This decaide in basketball is weak to the 1990s: true or false?
The Cavs won 66 games and to me if they were in the 90s they would be a 5 or 6 seed in the East with the type of team they have.
Dwight Howard is considered the most dominant Center in the game and he is a very limited player. In the 90s "dominant" centers were truly dominant and had both the strength and skill sets are were not at all limited players.
None of the teams in this 2009 season would make it past the Conference Semifinals.
The 1990s had better games, better teams, better rilvaries and more intensity.
Because of this dumb marketing scheme all we hear about is Kobe and Lebron.
We lost are great NBA rivalries like Knicks-Heat,Bulls-Knicks,Bulls-Pacers,Knicks-Pacers, Rockets-Jazz, Sonics-Jazz, Lakers-Sonics, and many more.
90s also had better players than it did today.
Games were alot more exciting to watch in the 1990s.
Even teams that didnt win a championship in the 1990s would dominate today.
the 1994 Knicks, 1996 Sonics, 1997 or 1998 Jazz, and even 1998 Pacers would run through the NBA like its nothing today. And these were teams didnt win their NBA championships.
In the 1990s it was about competition and not marketing like it is today.
True of False: Compared to the 1990s this decade is weak?
its a typo you f**cking d! ck head
You know what the f**k I meant so dont be such a f**k ing smart@$$
I meant decade
I forgot to mention they call way too many fouls now, back than they used to let them play
- Anonymous1 decade agoFavorite Answer
I agree w. you wholeheartedly I mean that decade had the same teams year in and out vying for the championship. The Hornets were an expansion team and had some very competitive teams almost right off the bat. The Bobcats have been improving, but nowhere near the Hornets.
The 94-01' Knicks would have ravaged this era of basketball if they were in it. I mean they were a defensive powerhouse and that is missing in the NBA today. Ewing, Houston, Sprewell can be top scorers in the NBA like they were then now and Camby and Thomas and Johnson are way above average players. While, Ward, Starks, Childs, etc. were good role players of the day.
Other great teams you forgot to list were the Drexler/Blazers, Utah/Houston rivalry, Barkley Suns, Shaq/Penny Magic, etc. and they all would do away with this defensive-less league today. Remember these were all near 60 win and 60 win teams and they were better ran and had better players than today.
To the guy that said, DH12 is better than Ewing you have got to be crazy. DH12 is great and very dominant. The most dominant center in the NBA this side of Shaq, but he is limited. I mean all he does is rely on his athleticism and strength he does not have a vast array of low post moves and is offensively challenged outside of the paint.
Patrick Ewing is the greatest jump shooting center that the game has ever seen and made an impact right off the bat in NY leading them to 14 consecutive playoff apearances, numerous ECF, and 2 NBA Finals. While, it took time for DH12 to be a 20+ scorer in this league. Ewing was just as good as a rebounder and an even better defensive player than the current DPOY in DH12. Also, Ewing could put the ball on the floor and create his own shot something that DH12 has not proved he can do yet. In fcat, if it was not for Ewing's direction in Yao/DH12's careers they would not be where they are now in their careers that is for sure.
Ewing dropped 28+ PPG in a season before and he has done that shooting difficult shots and not camping out in the paint, like DH12 does. When DH12 can do this if ever than we can talk.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
The 90's no doubt
In that era you could see at least 2/3 superstars in 1 team,for example Bulls(Jordan,Pippen,Rodman),Jazz(Malone,Stockhon and etc),plus star players and etc
They were much skillful and had better fundamentals then the current players.They also shot better % and the defensive force were huge and there were a lot of smart defenders.The guys in offense were so good,they passed more to get easier shots and etc
Back in those days,the rivalaries were way huger and important then now
If Howard was there,he wouldn't put so much good numbers because the centers that played had better fundimantels,skills and strength.
And nothing is same without MJ,who impressed everybody with his amazing fundimantels,athletic abilty and mid range shooting abilty.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
each decade is different plus some of those teams you mention would not do so well now just because of the rule changes=====94 knicks would not be aloud to hold grab and just beat on the other team for 48 min plus ewing was a great center but was more of a jump shooter then so he never owned the paint======(shaq was dwight howard minus the use of his left hand) hakeem was the truth because he could post you or take you 15-18 ft and give you that dream shake===those were great teams for their times but in this nba there is no way to know just how good they would be plus what they all have in common is that jordan kept them all from winning the title===except for the 94 knicks and rockets-----------its cool to compare whenever IF is in the picture we will never know.
- NBA HistorianLv 41 decade ago
I totally agree with you. You nailed it right there. There were a huge amount of talent in the 80s and the 90s. The game was played at really fast pace. Everybody could shoot at high percentage. Players back then can be flashy and effective at the same time. Rivalries were very intense in the 80s and 90s. You can see players truly didn't like each others. They gave it all on the court when they met. Today, you see players being too friendly to each others. I want real rivalaries where players truly disliked each others.
The NBA became watered down when MJ left in 1998. The only team that I think that can match up with those in the 80s and 90s are the 2000-2002 Lakers and the 2002 Kings. The Lakers during 2000-2002 were truly dominant with Shaq and Kobe. The 2002 Kings were very talented with Webber, Bibby, Peja, Christie, Divac, Jackson, etc.
Today, you only see one superstar along with one all star and a bunch of role players. Back in the 80s and 90s, you would have 2 superstars on the same team along with solid players. Hell, the Celtics and the Lakers of the 80s had 3 or 4 future HOFers on each team. The talent level isnt the same today.
The game was also tougher back then due to handchecking. MJ had to deal with players handchecking him. It was perfectly legal. The refs allowed the players to play physical defense instead of protecting them. Players were tougher mentally back then. Today, if you just poke your finger at someone, you get called for a foul. WTF is that? I want real basketball, not sissy basketball.
The Knicks' roster of Starks, Harper, Oakley, Mason, Ewing, Anthony, Davis, etc. would destroy LeBron and the Cavs today. They were definitely one of the greatest defensive teams I've ever seen. Very physically tough.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- Anonymous4 years ago
Yes "we" haven't found but individuals have found, who I count among true believers (not deluded ones). Yes I believe. From your questions about rain you gave an impression that you feel superior and others to be fools, no offense. See there are 2 concepts about the existence of God. 1. Abrahimic concept (with which you are influenced) say God is present at the 7th sky/heaven and is not omnipresent (that's why muslims pray with their face up). 2. Dhramic concept says God is omnipresent i.e he is present in each and everything, every atom and even in emptiness and maybe some heaven and 7th sky also. The Dharmic concept is true other one is not that true. Religions and religious stuff I believe has been manipulated by time, their teachings aren't the best philosophy in this world and that should not be used to define God. God is way beyond religion and crazy/mental/deluded believers. I don't believe that much in religion but still I think no religion is that evil, the problem is, it's too easy to color any riot or battle for selfish gains with the name of religion.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Go back and look at the 1977 Blazers, the Showtime Lakers, the Bird-era Celtics, the Bad Boy Pistons, and the early 90's Bulls.
- 1 decade ago
weak compared to the 90's absolutly non-comparable to the 80's. It's such a watered down game now that if it keeps going the way it is, it will be nothing more than glorified streetball in a few years. What a shame.
- The Chosen OneLv 61 decade ago
As much as i love the teams of today i really cant answer ur question cause i never watched 90's basketball. There were alot of dominant players in the 90's that wouldve been fun to watch like ewing,jordan,pippen,malone,shaq(orlando days),etc so ill take ur word for it.
- SK22™Lv 61 decade ago
Don't be talking about Dwight Howard like that.
90's had only ONE dominant Center, Shaquille O'Neal. Ewing? Olajuwan? Nowhere near dominant.
Spurs-Pistons. Pistons-Celtics (relived). Lakers-Celtics (relived). Bulls-Celtics (relived). Kings-Lakers. Cavs-Lakers. Cavs-Celtics. Suns-Lakers. Suns-Mavs. Heat-Mavs. Spurs-Lakers.
LeBron James, Kobe Bryant, Dwight Howard, Dwyane Wade, Chris Paul, FUN TO WATCH.
Yeah right. I don't think the 94 Knicks would come close to a one seed in the East. Patrick Ewing was NOWHERE NEAR DOMINANT. He was a frequent scorer, but he didn't OWN the paint like O'Neal, Duncan, or Howard do/did in the 2000's. And I bet not even the 98 Jazz would beat Orlando, Cleveland, Los Angeles, Denver, and Boston right now (considering there are NO injuries, Garnett and Nelson).
I agree with that. Fans are leaving. Mainly because of scams, for example the Lakers over Kings Western Conference Finals series.
- 1 decade ago
LOL @ the 12 year old(SK22 said he was 12 or 13 in some question, i remember that weirdly enough) who said Ewing and Olajuwan weren't dominate.
You can't even remember the 90's kid, you shouldnt even be in this discussion