, 2020 at 11:34 PM ^
Under today's rules? Yeah, Jordan would get 130 by himself.
April 28th, 2020 at 10:19 AM ^
Era comparison is never going to work properly because games evolve, and so do players.
Michael Jordan was never a particularly eager 3-point shooter. I think he shot lower than 30%, which was fine for his era. It wasn't a focus of his game because it wasn't a priority in the way basketball was played at the time. We know, for a fact, that anything he felt he needed to add to his game, he was going to do it and do it well, so if 3-point shooting had been the key to being a great player and winning championships, he would've developed it.
Everything is different now. Some rules have changed a bit, and shooting has changed, and players are bigger and stronger (hint: PEDs don't make you shoot better, but they can make you faster and stronger and provide more cardiovascular endurance). Yes, the Goliaths of today that drain 3s would beat the 80s Celtics or the 90s Bulls, just like the NFL teams today with QBs that hit 65-70% of their passes to ultra-fast receivers while fielding 4.5 lightning bolts on defense would beat the 80's 49ers or the 90s Cowboys.
That doesn't make those teams less great. Teams should be judged by their performance in their eras. The teams today wouldn't advance to the levels they do today without the hard work and development of those who have come before.
April 28th, 2020 at 11:46 AM ^
PEDs are an elephant in the room. There are a lot more of them available to athletes now. I remember David Stern a few years back saying there was no PED problem in the league, which didn't sound too convincing.
Dennis Rodman was the first NBA guy who I thought might be on them - he went from being a lanky small forward into a bulky power forward late in his career without losing his athleticism, which was curious. There are some guys now that make me wonder.
I strongly suspect that PEDS are massively widespread throughout major revenue sports, because the benefits are so significant and the risks are so low (how many guys have gotten nailed in the NBA? Like one in the last five years? Stern was kidding himself, and I doubt he even believed it).
Generally, if there is a benefit to PEDs, people are going to try them, and if they're not caught, those people are going to benefit from them. And since PEDs can increase strength, speed, and endurance, there are significant benefits for them in almost every sport. And the PED producers are always ahead of the tests, so even where there is testing, there are ways to get around it.
You can mitigate things somewhat--cycling almost surely hasn't stamped out doping, but it has put enough clamps on the practice that it provides less of an advantage and is less dangerous--but thinking that it's not widespread when there are many millions of dollars on the line and ultra-competitive people willing to do whatever it takes to win is simply implausible.
I'm a pretty big guy on "doing right things," but I also have to be realistic: PEDs are probably widespread, and thus players I like and root for probably use them. If I turn this into a moralistic crusade, I'm going to wind up being disappointed in people.
It depends if those teams could learn to shoot 3's better. They might have. Joe Dumars developed into a 3-point shooter late in his career, for instance. Larry Bird was always a good shooter from downtown but just didn't take the volume that players do now. He might actually be better in this era.
Yeah...I think Bird, Miller and Ray Allen would have killed it in today's game.
April 27th, 2020 at 10:19 PM ^
You lost me when you said Bird might actually be better in this era. He wouldn't be able to find a guy he could guard in today's game.
April 27th, 2020 at 10:22 PM ^
There's no illegal defense in today's game. That helps a lot.
April 27th, 2020 at 11:39 PM ^
Bird was a better defender than Curry and Harden. I agree, Bird would get torched by some small forwards, but could it really get worse than when he had to guard Dominique?
April 28th, 2020 at 10:37 AM ^
First sign of getting old and I'm 48 is when you start saying things were better back in my day especially when it comes to something as popular as the NBA.
30% of the players nowadays come from different countries as there are hundreds of millions of more people to choose these 350 best players. Take any industry that has grown as much in the NBA from 30 years ago and I guarantee you the top 350 in that field are much better at their job then those from 30 years ago as we learn and grow off of each other
April 27th, 2020 at 11:05 PM ^
With which eras rules? In the pre- technical foul era, today's teams would be lost. Lakers Pistons and Celtics in the 80s those players got punched in the face and still finished.
April 27th, 2020 at 11:45 PM ^
This is always the worst argument. You pretend like James Harden wouldn't absolutely kill Isaiah Thomas in a street fight. Boogie Cousins would absolutely destroy anyone on the Bad Boys. Just because these guys don't fight in games like they did back then, doesn't mean they can't. The 80s Celtics were a bunch of scrawny white dudes. Who on that team really wants to fight Draymond? No one.
There is no discussion. Its today's players over yesterday's players with 1 exception and thats Jordan. The era and rules don't matter.
April 28th, 2020 at 10:04 AM ^
Why do people make the assumption that the old era guys wouldn't be better in todays environment. You have to account for growing up in an AAU culture, health, nutrition and training advancements etc.
The older players would be bigger, stronger and faster than they were in their era.
The Thomas, Jordans, Birds and Johnsons of the era would still be cream of the crop just because of their mentality
Because that's not the argument. The argument is about how good they were when they played vs guys today. I'm sure if Magic was born in 1995 he'd be significantly better than he was. But that's not the comparison. Its simply who is better. The answer is always todays player with the exception of Jordan.
April 28th, 2020 at 12:38 AM ^
Players like Durant and The Greek Freak didn’t exist in the 80s. Players that size were slow. The athletes of today would crush the athletes of the 80s and 90s. Those two in particular would dominate more than MJ did.
But you can’t really compare the games and athletes across eras. Rules were different for the games and more sophisticated training helps make up for most of the athleticism.
As far as fan enjoyment, Showtime and Lakers/Celtics games were much more fun to watch than any other era. It was also fun to see a team like the Pistons eventually take down the Celtics.
Offenses today are boring. And, championship teams today have to load up like the Dream Teams of the 80s to win. Boring!
The ‘90s era with the Bulls was also boring. No competition. But MJ is still the GOAT.
Nothing in the last 40 years compares to Magic running an offense. 80s all the way!
There's not a single professional sport where a modern team wouldn't wipe the floor with a team 30 years ago. That's just a given.
Basketball and Football, sure. You really don’t think Wayne Gretzky’s Oilers of the 80’s could win cups in this generation or the Tigers circa 83-87 could compete for a World Series title? I don’t see either of them getting crushed by modern teams.
Have you watched film of Gretzky's Oilers? The game was waaaaaay different back then. Just the difference in goaltending alone would blow them away, and today's high-speed pressure game would suffocate them. Gretzky loved to set up behind the net; he'd get crushed trying to do that today.
Baseball doesn't change as rapidly over time, but it still changes. I think the Tigers lineup would struggle with all the pitchers that throw 95 today, for example.
And Golf. There's always a guy in his 40's or 50's competing for majors with the guys in their 20's and 30's. You can make the argument that the equipment is better today, or that golf is not an "athletic sport", but despite some guys out driving others by 50-75 yards off the tee, great iron play and putting is always the equalizer - if not more important.
April 28th, 2020 at 12:36 PM ^
Games officiated like today? No question modern teams dominate.
Officiating and rules from back in the day? Not so certain.
I'm in my mid twenties and only started watching basketball in the last few years. I tried to watch an old game with a college buddy (a huge Sixers guy). We flipped on an Iverson gem, I thought it was borderline unwatchable. It's so slow and boring and uninterestingly physical! Handchecking sucks.
As to Curry getting roasted on defense: yeah, an underrated side-effect of ending illegal defense is that weaker defenders can stay on the floor. On the other hand, Curry's okay when he tries. Have you seen, like, D'Angelo Russell or Devin Booker?
And about animosity: didn't episode 2 show Jordan golfing with a playoff opponent? Didn't he do all kinds of "killing him with kindness" stuff to Barkley? There might have been some teams who hated each other back then, sure, but most seem pretty alright with each other -- and the same is true today, the Cavs and the Warriors didn't like each other during those runs, the Wizards and the Celtics were a thing for a while, the Celtics and Heat (when Ray Allen left) had bad blood.
April 27th, 2020 at 10:33 PM ^
Too much scoring in basketball then, much less today... Too little scoring in every other team sport except for football. Football has it about right.
April 27th, 2020 at 10:01 PM ^
The game in the late 80's/early 90's wasn't not a pretty game, it definitely was but it was also a rougher, physical game where if you tried to play in the paint, you paid for it. I think the biggest difference in the game itself isn't the rules or such but the players relationships with their opponents. Today, if you're friends off the court, you're friends on the court. In the late 80's/early 90's, you could be friends off the court and bitter rivals who went at it on the court. Jordan was good friends with guys like Charles Barkley, Charles Oakley and Patrick Ewing but you could never tell from the battles they had on the court.
As for The GOAT, it's Jordan.
April 27th, 2020 at 10:10 PM ^
There has never been anything like the 90's Bulls. It was such a great time to grow up as a basketball fan.
It's hard to compare eras, but the way today's players flop and whine for fouls is just hard to respect. That being said, last year's playoffs were the best in years and a blast to watch.
April 27th, 2020 at 10:33 PM ^
Bad Boys Forever. Zeke GOAT. Out! (Without a handshake).
April 27th, 2020 at 10:37 PM ^
Today's shooters are better, and today's players are more athletic.
But the league was much more enjoyable in the 80s and 90s.
There was a moment when I thought there might be a real rivalry brewing when GS came back from 3-1 down to beat OKC, but then Durant left the latter to win with the former, and that was that.
April 27th, 2020 at 10:47 PM ^
To add on to your last point, the two best teams now seem to more times than not, cruise through their conference playoffs and have a really good/great Finals series but they don't really go through any challenges or have to face rivals that push them as much as they can before they get there. The 80's/90's seemed to have that and you saw that with the Celtics/Pistons, Pistons/Bulls, Bulls/Knicks & Bulls/Pacers.
Also to your KD point and the same with Lebron, it was fun to watch Jordan's reaction after the Bulls lost to the Pistons for the 3rd year in a row, instead of guys looking to leave town, force a trade, they got in the gym, as a team, taking the lessons they learned and put in work needed to win.