The reason it seems like there are less dominant players (and it really doesn't anymore, maybe it did 3-5 years ago when the league style was changing rapidly and the post-MJ era guys were on their way out) is for two main reasons.
1. The rest of the players on the court are way better than they used to be. The proliferation of the 3pt shot alone makes the role players significantly more valuable than past eras. Obviously D-Rob, Ewing, Barkley and Malone are gonna seem larger than life when they're playing with 7-8 stiffs.
2. The zone rules make it significantly more difficult for 1 guy to just catch the ball, iso, double must come.....And the sophistication of schemes with the zone rules makes it harder for one guy to just destroy everyone like in the past. The best player (LeBron) playing in the vastly inferior conference on good teams basically masked this to casual observers. But that was an extreme outlier.
You'll probably ignore this because it goes against what you want to believe, but it's the truth.
You really think there used to be 10 superstars and now theres 2 because people just got worse at basketball when the training got way better and the pay increased 10fold? Jayson Tatum was basically bred to play basketball and put into skills camps when he was like 12.
1. The rest of the players on the court are way better than they used to be. The proliferation of the 3pt shot alone makes the role players significantly more valuable than past eras. Obviously D-Rob, Ewing, Barkley and Malone are gonna seem larger than life when they're playing with 7-8 stiffs.
2. The zone rules make it significantly more difficult for 1 guy to just catch the ball, iso, double must come.....And the sophistication of schemes with the zone rules makes it harder for one guy to just destroy everyone like in the past. The best player (LeBron) playing in the vastly inferior conference on good teams basically masked this to casual observers. But that was an extreme outlier.
You'll probably ignore this because it goes against what you want to believe, but it's the truth.
You really think there used to be 10 superstars and now theres 2 because people just got worse at basketball when the training got way better and the pay increased 10fold? Jayson Tatum was basically bred to play basketball and put into skills camps when he was like 12.
Amazing post.....leave the poll open but we can just close any further Comments.
Although if anyone can post one of those awesome youtube vids of like 5minutes of MJ slamming and jamming versus three or four white guys who can't get their feet set and just wave as he goes by I would be very happy
From like 2010ish to 2013ish when KG, Kobe, Pierce, Ray, Dirk, AI and that post-MJ era crew was on their way down the game was just changing so fast. It was hard for guys to come into the league and dominate. They weren't really raised on playing this new way. So the guys most equipped to play the new way were mostly guards. So it became a guards league for 3-4 years besides LeBron/KD.
That's why you see a resurgence in big men the last 2-3 years with Embiid, Towns, Brow, Jokic, Porzingis, Ayton because these guys post up some but they are also well versed in playing the new style which is necessary. A strict post player just isn't going to be efficient enough in the pace/space era. The court is too small with all the athleticism. Look at where Embiid catches it last night and how quick he has to make a decision before the Celts swarm. He has to be able to have that in his game + faceup + shoot. He can't just play like Patrick Ewing did, it just wouldn't be efficient enough. That doesn't mean he is better than Ewing, just means he is a more tactically/skillfully evolved version of him.
That's why you see a resurgence in big men the last 2-3 years with Embiid, Towns, Brow, Jokic, Porzingis, Ayton because these guys post up some but they are also well versed in playing the new style which is necessary. A strict post player just isn't going to be efficient enough in the pace/space era. The court is too small with all the athleticism. Look at where Embiid catches it last night and how quick he has to make a decision before the Celts swarm. He has to be able to have that in his game + faceup + shoot. He can't just play like Patrick Ewing did, it just wouldn't be efficient enough. That doesn't mean he is better than Ewing, just means he is a more tactically/skillfully evolved version of him.
Part of your analogy would mean that a larger percentage of the athletic population has committed to the game of basketball over other sports, than in the past.
I'm going to debate that just isn't true.
Maybe if we dig deep enough there's some numbers online??
The other part argues something I already addressed in an earlier post a few days ago in this thread or the other.
That athletes have suddenly become head & shoulders better than those from ONLY 30-40 years ago.
Consider that it took humans millions or hundreds of millions of years to evolve, and understand how silly this theory is.
Did they somehow mutate to become Soooo much better in just a few short years?
Honestly it's absurd.
Yes there is better training & health awareness today, but not to the extent that today's athletes are far superior than those 30yrs ago.
All fun debate.
This is kind of like politics, nothing can change most people's minds.
Donald Trump could reveal himself as Jesus Christ himself & those who despise him would continue to do so.
No, it wouldn't mean that at all because the population is way bigger and also more players come from outside of the US now. Many of the best players right now weren't born in this country. Something that was unheard of 25 years ago. The pool is significantly larger and training is significantly more specialized. The 3rd best player in the '94 finals was probably Derek Harper. Not sure what more proof you need.
Your 2nd point about human evolution has nothing to do with how it is being discussed in the context of basketball and the commercialization of the sport thus leading to greater efficiencies, you're just misunderstanding that part.
Your 2nd point about human evolution has nothing to do with how it is being discussed in the context of basketball and the commercialization of the sport thus leading to greater efficiencies, you're just misunderstanding that part.
There's just more good players now because the population is way bigger, the game has opened up globally, the economic incentives are way better, tactics/training has evolved, etc
Guys used to puff cigs at halftime back then.
So when Patrick Ewing takes the court and the 2nd best player on his team is John Starks or David Robinson takes the court and the 2nd best player on his team is Sean Elliott that's a little different then when Embiid takes the court. There's just way more talent on the floor.
Look at the Celts/Philly game and all the good players in it last night. You think a non-Bulls game featured that much talent 20-25 years ago as expansion diluted the talent pool of the league? It took years for the NBA to be able to fill out 30 teams (hell, it still can't really fill it out)
Guys used to puff cigs at halftime back then.
So when Patrick Ewing takes the court and the 2nd best player on his team is John Starks or David Robinson takes the court and the 2nd best player on his team is Sean Elliott that's a little different then when Embiid takes the court. There's just way more talent on the floor.
Look at the Celts/Philly game and all the good players in it last night. You think a non-Bulls game featured that much talent 20-25 years ago as expansion diluted the talent pool of the league? It took years for the NBA to be able to fill out 30 teams (hell, it still can't really fill it out)
I did do a search & saw that high school sports participation had increased many years in a row.
With that being said, there likely is more competition. (Just like the reason high schools are placed in districts based on their size & population which equates to more talent)
I suppose it all boils down to whether you trust your eyes in what you have seen & followed then & now, vs analogies.
With that being said, there likely is more competition. (Just like the reason high schools are placed in districts based on their size & population which equates to more talent)
I suppose it all boils down to whether you trust your eyes in what you have seen & followed then & now, vs analogies.
If you base it on a larger pool, then the overall product is probably a little better.
But that does not necessarily mean the elite players today are better than those just a few years ago.
The pool is bigger but not enough to sway things to that extreme.
If we are in 2050 having this discussion & are seeing the same increase in participation, then maybe.
I didn't say all the best players now are better than all of the best players then. I said the reason it would appear to you there are less guys dominating now is because you're playing against more mediocre guys and the zone rules/defensive schemes/3pt shot making it harder for one guy to dominate.
That's why it seems like there are less dominant players. It's harder to dominate. We didn't just go from 10 guys being able to dominate to 3 because people got worse at basketball over 30 years. We got there because the baseline to do so got higher.
There were a lot of great players then but not a ton of teams with multiple big time talents. Portland #2 guy was Terry Porter, Starks for NYK, Elliott for SA, Maxwell/Kenny for Houston (before Drexler trade)......So that's why 1-2 players could carry teams to 50-55 wins more.
Nowadays unless it is like LeBron in the vastly inferior conference, pretty hard for 1 guy to take a bunch of avg players to 50-55 wins. There's just more good players. Team building is better because of analytics/former players aren't running teams anymore either but that's another story.
That's not even a debate.
Some teams these days don't even have a super star.
The Nets best player is Caris LeVert..lol
The Kings best player is Marvin Bagley...lol
The Magic's best player is Evan Fournier...lol
I'll stop there
LMAO
Hawks started 50 year old Vince Carter tonight 
No doubt he will end up #1
But the excuses will pour in from his supporters as to why.
Most career turnovers
NBA/ABA
Rank Player TOV
1. Karl Malone* 4524
2. Moses Malone* 4264
3. John Stockton* 4244
4. Kobe Bryant 4010
5. Jason Kidd* 4003
6. LeBron James 3972
7. Julius Erving* 3940
8. Artis Gilmore* 3926
9. Isiah Thomas* 3682
10. Hakeem Olajuwon* 3667
11. Patrick Ewing* 3537
12. Paul Pierce 3532
13. Magic Johnson* 3506
14. Reggie Theus 3493
15. Steve Nash* 3478
16. Tim Duncan 3381
17. Charles Barkley* 3376
18. Shaquille O'Neal* 3310
19. Allen Iverson* 3262
20. Scottie Pippen* 3257
21. Robert Parish* 3183
22. Kevin Garnett 3179
23. Dwyane Wade 3167
24. Mark Jackson 3155
25. Andre Miller 3121
26. Ron Boone 3085
27. Dwight Howard 3043
28. Gary Payton* 3030
29. Russell Westbrook 3001
30. Clyde Drexler* 2977
31. Michael Jordan* 2924
You cannot compare different eras for obvious reasons, different rules, training, nutrition, etc etc... Funny how the same flawed argument goes, "now a days players would destroy yesterday's player, because of the training, nutrition, coaching etc etc" This flawed argument is based on the HUGE assumption that yesterday's player would not use the same training, nutrition and coaching that today's players use! It's like comparing a cyclist from 40 years ago, using the same training, nutrition, coaching and BIKE from yesteryear to a modern cyclist. When this comparison is made, the debater often says "well of course they have to have access to the same bike" well then of course they have to have access to the same nutrition, coaching and training etc etc. That being said let's look at the numbers
Times leading the league in scoring
Jordan 10 (greatest scorer ever)
Lebron 1
First team all Defensive team
Jordan 9 (tied for greatest defender ever)
Lebron 5
So you have the greatest scorer ever and the greatest defender ever in the same body! How can you argue that he is not the greatest ever? Scores the most, defends the best. What else is he supposed to do to prove he's the best ever?
Times leading the league in scoring
Jordan 10 (greatest scorer ever)
Lebron 1
First team all Defensive team
Jordan 9 (tied for greatest defender ever)
Lebron 5
So you have the greatest scorer ever and the greatest defender ever in the same body! How can you argue that he is not the greatest ever? Scores the most, defends the best. What else is he supposed to do to prove he's the best ever?
Yeah, exactly. The players today get to stand on the shoulders of the games advances. Not just in terms of nutrition or training, but also in terms of strategic optimization/coaching advances.
It's the folks who pretend this isn't a real thing and actually think a devolution has taken place (i.e players were better 30 years ago, lol @ that) that are being stone cold ignorant.
If David Robinson played today, he would be shooting 3's like Karl Anthony Towns can. Protecting the paint like Rudy Gobert.
There are many guys from previous eras that just wouldn't be able to make it though. A lot of the guys that couldn't meet the athletic threshold would be in trouble (i.e slow white guys, some of the really big guys obviously just don't have the footspeed to play today...Roy Hibbert is a guy who could protect the paint and his career just died because the game changed so much during his career. This happens as well)
There are some guys that would be better now than they were when they played. Mostly the fuckup types like AI, Kemp, Coleman because everyone just works hard and takes the game serious now to make 200 mill. Even Boogie lost like 30 pounds last offseason. It's just not cool to be a malcontent anymore really. They give you an AAU daddy at like 12 now if they see you got a chance to make 9 figures in the next decade.
