Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="RF2044, post: 1734571, member: 40"]
I assume you mean the "mean" player instead of median?   ; )

There's better nutrition now than 20 years ago, there's more of a concerted effort on weight lifting earlier, etc.  So maybe they are better athletically, maybe not.  I'm pretty sure that Dwight Howard is a better athlete than Hakeem Olajuwon, but that wouldn't prevent Olajuwon from 20 years ago from curb stomping him, the same way he did to a bigger, stronger Shaq in the mid-90s.  So is simply being a "superior athlete" ostensibly a big advantage?

I sure don't buy the premise that the mean player from today is superior from a skill perspective.  The rules changes are what account for the difference, IMO.  The game is much freer / more cleanly played than it was back then.  It took the NBA making a concerted effort to clean the game up from an officiating standpoint for the changes to stick.  Thank god they did [and I wish NCAA basketball could follow suit].

But at the end of the day, I see far less difference between the 90s and today's players than I do of the comparison between 60s players and 90s players [per the post above].  I think that the vast majority of players from the 90s would have little difficulty transitioning to the modern game / playing in the NBA.  Certainly not the top end talent.  Every league has marginal performers / end of bench guys who are fringe and might not make the cut.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?