Style of play in NBA Finals

[Cusefan0307]

No question this is correct. But that doesn't mean that one team couldn't be better than another team. Or one player better than another. I've seen Kershaw. He isn't as talented as Pedro or Koufax. Sorry. He just isn't. But, Kershaw on average certainly pitches to better players than Pedro or Koufax did. I'm ignoring that Pedro pitched to a D.H. instead of a pitcher. the basketball players today are better than the players of the 1980's. My objection to Erics thesis is that he said that the Celtics would just be overwhelmed. Some of the time maybe. But they had amazing talent that played in any generation that we have lived though.

I think Bird would have been a great player in this era as well. He was a big that played on the perimeter. Way ahead of his time. I'm not sure McHale, Walton or Parrish fit.

 

[patcuse]

No. They aren't. The Celtic team in I think '86 lost one game all year at home. They had a front court of Robert Parrish, Larry Bird , Kevin McHale and a healthy Bill Walton. Denis Johnson and Danny Ainge in the back court for defense. i love the warriors and they might have won a series. But to think the Celtics weren't in the same league is silly.

And the 4 minute mile will never be broken

 

[Knicks411]

I think Bird would have been a great player in this era as well. He was a big that played on the perimeter. Way ahead of his time. I'm not sure McHale, Walton or Parrish fit.

I think for the most part all those guys would be really good now. McHale would probably be more of a 5, but he'd be the best low post scorer in the league. Bird would still be Bird. Peak Bill Walton was amazing.

 

[dasher]

And the 4 minute mile will never be broken

And what does that have to do with anything being talked about here? No one has said that athletes aren't getting better. That is as obvious as the sky is blue.

 

[AlaskaSU]

I love the "ugliness" of college basketball. That's what makes it so unpredictable and tense. Everyone had predicted this series since the beginning of the season, everyone was complaining about the unevenness of the playoffs, and now one team is dominating the other supposed best team in the league. No parity, no unpredictability. Boring.

There are different perspectives; competition and aesthetics. I am enjoying the latter in this series. No one has ever had the range of Curry, along with his old man ball fake dribble moves and then shooting from weird angles around the basket, no 7' has ever had the ball handling ability of Durant and such a complete game, Clay is a high IQ player and Dreymond is a maniac especially on D, James has the best ever combination of skill and power, and Irving is the quickest person to the hole that I have ever seen. I'd enjoy it if they were playing the Wa. Generals. I agree that it would be even better if the two teams were more evenly matched, if Paul George, a free agent, were on the Cavs.

 

[patcuse]

And what does that have to do with anything being talked about here? No one has said that athletes aren't getting better. That is as obvious as the sky is blue.

Better athletes equals better basketball players

 

[dasher]

Better athletes equals better basketball players

The sky is blue. Of course it does. But that doesn't mean one team from the 1980's couldn't be a better team than the best team today. Would the Jacksonville jags destroy teams from the 1980's? They have modern players. Is Brett Gardner a better hitter than Ted Williams? On average, players are getting better. Where would mike jordan fit in today? Top player? Top 5 player? Top 10 player?

 

[Melancer46]

The issue with these types of comparisons is that for example, today's Durant likely doesn't exist if he were playing in the 80's. Vice versa, if Bird were born and raised in this generation, he'd probably be more athletic than he was back then and would certainly attempt far more 3's than he did back then. Steph wouldn't be making it rain from 3 if he played in the 80's; he probably would have worked more on developing his handles and mid-range game because that's what the game was like back then. I have no doubts that the 86 Celtics would be an all-time great team if they came around in 2017, and the same goes for the 2017 Warriors if they had played back in the 80's.

But saying stuff like the Warriors are just too good from 3 and too athletic for a team from the 80's is ignoring the fact that part of the reason they're so athletic is because they're a team from an era that has advanced athletics and a major reason that they're so good from 3 is because they're a 2017 team.

 

[GooseMutt]

But the name of the game is putting points on the board. How would these teams that weren't constructed to shoot threes compete with a team like the 2017 Warriors who have a seemingly endless supply of elite shooters?

True but Curry controls the floor and it's beautiful to watch

 

[AlaskaSU]

The sky is blue. Of course it does. But that doesn't mean one team from the 1980's couldn't be a better team than the best team today. Would the Jacksonville jags destroy teams from the 1980's? They have modern players. Is Brett Gardner a better hitter than Ted Williams? On average, players are getting better. Where would mike jordan fit in today? Top player? Top 5 player? Top 10 player?

One sport in no different from another in terms of how human athletes improve over time. Would Jesse Owens era Olympic Athletes beat Usain Bolt's Olympic track athletes? Basketball is no different from track. It could argued that there are a few individual exceptions, but to assume that an old era championship team composed of 5 starters and 10 players could beat a current championship team is a stretch. Wilt was a coordinated 7' and he dominated. 7' is no longer a big deal. Interestingly, the same does not hold true for horses. Their times do not improve over successive generations. This seems to indicate that genetics are more important than methods. The horse breeding gene pool is far smaller than the billions of men on the planet that play basketball.

As to the argument that old generation athletes would be better if they trained in modern conditions, probably true, but no one is considering this in their comparisons. Improvement is a matter of both improved methods and genetics.

 

[NineOneSeven]

The talent on the court is unreal.

Curry, Durant, Klay, Green, James, Irving, and Love are all elite basketball players.

 

[NorSyr66]

Read through the posts and one more team to consider when talking the greats to compare to Golden State & Cleveland was the Celtics in the 1960's. The X-factor was Bill Russell at center. Defender and rebounder number one. As many have mentioned the different style of play, rules, size and speed of players, etc continue to change the game but the Celtics of this decade including Russell, Sharman, Ramsey, Cousy, McCawley, Jungle Jim Loscutoff (had to include my favorite), Heinsohn, Sam Jones, KC Jones, Satch Saunders, and Havilcek always had the great balance of scoring and defense. The 3 point shoot is a difference maker today but I suspect these players could have adapted plus would have done still defended at a level to neutralize today's talented teams.

 

[Eric15]

Read through the posts and one more team to consider when talking the greats to compare to Golden State & Cleveland was the Celtics in the 1960's. The X-factor was Bill Russell at center. Defender and rebounder number one. As many have mentioned the different style of play, rules, size and speed of players, etc continue to change the game but the Celtics of this decade including Russell, Sharman, Ramsey, Cousy, McCawley, Jungle Jim Loscutoff (had to include my favorite), Heinsohn, Sam Jones, KC Jones, Satch Saunders, and Havilcek always had the great balance of scoring and defense. The 3 point shoot is a difference maker today but I suspect these players could have adapted plus would have done still defended at a level to neutralize today's talented teams.

These Warriors would beat those 1960s Celtics 99 out of 100 times. It would be like Syracuse vs. LeMoyne with a freakish upset maybe happening once.

What I just said doesn't any way diminish how incredible that dynasty was in their era.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

The talent on the court is unreal.

Curry, Durant, Klay, Green, James, Irving, and Love are all elite basketball players.

Don't forget Igoudala. He's past his prime, but in his day he was elite too.

 

[Knicks411]

The issue with these types of comparisons is that for example, today's Durant likely doesn't exist if he were playing in the 80's. Vice versa, if Bird were born and raised in this generation, he'd probably be more athletic than he was back then and would certainly attempt far more 3's than he did back then. Steph wouldn't be making it rain from 3 if he played in the 80's; he probably would have worked more on developing his handles and mid-range game because that's what the game was like back then. I have no doubts that the 86 Celtics would be an all-time great team if they came around in 2017, and the same goes for the 2017 Warriors if they had played back in the 80's.

But saying stuff like the Warriors are just too good from 3 and too athletic for a team from the 80's is ignoring the fact that part of the reason they're so athletic is because they're a team from an era that has advanced athletics and a major reason that they're so good from 3 is because they're a 2017 team.

Yeah, I think i said this before, but if you dumped the modern Warriors in the 80's and had them play as they do now, they'd have a huge advantage. But if the 80's Celtics were playing in today's environment, they would definitely adapt. But they would almost certainly not play their 3 big guys together all the time. So who knows.

 

[Knicks411]

Don't forget Igoudala. He's past his prime, but in his day he was elite too.

Golden State is amazing because they have elite players like KD and Steph. And then elite role players like Dray and Iggy. (I think calling Dray is a role player is not fair to him, he's better than that, but I think you get my point)

Also, so many of the dudes they have are great passers. Iggy, Livingston, Draymond. What a team to watch

 

[GooseMutt]

To my friends (and there are many of them) who think Magic's Lakers, Bird's Celtics or Jordan's Bulls are better than this Warrior group: I respect your opinion, but you're being unreasonable.

Like comparing disco to rap. Each in their own time( not a disco guy)

 

[Arangeman]

Lakers match up pretty well. Kareem would be unstoppable but a liability in the pnr. The showtime Lakers are probably the best comparison to GSW and would be a handful.

I dont know that this is better basketball. Just different basketball. I enjoyed the post up and mid range game too. Not everyone wants to watch 3x as many 3 pointers launched.

Since the Warriors have so many modern advantages, it would be more interesting to see them try to play 80's rules against LA or BOS.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Golden State is amazing because they have elite players like KD and Steph. And then elite role players like Dray and Iggy. (I think calling Dray is a role player is not fair to him, he's better than that, but I think you get my point)

Also, so many of the dudes they have are great passers. Iggy, Livingston, Draymond. What a team to watch

The Warriors are going to have an interesting off-season. They don't have a whole lot under contract. Heck, Durant's 2nd year is a player option. Who's to say that if they close out the series that he doesn't opt out. Curry needs and deserves to get paid. They're going to need to retool their bench big time, and they'll need to do it all in free agency since I think they've got one 2nd round pick and that's it.

 

[Alsacs]

What I think makes the Warriors so great is that if you plucked Curry and Durant off this Warrior team, I think they would still make the playoffs as a mid-range seed in the West. They would still have two Top 20 players in Klay and Draymond, and an abundance of supporting talent. Can you say that about any other team in the history of the league?

Go look at the 1986 Celtics and 1987 Lakers.

The game was completely different in the 1980s vs today.

Those teams were loaded but the game wasn't 3 point oriented and spacing the floor like now.

Celtics had Bird/McHale top 20 players. Parish/Ainge/Johnson/Walton in their rotation.
Lakers had Magic/Kareem top 20 players.
Worthy/Green/Cooper/Scott/Thompson in their rotation.

The game was different but these teams were stacked.

 

[Knicks411]

The Warriors are going to have an interesting off-season. They don't have a whole lot under contract. Heck, Durant's 2nd year is a player option. Who's to say that if they close out the series that he doesn't opt out. Curry needs and deserves to get paid. They're going to need to retool their bench big time, and they'll need to do it all in free agency since I think they've got one 2nd round pick and that's it.

There was a story recently that said Durant is willing to take less than the max in order for them to keep Iggy and Livingston around. Curry will sign the max extension I would bet.

 

[Alsacs]

But we aren't comparing the 1986 Celtics to other teams in 1986, we are comparing them to the 2017 Warriors.

How would the mid-80s possibly have enough athleticism and offensive firepower to run with Golden State? Boston attempted 393 threes in 1986. The Warriors made 982 threes this year. Boston would be completely overwhelmed.

Walton isn't really relevant here -- he averaged 8 points per game that year.

Walton averaged 8 points per game because he played behind a HOF center.

Those Celtics had shooters in Bird/Ainge/Wedman if they had to take more 3's. They had plenty of shooting but the game was mid range game and in.

 

[reedny]

Golden State is amazing because they have elite players like KD and Steph. And then elite role players like Dray and Iggy. (I think calling Dray is a role player is not fair to him, he's better than that, but I think you get my point)

Also, so many of the dudes they have are great passers. Iggy, Livingston, Draymond. What a team to watch

KD looks great, and got (well-deserved) props for his performance last night. However, as you point out, look at the surrounding cast. You can't leave curry open. You can't leave Thompson open. You can't even leave their PF (Green) open. So KD's taking advantage of all the floor space created by the surrounding talent. Not sure there are too many teams out there that Green and Iggy wouldn't start for.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

There was a story recently that said Durant is willing to take less than the max in order for them to keep Iggy and Livingston around. Curry will sign the max extension I would bet.

So Durant would opt out and sign for less? That would be kind of cool actually.

 

[Alsacs]

How much did you see of the '86 Celts? I bet not much. The Celtics would have owned the boards. Danny Ainge and Denis Johnson would have done okay against the Warriors guards. Not stopped them. No one can. But the Celtics would not have been overwhelmed.

To beat the mid-80s Celtics you needed a speedy PG like Mo Cheeks or Isiah Thomas.

The Warriors don't have that speedy PG to kill them defensively.