While It's Slow

[PalmettoHawkFan]

I'm sitting here looking at a bunch of moving boxes

Check Fred Brown and John Johnson

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRC9QktPY-s&feature=related]Game 4, 1979 NBA Finals; Sonics/Bullets (1st Half) - YouTube[/ame]

Johnson was so smooth it was sick.

Freddie has a stoopit hook at 28min

 

[conn53victor]

On of my West Branch Middle School student's said, "Iowa has never been good at basketball."

I said, "My first year of Iowa BB tickets, they averaged over 100 points per game and went undefeated in the Big 10."

I didn't invoke the ghost of former student Jon Miller.

 

[CCLHHawk]

Nice. Its probably nostalgia talking but NBA basketball sure seemed more enjoyable in the late 70's thru the 80's. I remember as a kid staying up to watch the Friday night CBS late game that came on after the news. Usually never made it to the end.

 

[PalmettoHawkFan]

Most of those guys were way too fat by modern NBA standards. The conditioning just wasn't there, which is reflected in slower footspeeds and lower verticals.

Also, the 60s generation of HS players -- who were the 5-10 year veterans in this '79 clip -- don't have the "highlight polish" of today's guys. Some of these guys have really nice individual skills, and a few have some gaps in their games -- watching Lonnie Shelton try to handle is painful. Most modern players have better individual skills -- handles, outside shooting by the forwards, on-the-ball D.

Where this generation was much better than the current crop, though, is in five-on-five skills. Fast breaks where the ball never touches the floor, crisp passing, good spacing, sharp cuts, working without the ball. And one area where the individual skills are better is that a whole lot of these releases say "hours and hours and hours of jump shots." One thing I like watching was how John Johnson and the white guy from Kentucky on the Bullets anticipated where their teammates would be, and seemed to always make the right cut or pass in the situation. That's from running sets over and over and over....

The lack of conditioning and high-level team skills kind of go hand in hand. When you can't break down defenses with physical skills, you have to break them down with fundamentals. The speed and power of today's game is awesome, but with the exception of the Euros or the guys who had real coaches in HS or AAU, they're missing what the 70s-80s generations had.

MJ wasn't the greatest offensive force the game has ever seen because of his physical tools, but because he paired the physical tools with instincts and fundamentals honed by Dean Smith and his HS coach. Not AAU and one-and-done....


Enough of this crap.

Get Woody, Ingram for D and MG's backup, and get Thurman for the wing.

 

[oroko]

I used to watch Fred Brown and Lonnie Shelton (coached by Bill Russell) play the Bulls in the old Chicago Stadium.

I was more then impressed seeing guys as huge as Shelton participating in what amounted to a 48 minute track meet.

I agree with your general theme that the athletes are way better and the game is way worse.

 

[conn53victor]

The conditioning just wasn't there, which is reflected in slower footspeeds and lower verticals.

I am puzzling over this one since, playing with essential only six players, the 1969-70 Hawkeye basketball team averaged over 100 ppg in the Big 10 (without a three point line) with John Johnson (27.0 ppg), Fred Brown (17.9), Chad Calabria (19.1), Glenn Vidnovic (17.3), Dick Jensen (3.1), and Ben McGilmer (10.3).

It seems to me that they must have been in some kind of shape. That was my first year of season tickets and, let me tell you, they flat out RAN. That team was in shape. I heard once that they trained with the cross country team in the fall, but that may be apocryphal.

 

[PalmettoHawkFan]

It seems to me that they must have been in some kind of shape. That was my first year of season tickets and, let me tell you, they flat out RAN. That team was in shape. I heard once that they trained with the cross country team in the fall, but that may be apocryphal.

It's not the running -- a lot of 60s and 70s players had the same aerobic base and anaerobic sharpness (being able to repeat sprints over and over, and handle "going into the redline") as modern players.

The big difference is in the lack of weight training, plyometrics, and other power+speed training (speed bands, resisted running and lateral movement, etc.). That didn't really hit the NBA until the mid-80s. The Karl Malone/Dennis Rodman "live in the gym" mindset didn't sink in for a long time. That kind of work makes a big difference in explosiveness and strength. By big, I mean a 36 vs. a 32 vertical, for instance. It doesn't sound like a lot, but four inches on the vertical, or an extra quarter-step on the first move, makes all the difference in the world on the court.

I was working with the basketball coach at my school in NC to put together a plyo+weight program for his varsity in 2003. I didn't do that kind of stuff until I was 25, and after a year you could see the difference in the kids' bodies.

That kind of work from 17-27, and a more professional approach to the off-season, is the difference in today's athlete.

 

[twinlaker]

It's not the running -- a lot of 60s and 70s players had the same aerobic base and anaerobic sharpness (being able to repeat sprints over and over, and handle "going into the redline") as modern players.

The big difference is in the lack of weight training, plyometrics, and other power+speed training (speed bands, resisted running and lateral movement, etc.). That didn't really hit the NBA until the mid-80s. The Karl Malone/Dennis Rodman "live in the gym" mindset didn't sink in for a long time. That kind of work makes a big difference in explosiveness and strength. By big, I mean a 36 vs. a 32 vertical, for instance. It doesn't sound like a lot, but four inches on the vertical, or an extra quarter-step on the first move, makes all the difference in the world on the court.

I was working with the basketball coach at my school in NC to put together a plyo+weight program for his varsity in 2003. I didn't do that kind of stuff until I was 25, and after a year you could see the difference in the kids' bodies.

That kind of work from 17-27, and a more professional approach to the off-season, is the difference in today's athlete.

So do coaches "overcoach" now? Why not turn these horses out and let them run? Averaging over 100 with no shot clock and no 3 point line was a much better game than what we see today... by far!

 

[PalmettoHawkFan]

So do coaches "overcoach" now? Why not turn these horses out and let them run? Averaging over 100 with no shot clock and no 3 point line was a much better game than what we see today... by far!

I have no idea -- because I'm an ex-****** HS basketball player who is a track coach.

What I've seen is that HS players at serious programs, and just about every college player, is much better conditioned for endurance, strength, speed, and power than their counterparts in the 70s.

They may not be better players, but they have much fitter bodies.

 

[oroko]

Today's game sucks because it's totally shot clock oriented.

Watch the conference finals between the Lakers and the Rockets when Akeem the Dream was a rookie and Ralph Sampson was in his second year. It truly marked the end of an era because big men still got the ball off the boards AND ran the floor. From that point forward it's slowly become the slog we see today.

The college game is worse than that.

 

[conn53victor]

Today's game sucks because it's totally shot clock oriented.

So the shot clock slowed the game? Anybody want to throw some ppg stats on that one?