LeBron James

[Inner Dirt]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

LeBron better bring it tonight. Down 8 after the 1st quarter...


Kareem would be shooting 3-pointer-skyhooks while carrying 25 more pounds of muscle, laser-correct 20/20 vision, hair plugs and a jet-black beard

I don't understand people that say (any past era, any sport) "players from 70's would get smoked by modern players, the competition was terrible."


They act like the species of man has evolved genetically at some insane rate the last half century or so. Giving no thought to the fact if an athlete from the 60's grew up today with modern nutrition, training and medicine (legal or illegal) they would end up being able to perform like today's athletes.


Pretty sure most of us older guys realize that, go to a sports forum full of young people and most think 1955 was like the dark ages and the average man was 5'6". Another factor with modern technology colleges and pro sports are developing athletes that back in the day would not be discovered.

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by Inner Dirt

I don't understand people that say (any past era, any sport) "players from 70's would get smoked by modern players, the competition was terrible."


They act like the species of man has evolved genetically at some insane rate the last half century or so. Giving no thought to the fact if an athlete from the 60's grew up today with modern nutrition, training and medicine (legal or illegal) they would end up being able to perform like today's athletes.


Pretty sure most of us older guys realize that, go to a sports forum full of young people and most think 1955 was like the dark ages and the average man was 5'6". Another factor with modern technology colleges and pro sports are developing athletes that back in the day would not be discovered.

I agree. I wouldn't be shocked to see some slight growth with humans, but 'performance' has been a much steeper significant curve.

In the 80s and 90s Basketball(and Baseball) was my horse racing. I was 6'8 1/2 tall and about 230lbs as a senior in '97.

We had athletes back then, but weight training has improved. In the 80s NBA players for the most part looked like regular tall men. Many more of today's NBA players look like olympic athletes.

Things like steroids and hgh and really scientific doctor-designed implementation has played some role. It's always going to be something that is publicly expressed as a non-existing factor, but privately it's been kind of accepted that if you use your body for a living, you should do everything that helps. I mean, you can't turn on netflix and watch a series without some actors that are using.

Basketball has changed a lot. It's a much more efficient game now. If I wanted to shoot a 3 back then, I would have needed to buy an airplane ticket to Europe. I remember hitting 20 in a row from behind the arc in a shoot around, and having students come up to me asking why I wasn't a 3-pt shooter.
Two funny things back then were carrying a coach/jockey on my shoulders when I went out to shoot 3s or decided to bring the ball up coast-to-coast (which was only surpassed by the effort required to carry a baseball coach and a pitching coach from the pitcher's mound over to the first-base bag). I was a stretch-4 and a first-baseman so it wasn't my era. (Not that baseball has a ton of tall hitters. Maybe that makes more sense.). I have a condition called 'Marfan Syndrome' and I had an aortic dissection and 3 open-heart surgeries, so a career playing ball wasn't meant to be. (btw; Jeff Green of the Cavs has come back from a surgery that was vaguely similar to one of mine(without the dissection) and he did a great job filling in for Kevin Love in game 7).

Another great game from Lebron. That blocked-dunk highlight was impressive. Lot of fans counted him out after Game 5.

Game 7 West tonight 9pm

[lansdale]

Originally Posted by lansdale

It will be strange to have an NBA Finals w/o Lebron -- last time it happened was, I believe, 2009, but Cavs are done for this year. To blame him for this is ridiculous -- he played a v. good game last night 26/10/10 -- even if he scores 35 they stlll lose. After losing Kyrie, they simply didn't have enough to win at this level. Maybe some speculation why Lebron was able to win with a bad team in 2015-- yes, but he was three years younger. No team has won an NBA championship with an SF as it's key player over the age of 32.

Agree w/Valuist re GSW/Rockets -- Warriors still the better team. 4th Q. of last game somewhat of a fluke, but more than few signs that they don't take Rox seriously -- careless shot selection, no screens set on three-ball attempts, Kerr not calling time to draw up a play in final seconds -- none of the usual signs that they felt they needed this win. Also no Iguodala in 4 Q. due to injury -- he'll be back tonight. One thing to note though -- this was the first time I watched Curry carefully since his long absence, it he seemed to have trouble beating defenders off the dribble in 4 Q. and creating space to shoot the three -- but he also had no screens, so not sure whether this is a real thing or not. We'll know more after tonight. BTW, predicting that tonight Ariza will take a serious cheap shot at one of the GSW shooters - Durant, Curry, or Klay -- in an attempt to knock him out of the game -- seriously hope I'm wrong about this.

Apologies to Lebron and the Cavs for doubting another trip to the Finals. And although LBJ was typically great, playing 48 minutes no less, think this team was lucky to be facing a young Celt team that seemed to lose their composure for the first time in the post-season, going 7/39 from downtown, including a number of wide-open looks. This is why teams load up on veterans (Robert Horry?) for the post-season.

[highnote]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

In the 80s and 90s Basketball(and Baseball) was my horse racing. I was 6'8 1/2 tall and about 230lbs as a senior in '97.

Basketball has changed a lot. It's a much more efficient game now. If I wanted to shoot a 3 back then, I would have needed to buy an airplane ticket to Europe. I remember hitting 20 in a row from behind the arc in a shoot around, and having students come up to me asking why I wasn't a 3-pt shooter.

It is only just starting to change in high school basketball here in CT.

I coached my son's team during the summer league when he was going into his sophomore year. We had a 6'8" kid who went on to play in college. I asked the kids to run an up-tempo game and shoot a lot of 3-pointers. And I looked at our 6'8" player and said, "Even you!".

He gave me an incredulous look as if to say, "You can't be serious." He never took a single three during the summer games -- games that had absolutely no pressure and were meaningless for the most part.

Finally, a year later the big kid started shooting 3s on occasion. He was actually a pretty good shooter. He shot over 70% from the free throw line and about 33% from 3 point range. He couldn't do a jump shot, though. It was more of a set shot. Still, he was often wide-open because no one guarded him that far from the rim.

Now I am starting to see more high school bigs shooting threes.

[Inner Dirt]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

I agree. I wouldn't be shocked to see some slight growth with humans, but 'performance' has been a much steeper significant curve.

In the 80s and 90s Basketball(and Baseball) was my horse racing. I was 6'8 1/2 tall and about 230lbs as a senior in '97.

We had athletes back then, but weight training has improved. In the 80s NBA players for the most part looked like regular tall men. Many more of today's NBA players look like olympic athletes.

Things like steroids and hgh and really scientific doctor-designed implementation has played some role. It's always going to be something that is publicly expressed as a non-existing factor, but privately it's been kind of accepted that if you use your body for a living, you should do everything that helps. I mean, you can't turn on netflix and watch a series without some actors that are using.

Sorry about you having a heart condition at a young age.



I think steroids and HGH are the biggest difference.



There is not a big magical difference in advancement in weight training or nutrition in the 40 years since I was in school, most of the huge gains in those areas were made in the 60's and early 70's as body building contests became popular. Go in an NFL weight room you find a lot of the same equipment that was been around for 50 years and even the newfangled

computerized machines aren't working any muscles any differently than you could have by different means a half century ago. Over the counter nutritional supplements that are used by athletes today have the same basic ingredients in them that have been around for 40+ years.


A good example is to look at professional body builders from back in Arnold's heyday over 40 years ago to today, not much difference. They have always taken illegal drugs and were never tested. I think with today's athletes the doctors and pharmacists mostly stay ahead of the testing.

Good example was Barry Bonds, he never peed dirty. I saw a picture of him in bicycling gear just a year after he retired from baseball, 40 pounds of muscle vanished. Don't know anything about HGH, but steroid aided muscle growth disappears quickly after you stop using. Muscles built without cheating slowly dissipate once you stop training. You see too many NFL players instantly shrink after their playing days.

[pandy]

Lebron is what you would get if you made Michael Jordan bigger and stronger.

[Bogo]

I think I am in the minority when discussing past athletes because I am only in my 30's. But ever since I was young I had an extreme interest in the people that played earlier in just about every sport. I became friends with a man that had all kinds of film and even rare boxing fights from Jack Johnson. I loved watching the old games and boxing matches. My take is that an athlete should be judged on his performance against other athletes in his era. How dominant was he against players in his era? I just don't see how someone that played thirty years ago can be judged on speed and weight against an athlete playing now. Julio Jones is 20 pounds heavier and is faster than Jerry Rice. But Jerry Rice was better against athletes in his era than Julio Jones is against athletes in his. I am sure there are running backs faster and shiftier than Gale Sayers today. But he could do things nobody else could do at that time. Imagine if Jim Brown was born 22 years ago. We might actually see a 260lb running back with sprinter's speed. Some day forty years from now people will say Lebron looked slow and robotic on the tape. But he sure doesn't look that way against players in his era.

[burnsy]

Cavs +650, Warriors -1000

Some places have moved it to -1200

Can't even bet it.

All the Lebron talk and they will get dogged by KD yet again. He's been beat up on them for the better part of 2 years now. With half the "Lebron drama." He just goes out and plays his game and...……..wins.

[cj]

Originally Posted by burnsy

Cavs +650, Warriors -1000

Some places have moved it to -1200

Can't even bet it.

All the Lebron talk and they will get dogged by KD yet again. He's been beat up on them for the better part of 2 years now. With half the "Lebron drama." He just goes out and plays his game and...……..wins.

It helps when you are surrounded by three other all starts, at least two of which will be future hall of famers. LeBron has borderline all star Kevin Love and he seems to be hurt as often as he plays.

[Inner Dirt]

If you want to discuss how basketball has evolved I think the biggest difference I noticed in 50 years of watching sports is how far the women's game has progressed, even in the last 20 years. The women appear a lot more athletic and talented than they were just a couple decades ago.

[ronsmac]

Originally Posted by cj

It helps when you are surrounded by three other all starts, at least two of which will be future hall of famers. LeBron has borderline all star Kevin Love and he seems to be hurt as often as he plays.

Boderline is being generous. The best move gs made was not trading Klay for Love 4 yrs ago.

[lansdale]

Originally Posted by cj

It helps when you are surrounded by three other all starts, at least two of which will be future hall of famers. LeBron has borderline all star Kevin Love and he seems to be hurt as often as he plays.

Wow, still no love for Love. KL should take the blame for LBJ losing championships? I don't know what the deal with his health is -- he's had multiple injuries throughout the last 1/3 of the season and is now out on the concussion protocol. Doesn't look like he'll be any kind of factor in the Finals. But let's remember LBJ with a healthy Love and a healthy Kyrie last year, still had their asses handed to them by a much better team -- by consensus one of the best ever -- and their swift demise is even more assured this year.

'Borderline All-Star' eh -- it's gonna kill you when Love makes that trip to Springfield. ;-).

[lansdale]

Originally Posted by ronsmac

Boderline is being generous. The best move gs made was not trading Klay for Love 4 yrs ago.

As with most of their front office stuff, not making that trade made sense -- KT is a great 3-pt. shooter and had the quickness to fit in perfectly with the up-tempo offense they were planning to install. But does that mean KT is a more vaulable player than KL -- no, and the stats bear it out. They're just about equal as scorers, but Love has a huge (11-3) edge in rebounding, which gives a sizable career advantage in PER (22-16) and, WS48 (.18-.11).

Some interesting incidental stuff in here. e.g. Love and Klay and nearly identical in playoff 3-pt. shooting %, (Love-.411, Klay-408), and also in scoring per 100 possessions (ca. 25 pts.). But overall, as with their career numbers, Love has a decisive edge.

I've come to the conclusion that the reason so many fans hate Love is that his lack of speed and hops make him so unsuited to today's game. I get that. But he's still going to the HOF ;-).





https://www.basketball-reference.com...01&idx=players

[cj]

Originally Posted by lansdale

Wow, still no love for Love. KL should take the blame for LBJ losing championships? I don't know what the deal with his health is -- he's had multiple injuries throughout the last 1/3 of the season and is now out on the concussion protocol. Doesn't look like he'll be any kind of factor in the Finals. But let's remember LBJ with a healthy Love and a healthy Kyrie last year, still had their asses handed to them by a much better team -- by consensus one of the best ever -- and their swift demise is even more assured this year.

'Borderline All-Star' eh -- it's gonna kill you when Love makes that trip to Springfield. ;-).

If Love were in the west these days he wouldn't sniff the all star game. He hasn't made a an All NBA team in a while, and made only one second team and one third team in his career. I don't think I've been very wrong about him at all. He is a decent player but he should never have been a max player.

[cj]

Originally Posted by lansdale

As with most of their front office stuff, not making that trade made sense -- KT is a great 3-pt. shooter and had the quickness to fit in perfectly with the up-tempo offense they were planning to install. But does that mean KT is a more vaulable player than KL -- no, and the stats bear it out. They're just about equal as scorers, but Love has a huge (11-3) edge in rebounding, which gives a sizable career advantage in PER (22-16) and, WS48 (.18-.11).

Some interesting incidental stuff in here. e.g. Love and Klay and nearly identical in playoff 3-pt. shooting %, (Love-.411, Klay-408), and also in scoring per 100 possessions (ca. 25 pts.). But overall, as with their career numbers, Love has a decisive edge.

I've come to the conclusion that the reason so many fans hate Love is that his lack of speed and hops make him so unsuited to today's game. I get that. But he's still going to the HOF ;-).





https://www.basketball-reference.com...01&idx=players

The difference is Thompson is a very good defender. Love is mediocre, at best. Cavs were -12 with Love on the floor in the Boston series, +20 without him. I doubt that is a fluke. He is a better version of Ryan Anderson.