Kill The Wretched Specialists! I Love This Game.....

[J@3]

1. Brent Barry
2. John Barry
3. LeBron James
4. Earl Boykins
5. Brian Cardinal
6. Andrei Kirilenko
7. Bobby Jackson
8. Yao Ming
9. Jason Kidd (despite the lousy J)
10. Robert Horry
11. Manu Ginobili

Definately making your point here that American fundamentals are slipping when Euro's are sneaking into your example lists

Hehe and those damn Asians

[Eugene]

I'm going to say two things that contradict each other.

1. What Drespn said is almost completely true. Majority of the NBA is lacking in fundamentals, the very basic skills (of course, relatively speaking) which are essential to play basketball. Indeed, some things must be changed.

2. The best basketball is still play in the United States of America, more specifically, the National Basketball Association.

I agree with Drespn and everyone else who said that the game in the NBA is more individual than the one in Europe. The emphasis on man to man defense, among other things, promotes individual play over team play. However, if you look at all the teams who have won the NBA championship, and the teams who have consistently gone to the Finals, or even the consistently good teams in the NBA, all those teams have great teamwork, great ball movement, great shooting, great team defense, and great fundamentals, as well as great coaching.

For example:

Let's start with the Bulls. They had depth, role players, team play, team defense, great shooters. Yes, they had Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen, but those two were also couple of the best team players the league had ever seen. And they had great coaching in Phil Jackson, Johnny Bach, Tex Winters. And as well you know, Jordan and Pippen were as fundamentally sound as they come.

Moving forward, the Spurs, led by Tim Duncan and David Robinson. So you have great interior play surrounded by great shooting in Sean Elliot, Avery Johnson. Then came Bowen, Ginobili and Parker (the last two who are foreign players, admittedly), but still led by Duncan, still playing great team ball.

Lakers had Shaq and Kobe. With as much controversy and hype surrounding those two players, people like to forget that the three-peat Lakers exhibited superb team play and better team defense. Oh, as for shooters, you had Shaw, Rice, Fisher, Horry, Fox (those names don't mean much now, but they used to).

Detroit Pistons, coached by Larry Brown won with suffocating defense on the perimeter and around the basket, great ball movement (in the Finals, the Lakers simply could not keep up), and pretty damn good shooting. They had Rip Hamilton and Chauncey Billups, as well as Tayshaun Prince all hitting their shots, and getting open looks, more importantly, and even Ben Wallace was hitting them 15 footers at times.

If you look at the past teams, like the Bad Boys Pistons, Showtime Lakers, the Celtics, Red Auerbach Knicks. They all exhibited the epitome of basketball enhanced by great individual skill of their best players.

So, the winning NBA teams have always played basketball the way it should be played. Even the Kings, the Nets, the Pacers, Wolves, all have depth/shooting/defense/ball movement. And let's mention the Utah Jazz here, who have inexplicably been in the playoffs or very close to it for the last seven hundred years. All they do is play pick and roll and play gutty fundamental basketball.

So I think it's not quite as bad as it seems. You're just looking at the bottom feeders like the Clippers, the Wizards, the Sixers now, the Knicks, the Raptors. And you're right: they don't play ball the way they should. But if you look at the best teams, they play ball the right way, and just more athletically than any other team in the world.

All the best,

Eugene

[John-John Joe]

I'm going to say two things that contradict each other.

1. What Drespn said is almost completely true. Majority of the NBA is lacking in fundamentals, the very basic skills (of course, relatively speaking) which are essential to play basketball. Indeed, some things must be changed.

2. The best basketball is still play in the United States of America, more specifically, the National Basketball Association.

I agree with Drespn and everyone else who said that the game in the NBA is more individual than the one in Europe. The emphasis on man to man defense, among other things, promotes individual play over team play. However, if you look at all the teams who have won the NBA championship, and the teams who have consistently gone to the Finals, or even the consistently good teams in the NBA, all those teams have great teamwork, great ball movement, great shooting, great team defense, and great fundamentals, as well as great coaching.

For example:

Let's start with the Bulls. They had depth, role players, team play, team defense, great shooters. Yes, they had Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen, but those two were also couple of the best team players the league had ever seen. And they had great coaching in Phil Jackson, Johnny Bach, Tex Winters. And as well you know, Jordan and Pippen were as fundamentally sound as they come.

Moving forward, the Spurs, led by Tim Duncan and David Robinson. So you have great interior play surrounded by great shooting in Sean Elliot, Avery Johnson. Then came Bowen, Ginobili and Parker (the last two who are foreign players, admittedly), but still led by Duncan, still playing great team ball.

Lakers had Shaq and Kobe. With as much controversy and hype surrounding those two players, people like to forget that the three-peat Lakers exhibited superb team play and better team defense. Oh, as for shooters, you had Shaw, Rice, Fisher, Horry, Fox (those names don't mean much now, but they used to).

Detroit Pistons, coached by Larry Brown won with suffocating defense on the perimeter and around the basket, great ball movement (in the Finals, the Lakers simply could not keep up), and pretty damn good shooting. They had Rip Hamilton and Chauncey Billups, as well as Tayshaun Prince all hitting their shots, and getting open looks, more importantly, and even Ben Wallace was hitting them 15 footers at times.

If you look at the past teams, like the Bad Boys Pistons, Showtime Lakers, the Celtics, Red Auerbach Knicks. They all exhibited the epitome of basketball enhanced by great individual skill of their best players.

So, the winning NBA teams have always played basketball the way it should be played. Even the Kings, the Nets, the Pacers, Wolves, all have depth/shooting/defense/ball movement. And let's mention the Utah Jazz here, who have inexplicably been in the playoffs or very close to it for the last seven hundred years. All they do is play pick and roll and play gutty fundamental basketball.

So I think it's not quite as bad as it seems. You're just looking at the bottom feeders like the Clippers, the Wizards, the Sixers now, the Knicks, the Raptors. And you're right: they don't play ball the way they should. But if you look at the best teams, they play ball the right way, and just more athletically than any other team in the world.

All the best,

Eugene

Eugene, your points are valid and well taken. You definitely know the game...... Still, the quality of play from year to year has dropped dramatically. I mean, when you have the guys on TNT basically asking viewers why they would even tune into their game of the night you know something's wrong. When one of the biggest stories in the NBA is how Benjamin Wallace is going to wear his hair on that given night, you know something is wrong. Just look at that Detroit/Indiana series, and please don't give that malarkey about "good defensive basketball". Did you see all those wide-open BRICKS? Scores in the low 70's? Sometimes I think we're in denial......

[Steve04]

I'm with Dre. We are still the best in the world, but the quality and the emphasis on fundamentals has dropped since the early 90's. Go watch any of those Bulls championship teams or any of the other top teams and compare them to teams now and they're head and shoulders above everyone because of their teamwork and EXECUTION. Kobe is my favorite player, but if he would have stayed in the offense more and been a little more unselfish and less ego driven then we would have won this year even without a 100% Shaq.

[Eugene]

I honestly don't think it's necessarily malarky--the Indy/Det series I think was very much a defensively oriented series. Granted, Detroit isn't the most offensively gifted team, nor is Indiana, for that matter, but both teams play a half-court set, Indiana predicated on post play and Detroit on ball movement and perimeter scoring. Now you have two teams which more or less neutralize each other (see: Bill Simmons's NBA Fact or Fiction, 5-28-04).

While execution on offense is more lacking now than before, with the lack of good shooters and fundamentally sound players, I think more has to do with defense than you think. My friend Chi calls it the Van Grindy system, where the offense holds the ball to run the clock down and decrease the number of possessions in a game.

Also, I think the zone defense rules help the defense tremendously. Now the teams are using man to man defenses with zone principles, and bringing in an extra man to the strong side to hinder the offense.

I mean, I understand your point about the lack of fundamentals, and I think that starts at the earlier levels, where coaches of middle schools and high schools are more wont to simply let a talented player win games on his individual talents alone, as well as increasing number of players who leave college early. The popular perception of the game has moved away from the basic team principles of the game and because of that fundamentally sound basketball is not nearly as marketable, which is why you see the fundamentals being neglected at an earlier stage.

But the great teams still play basketball the right way, even it's being unfairly underrated.

I do agree though that the majority of the league as gone to shit. Maybe we should bring back the fun police. With Lebron James, KG, Duncan, Wade. Like Ray Allen and Michael Redd going back and forth shooting threes and saying "Shooting is FUN-damental." Or James passing. Duncan posting up. Garnett and Ben Wallance boxing out. Shane Battier taking charges.

All the best,

Eugene

[gifted]

i don't necessarilly agree that the skill level in the US has dropped, but i do agree that the skill level in the NBA has dropped. GMs these days are drafting the wrong guys... a recent example is atlanta drafting josh smith... he has no shot and all he can do is dunk dunk dunk... its not going to take him anywhere... i believe that we do have the basketball players that hav the same skill and fundamentals as the players in the 80's and 90's but these owners, GM's, etc. aren't making the right decisions...

[galvatron3000]

The fundamental skill level of players has dropped in the NBA because guys are not learning the fundamentals of the game anymore in America. The Athletics in Ameraica has not dropped because we have some outstanding atheletes. How many cats can shoot a mid range jump shot. I only know of two ( Sam Cassell and Richard Hamilton) granted I may have left off a few others but not many. Tim Duncan is by far the most fundamentally sound guy in the league. He is not as athletic but his skill and size keep him in the top 3 players in the league. We have guy who get their shot of or get to the basket due to that first step but what about people like Rip who run through screen and get open and catch a shoot. Everyone knew LeBron was not a good shooter a but he is smart and an excellent passer( he needs time to develop) but the NBA game stresses individual high light reel basketball within a team not a TEAM concept product like the NCAA( which keeps losing it's players before they get to college cause of NBA money) I have thought the NBA has being trying to water down the league for awhile now with all the rule changes because they don't have the same quality product they had 10 or 20 years ago due to lack of fundamentals. That said it is up to each individual to work on their game during the off season. How many cats do you notice improvement on from season to season? Very few, in my opinion. Hopefully, Detroit has made the league aware of it's short comings or they will be repeating again( Go Spurs Go)

[John-John Joe]

The fundamental skill level of players has dropped in the NBA because guys are not learning the fundamentals of the game anymore in America. The Athletics in Ameraica has not dropped because we have some outstanding atheletes. How many cats can shoot a mid range jump shot. I only know of two ( Sam Cassell and Richard Hamilton) granted I may have left off a few others but not many. Tim Duncan is by far the most fundamentally sound guy in the league. He is not as athletic but his skill and size keep him in the top 3 players in the league. We have guy who get their shot of or get to the basket due to that first step but what about people like Rip who run through screen and get open and catch a shoot. Everyone knew LeBron was not a good shooter a but he is smart and an excellent passer( he needs time to develop) but the NBA game stresses individual high light reel basketball within a team not a TEAM concept product like the NCAA( which keeps losing it's players before they get to college cause of NBA money) I have thought the NBA has being trying to water down the league for awhile now with all the rule changes because they don't have the same quality product they had 10 or 20 years ago due to lack of fundamentals. That said it is up to each individual to work on their game during the off season. How many cats do you notice improvement on from season to season? Very few, in my opinion. Hopefully, Detroit has made the league aware of it's short comings or they will be repeating again( Go Spurs Go)

Galvy, I couldn't have said it better myself my brother.... Some great points have been made in this thread, I understand the league's woes aren't solely attributed to the wretched specialists. I understand it has to do with several factors including over-coaching and wretched "possession basketball". But I feel that the overcoaching, etc. has been a by-product of having so many guys who lack the fundamentals to execute the most basic and fundamental priniciples of basketball. I'm quite sure we can throw "over-expansion" into the equation as well. Some of these dudes don't belong in the NBA............

[Colin]

Over-expansion is huge. They should have stopped 6 teams ago (Toronto, Vancouver/Memphis, Dallas, one of the Florida teams, Charlotte/New Orleans, Charlotte.)

[Sauru]

the nba could do without both charlotte and the hornets. charlotte had a team once and didnt want to watch them whats gonna be different now? 1 or 2 seasons people will watch then its downhill again unless they get lucky and land a mega star/rookie. the hornets did ok after the move but now they are slacking big time again. i vote ditch both these teams. not sure how the canadian teams are doing so i cant comment there.

[Colin]

Vancouver and Toronto both are close enough to cities with teams. By the end of this year I will have been in Seattle 3 times, and seen the Sonics play the Suns, and the Seahawks play the Falcons.

[Rens]

Two words: age limit.

[tsherkin]

Expansion is not the problem.

Zone defence is not the problem.

What do both of these things have in common? They expose the increasingly less talented crop of basketball players coming out of North America?

Why? Because people are obsessed with the highlight reel. And1 basketball and the EBC don't help things by focusing on embarassing people with illegal dribbling moves and dunks.

Dunks are exciting. They do not happen often enough in a game to make it worth your time to spend all of your effort working on them. Get a mid-range J, learn how to pass and defend, THEN worry about dunking.

Another thing hurting the NBA? HS players. Yes, there are examples of great HS players. But there is also a long list of busts and players that were clearly not ready wasting NBA teams' money while riding the pine. An age limit would be very helpful. I'd prefer an age limit that would encourage a minimum of 2 years in the NCAA.

The HS dilemma is two-fold: First, it introduces a horde of new players to the NBA, most of whom are really not capable of matching up against the competition. This whole business of "it just takes them a little longer" is total BS. You draft someone in the first round because you want an immediate impact, not because you want to be good three years down the road.

Second, it forces GMs to make gambles that they wouldn't even consider otherwise, just in case someone ELSE takes the player and he ends up burning you. They should focus on scouting college and internationally, not worry about prep ballers. It doesn't matter if the league will have to wait for a few years for the player to arrive, they'll arrive at their peak.

Remember in the 80s and 90s when players, big men and guards, they could arrive in the league and be 20ppg scorers? Think about just the late 80s and the 90s. Mitch Richmond, Patrick Ewing, Alonzo Mourning, Shaquille O'neal... These guys came into the league and started dominating, it didn't "take them time." That's crap.

And yeah, the quality of basketball skills has eroded considerably. Used to be, if you shot under 47%, it was a bad year. Guards looked to shoot 50%, they didn't settle for 45% and think they were doing alright at 43% or 44%. Three-point shooters shot 40% or better, not 36% or better. The standards of the league have dropped to accomodate an era of players who are worried about "getting theirs" instead of preparing themselves to be useful when they hit the league, and soon.

I totally agree that the idea of a specialist is a problem. Mostly. The idea of being able to bring a little guy off the bench for some three-point shooting spark is not new (Steve Kerr, for example) but bench depth and specialists are too different things.

You don't want a lineup that features a rebounder, a scorer, a shooter and a passer. You want a lineup featuring five guys who can get it done. They should be players, not specialists.

You want a good example of why older eras were better? Nevermind the fact that you never heard of a team that was unable to reach the 70-point mark, that's just disgusting. It happened in the 60s when the Celtics were stocked with what would basically become the next crop of HoFers and they had the first real shot-blocking center.

Michael Jordan.

Michael Jordan is a perfect example of an Old School baller. He was a slasher, a rebounder, a passer, a defender and a shooter. Not a three-point shooter (though I might point out he hit them when he needed to) but a deadly mid-range shooter.

And at the age of 41 (41!!!!!!!), he averaged 20 pts, 6 rbs and 4 ats on 45% shooting, mostly on mid-range Js and moves from the high block.

A 41 year-old schooled the rest of the league. Shooting almost exclusively from outisde of the paint because he wasn't able to drive as often as he wanted.

How disgusting is that? I mean, props to Michael for being the best player of his era and one of the best players in the era that has followed him despite being sports-old and breaking down physically.

But he's just a great example of how older players can do more than most today.

Let me put it this way. If the '88 Lakers were the age they were then now, they would probably win more than 70 games.

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.

11ppg out of Tony Campbell

Michael Cooper, AC Green, MAGIC JOHNSON, Kurt Rambis, Byron Scott, Mychal Thompson, JAMES WORTHY...

Look at the breakdown. ~ 22ppg from Scott, ~ 20ppg from Magic and James Worthy. ~ 15 ppg from Kareem. 11ppg or more from Tony Campbell, AC Green and Mychal Thompson. They could defend, they could run or play in the halfcourt, they could shoot...

Who would stop them? There are no NBA teams built well enough to stop that team.


And damn, the 86-87 Lakers would've REALLY torched the current league. 4 guys averaging 17ppg or better with three other double-digit scorers? *shudders* 82-0?? 4 guys on that team shot below 50%. 4!!!!

The league has definitely degraded. Part of it is because of the current culture and part of it is because the league (aka David Stern) plays up to the marketing potential when the league should focus on infusing new quality players. When there are quality players, the league's marketing takes care of itself because the games are interesting, people are drawn to them..

You don't have problems like the NBA looking at New Orleans because of their low, low season-ticket sales. Or problems like the NBA moving the Hornets out of Charlotte because of awful attendance.

And the league was more competitive, so there was more to be interested about. Now, I can almost guarantee a half-dozen teams off the top of my head won't even CONTEND for a spot in the playoffs.