There are 88 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Kobe Bryant Suggests 2012 U.S. Team Could Beat 1992 ‘Dream Team' what do you think?

Kobe Bryant Suggests 2012 U.S. Team Could Beat 1992 ‘Dream Team' what do you think?

^You def bring up good points, but i think we are still going to disagree. I firmly believe that todays D is so much softer than that of the Jordan era. Yes, players may be bigger and faster now, but that does not equate to being a better defender, imo. I think the reason everyone scored back then had more to do with them being far more fundamentally sound than todays players. I thought these were good articles.

http://blitzsportsnetwork.com/2012/01/the-michael-jordan-era-defenses-vs-the-kobelebron-era-defenses/

http://hoopshype.com/articles/defense_lazenby.htm
[ Edited by Hoovtrain on Aug 7, 2012 at 2:57 PM ]
After watching the 2012 USA team play a bunch of games now, can we all conclude that Kobe's statement was laughable?
Originally posted by 80sbaby24:
After watching the 2012 USA team play a bunch of games now, can we all conclude that Kobe's statement was laughable?


Yes. He was way off.
Originally posted by SanDiego49er:
Originally posted by 80sbaby24:
After watching the 2012 USA team play a bunch of games now, can we all conclude that Kobe's statement was laughable?


Yes. He was way off.

Yeah, it's like these teams we're facing today are totally worse than the teams back in '92. Like, we crushed their spirits so bad back then, that the rest of the world gave up on playing basketball.








[ Edited by TheSixthRing on Aug 7, 2012 at 3:32 PM ]
Originally posted by 80sbaby24:
After watching the 2012 USA team play a bunch of games now, can we all conclude that Kobe's statement was laughable?

The teams in 92 were so much better
Who is ignorant to think There isn't WAY more NBA experience in today's Olympics?

This USA team is playing against teams that could easily compete as an NBA team.

When the USA played in 1992, it is questionable if some of the international players had enough talent to even make a college team, let alone some of the elite high school prep schools.
Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
^You def bring up good points, but i think we are still going to disagree. I firmly believe that todays D is so much softer than that of the Jordan era. Yes, players may be bigger and faster now, but that does not equate to being a better defender, imo. I think the reason everyone scored back then had more to do with them being far more fundamentally sound than todays players. I thought these were good articles.

http://blitzsportsnetwork.com/2012/01/the-michael-jordan-era-defenses-vs-the-kobelebron-era-defenses/

http://hoopshype.com/articles/defense_lazenby.htm

With all due respect, the "more fundamentally sound" thing kills me. I'm curious...what are the exact fundamentals that you're talking about? What exactly did they do better 20 years ago?

Any halfway decent prospect gets sent to scores of specialized skills camps, most of which either didn't exist or were in their infancy 20 years ago. This is an enormous industry. I get 5-10 emails/snail mail every week on the subject. PG camps, big men camps, shooting camps, etc. And this is reflected in the play. The fundamentals on today's players are vastly ahead of what they were 20 years ago. Between these camps and the proliferation of AAU ball, by the time a guy is 21 years old, he's played so much more basketball, under so much more supervision than a guy from 20 years ago that it's not even comparable.

I can't help but think of the Olympics that are on right now and compare. In every single measurable sport, records from 20 years ago might not even get you past the prelims today. But basketball...which has enjoyed MASSIVE international gains in popularity and revenue in the last 20 years has taken a step backward? C'mon, man.

Furthermore, you have so much more time & assets being poured into making your squad better. One of my favorite quotes to this end is from Hersey Hawkins.

"I can think about my first year in the league and how detailed scouting reports have become about stopping other teams. By the time I retired (in 2001) I was getting books--15-20 pages on the other team, their sets and what my player likes to do."

Here's another one from Johnny Bach, who was essentially Phil Jackson's "defensive coordinator" on the first 3 Bulls title teams. He said this in 2005.

"I think scouting is far better than it ever was...we have it on DVD and we have it edited. I don't think players had as much information as they have now and I think it contributes to playing the scorers better--deciding who are the scorers and really concentrating on how we're going to push them out a little further (away from their favorite areas). You have so much information available--the statistics alone, then you have the pictorial review that I can produce to a team. What we call 'criticals'--out of bounds plays, what they do after a timeout, what they do when the score's tied, what's the last shot of the quarter--all these things are broken down now."

And both of these quotes were from before the internet & advanced statistics had really taken hold in the NBA. Every team has at least 2 video coordinators, and with the couple of clicks of a mouse, you can get all of the footage of Dwyane Wade on the pick & roll when the big man is showing high, for example. And then, that footage gets sent to Thabo Sefolosha's iPad, who can study it for hours if he wishes. In Jordan's day, that was a VCR & team film sessions.

That, along with the rule differences that I mentioned in the last post make defenses so much better today that I'm of the opinion that saying otherwise can only be justified as romanticism. Just watch that video. Jordan spends most of it being guarded by Jeff Hornacek, Reggie Miller, Kevin Johnson, & Dan Majerle. He posts up in exactly the spot he wants to every time. That's not how it works anymore.
Jesus Harold Christ, Pete. You scare me when you do things like:


"Allow me to quote Johnny Bach, circa 2005.... "
Originally posted by StOnEy333:
Jesus Harold Christ, Pete. You scare me when you do things like:


"Allow me to quote Johnny Bach, circa 2005.... "

LOL...I remember him talking about the subject. I had to look up the exact quote, that wasn't from memory.
Originally posted by LA9erFan:
Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
^You def bring up good points, but i think we are still going to disagree. I firmly believe that todays D is so much softer than that of the Jordan era. Yes, players may be bigger and faster now, but that does not equate to being a better defender, imo. I think the reason everyone scored back then had more to do with them being far more fundamentally sound than todays players. I thought these were good articles.

http://blitzsportsnetwork.com/2012/01/the-michael-jordan-era-defenses-vs-the-kobelebron-era-defenses/

http://hoopshype.com/articles/defense_lazenby.htm

With all due respect, the "more fundamentally sound" thing kills me. I'm curious...what are the exact fundamentals that you're talking about? What exactly did they do better 20 years ago?

Any halfway decent prospect gets sent to scores of specialized skills camps, most of which either didn't exist or were in their infancy 20 years ago. This is an enormous industry. I get 5-10 emails/snail mail every week on the subject. PG camps, big men camps, shooting camps, etc. And this is reflected in the play. The fundamentals on today's players are vastly ahead of what they were 20 years ago. Between these camps and the proliferation of AAU ball, by the time a guy is 21 years old, he's played so much more basketball, under so much more supervision than a guy from 20 years ago that it's not even comparable.

I can't help but think of the Olympics that are on right now and compare. In every single measurable sport, records from 20 years ago might not even get you past the prelims today. But basketball...which has enjoyed MASSIVE international gains in popularity and revenue in the last 20 years has taken a step backward? C'mon, man.

Furthermore, you have so much more time & assets being poured into making your squad better. One of my favorite quotes to this end is from Hersey Hawkins.

"I can think about my first year in the league and how detailed scouting reports have become about stopping other teams. By the time I retired (in 2001) I was getting books--15-20 pages on the other team, their sets and what my player likes to do."

Here's another one from Johnny Bach, who was essentially Phil Jackson's "defensive coordinator" on the first 3 Bulls title teams. He said this in 2005.

"I think scouting is far better than it ever was...we have it on DVD and we have it edited. I don't think players had as much information as they have now and I think it contributes to playing the scorers better--deciding who are the scorers and really concentrating on how we're going to push them out a little further (away from their favorite areas). You have so much information available--the statistics alone, then you have the pictorial review that I can produce to a team. What we call 'criticals'--out of bounds plays, what they do after a timeout, what they do when the score's tied, what's the last shot of the quarter--all these things are broken down now."

And both of these quotes were from before the internet & advanced statistics had really taken hold in the NBA. Every team has at least 2 video coordinators, and with the couple of clicks of a mouse, you can get all of the footage of Dwyane Wade on the pick & roll when the big man is showing high, for example. And then, that footage gets sent to Thabo Sefolosha's iPad, who can study it for hours if he wishes. In Jordan's day, that was a VCR & team film sessions.

That, along with the rule differences that I mentioned in the last post make defenses so much better today that I'm of the opinion that saying otherwise can only be justified as romanticism. Just watch that video. Jordan spends most of it being guarded by Jeff Hornacek, Reggie Miller, Kevin Johnson, & Dan Majerle. He posts up in exactly the spot he wants to every time. That's not how it works anymore.

Fundamentally sound, as in they could shoot better, pass better, use their bodies better, use their teammates bodies better, run offensive sets better, play better team defense and just overall played a better, smarter team game. It was much more fluid than this disjointed, one on one crap we see today. I could really care less how many camps there are out there made available to todays players. It doesn't seem to translate from what I have watched and what I am currently watching. Now sure, there are throwbacks in today's game that play fundamentally sound basketball, but from top to bottom, today's NBA does not measure up. And of course you are going to see more expansive playbooks, scouting reports, etc with advancements in technology. And while having this information readily available anywhere you go would help with a players preparedness, it does not make them better players than those that did not have access to these amenities. This falls in line with the same myth that because players today are bigger, stronger, faster that somehow they are better players. It's just not true, imo. To me, players having better technology at their disposal and being bigger, stronger, faster doesn't mean squat. I go by what I see with my own 2 eyes. Having watched both eras of basketball, played basketball at various levels and attended numerous basketball camps, this is what I have ascertained. Since you like to use Thefolosha and Majerle as examples, I would take Thunder Dan's D any day of the week over Thabo's. I know you think this is romanticizing things, but I would disagree. That is the great thing about 2 people watching the same thing, often times you are going to get differing opinions. You clearly are of the school of thought that today's NBA is better, while I am not. Although my bitterness from having to watch my god awful Kings for the last 8 years may have skewed my view a bit, or maybe I am just getting old. Just out of curiosity, if you could put together an all time NBA 1st and 2nd team, who would it consist of? Mine would look like this:
1st Team:PG-Magic SG-Jordan SF-Bird PF-Duncan C-Olajuwan
2nd Team:PG-Thomas SG-West SF-Robertson PF-Mchale C-Jabbar
did they have other nba players playing for other countries back in 92? i don't remember
Originally posted by bayarealuv:
did they have other nba players playing for other countries back in 92? i don't remember
Not counting future NBA players (like Kukoc and Sabonis)

Croatia - Drazen Petrovic, New Jersey; Stojko Vranković, Boston
Lithuania - Šarūnas Marčiulionis, Golden State
Unified Team - Alexander Anatolyevich Volkov, Atlanta
Brazli - João Vianna, Dallas
Australia - Luc Longley, Minnesota (and future three-time world champion with the Bulls )
Germany - Detleft Schrempf, Indiana
Originally posted by bayarealuv:
did they have other nba players playing for other countries back in 92? i don't remember

Yes. Croatia had Petrovic, Kukoc, Radja. Lithuania had Marciulionas, Sabonis and both had a host of other players that could have played NBA, but chose to stay overseas.
[ Edited by Hoovtrain on Aug 9, 2012 at 12:41 PM ]
Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
Fundamentally sound, as in they could shoot better, pass better, use their bodies better, use their teammates bodies better, run offensive sets better, play better team defense and just overall played a better, smarter team game. It was much more fluid than this disjointed, one on one crap we see today. I could really care less how many camps there are out there made available to todays players. It doesn't seem to translate from what I have watched and what I am currently watching. Now sure, there are throwbacks in today's game that play fundamentally sound basketball, but from top to bottom, today's NBA does not measure up. And of course you are going to see more expansive playbooks, scouting reports, etc with advancements in technology. And while having this information readily available anywhere you go would help with a players preparedness, it does not make them better players than those that did not have access to these amenities. This falls in line with the same myth that because players today are bigger, stronger, faster that somehow they are better players. It's just not true, imo. To me, players having better technology at their disposal and being bigger, stronger, faster doesn't mean squat. I go by what I see with my own 2 eyes. Having watched both eras of basketball, played basketball at various levels and attended numerous basketball camps, this is what I have ascertained. Since you like to use Thefolosha and Majerle as examples, I would take Thunder Dan's D any day of the week over Thabo's. I know you think this is romanticizing things, but I would disagree. That is the great thing about 2 people watching the same thing, often times you are going to get differing opinions. You clearly are of the school of thought that today's NBA is better, while I am not. Although my bitterness from having to watch my god awful Kings for the last 8 years may have skewed my view a bit, or maybe I am just getting old. Just out of curiosity, if you could put together an all time NBA 1st and 2nd team, who would it consist of? Mine would look like this:
1st Team:PG-Magic SG-Jordan SF-Bird PF-Duncan C-Olajuwan
2nd Team:PG-Thomas SG-West SF-Robertson PF-Mchale C-Jabbar

There's no point in disputing everything in this post, because my response would be a mile long. Like I said, every measurable sport has been improved significantly in the last 20 years. And it's not just about bigger/stronger/faster. It's about training, preparation, knowledge, coaching, etc. as well. But if there wasn't a stopwatch to objectively tell people otherwise, people would be arguing about who was better at the 100m dash....Usain Bolt or Carl Lewis. But somehow, you think that despite the massive growth that the sport has taken in that period of time...much more than other, measurable sports, which have still seen enormous upticks in their achievements despite not enjoying similar growth...basketball has taken a step backward, making it somehow different than every other athletic endeavor in human history.

The initial point of contention was the quality of today's defenses. If you don't see how the improvement in scouting and preparation, along with superior size & athleticism, translates to better NBA defenses, I don't know what to say.

I think that it's telling that 6 out of the 10 players on your all time teams were in their primes between 1985-1995. What an incredibly anomalous 10 years that must have been. And the idea that Jerry West was a better basketball player than Kobe Bryant is obscene to me.
Originally posted by LA9erFan:
Originally posted by Hoovtrain:
Fundamentally sound, as in they could shoot better, pass better, use their bodies better, use their teammates bodies better, run offensive sets better, play better team defense and just overall played a better, smarter team game. It was much more fluid than this disjointed, one on one crap we see today. I could really care less how many camps there are out there made available to todays players. It doesn't seem to translate from what I have watched and what I am currently watching. Now sure, there are throwbacks in today's game that play fundamentally sound basketball, but from top to bottom, today's NBA does not measure up. And of course you are going to see more expansive playbooks, scouting reports, etc with advancements in technology. And while having this information readily available anywhere you go would help with a players preparedness, it does not make them better players than those that did not have access to these amenities. This falls in line with the same myth that because players today are bigger, stronger, faster that somehow they are better players. It's just not true, imo. To me, players having better technology at their disposal and being bigger, stronger, faster doesn't mean squat. I go by what I see with my own 2 eyes. Having watched both eras of basketball, played basketball at various levels and attended numerous basketball camps, this is what I have ascertained. Since you like to use Thefolosha and Majerle as examples, I would take Thunder Dan's D any day of the week over Thabo's. I know you think this is romanticizing things, but I would disagree. That is the great thing about 2 people watching the same thing, often times you are going to get differing opinions. You clearly are of the school of thought that today's NBA is better, while I am not. Although my bitterness from having to watch my god awful Kings for the last 8 years may have skewed my view a bit, or maybe I am just getting old. Just out of curiosity, if you could put together an all time NBA 1st and 2nd team, who would it consist of? Mine would look like this:
1st Team:PG-Magic SG-Jordan SF-Bird PF-Duncan C-Olajuwan
2nd Team:PG-Thomas SG-West SF-Robertson PF-Mchale C-Jabbar

There's no point in disputing everything in this post, because my response would be a mile long. Like I said, every measurable sport has been improved significantly in the last 20 years. And it's not just about bigger/stronger/faster. It's about training, preparation, knowledge, coaching, etc. as well. But if there wasn't a stopwatch to objectively tell people otherwise, people would be arguing about who was better at the 100m dash....Usain Bolt or Carl Lewis. But somehow, you think that despite the massive growth that the sport has taken in that period of time...much more than other, measurable sports, which have still seen enormous upticks in their achievements despite not enjoying similar growth...basketball has taken a step backward, making it somehow different than every other athletic endeavor in human history.

The initial point of contention was the quality of today's defenses. If you don't see how the improvement in scouting and preparation, along with superior size & athleticism, translates to better NBA defenses, I don't know what to say.

I think that it's telling that 6 out of the 10 players on your all time teams were in their primes between 1985-1995. What an incredibly anomalous 10 years that must have been. And the idea that Jerry West was a better basketball player than Kobe Bryant is obscene to me.

I probably would have put Kobe ahead of West, but I wanted to see your head explode by not doing so. But you are right, there is no point continuing to dispute this. There you go, we finally agree on something.