My take on why the 90's era was not watered down.

[Bulls N' Bears]

*deleted*

Edited January 29, 2011 by Bulls N' Bears

[Real Deal]

Moved to NBA General. It's not exactly a memorable moment we can talk about. The 90s was a massive collection of them, just like any decade, and this is more about how much more difficult (or less difficult) it was to play in the era.

 

80’s Total Average: 45% finished under .500. 73% didn’t win 50 games.

90’s Total Average: 43% finished under .500. 69% didn’t win 50 games.

 

What does that show? That shows that teams were better in the 90’s compared to the 80’s. There were less under .500 teams in the 90’s, and more 50 win teams in the 90’s.

That doesn't mean anything. The West had more 50-win teams (8) than the East did last year (just 4), but the four contenders were LA, Cleveland, Boston and Orlando...three out of the East.

 

Logically, you could consider a league with less 50-win teams more competitive. If said contenders are losing to bottom-feeding playoff teams, and everyone is winning anywhere from 41-49 games (.500 or better, less than 50 wins), that league would be incredibly tough. Unrealistic example because there will never be a conference that has all 41-49 win teams, but it still holds water in that the closer the teams are in regards to their overall standings, the more competitive the league may be.

 

There's no real way of determining something like that just by team records, because all teams play each other, and it doesn't matter how many times unless the scale is too significant to ignore (ex. 10 teams back in the 60s). As many times as you play your bottom-feeders, you're playing contenders, and a small percentage increase/decrease doesn't mean anything at all because those teams over .500 could've been much better one decade than they were the other, or there may have been teams tanking that were below .500, maybe some of the worst teams ever playing in the 90s that you can't reflect in your statistical analysis.

 

The 11-win Mavericks and Nuggets, two of the top three worst teams in NBA history, were part of the 90s (the 9-win Sixers team was in 1973).

 

The 80s contained just one team that won 66+ games. The 90s had three teams that did it...but, to hurt the argument, they were all the Chicago Bulls teams.

 

Jordan's era had around 40 different guards that shot 50% and (at the same time) averaged 15+ PPG in that same season. Since? Very few have done it. You can say that means players were more efficient (which is true), and you can assume it's because of the illegal zone defense and the less-talented defensive players (specialty defense, I should say).

 

The only legit team year after year in the West was the Lakers.

You say that, but the Bulls won six titles from 1991-1998 (and potentially eight if Jordan didn't retire).

 

Of the teams I listed, they were the only one’s in the 80’s other than Milwaukee to make it to the Finals in the 80’s. The rockets, lakers, Celtics, Pistons, and sixers. That’s it. The 90’s finals series featured the Bulls, Knicks, Magic, Pistons, Jazz, Lakers, Rockets, Sonics, Blazers, Spurs.

In other words, it was much tougher to get into the Finals back in the 80s.

 

By the way, I wouldn't really count the Bad Boy Pistons OR those Spurs as 90s teams. Technically, yes, but both were more dominant in the 80s and 2000s. Neither dominated the 90s...at all.

 

-----

 

But, the point is...any way you can swing the argument, there's always something else to say, another way of looking at it. The Lakers had to play the Celtics nine times back in 1962. This year, we play them twice in the regular season. Thank God for that. Does that mean the 60s were less competitive, or more? Less talented players, technically...but they were also the cream of the crop, not washed away with 150 scrubs...right?

 

Always different angles to look at.

[JYD]

The 90's were great to me because...

 

-That's when I first started watching the game.

-That's when you were allowed to play defense (hand checking)

-The Knicks were relevant, and played a very exciting brand of basketball. If you went to the hoop, prepared to be knocked down.

 

In the 2000's the Knicks have been awful, and defense is virtually non-existent as every team nowadays scores 100 a night.

 

If it weren't for Jordan, the Knicks probably win a damn championship or two in the 90's. [expletive]ing Jordan!