My thesis isn't that "athleticism improves over time". I think people improve in every aspect of the game over time, and I've mentioned several times how shooting was the biggest edge for the 2012 team (not an athleticism thing). However, I do think that LeBron is more athletic than either Jordan or Robinson.

I used your data set that you chose to post and somehow saw a clear downward trend

The first 60 years it dropped 25 seconds...the last 50 years it has hovered in a 2 second range with the 1968 time better than the last 3 Olympics (12 years)

There is no downward trend in the last 50 years so I don't see how you thought that

WELL SAID

I love how IGGY tries to use TRACK and FIELD stats to prove a basketball theory.

Of course there is no add in for all the drugs the athletes are taking now.
Or how much better the equiptment is. (like shoes or timing)

Because those would DISPROVE his position.

Here are some cherry picked IGGY stats from 92 and 12.

PPG
1992-Jordan 30.1
2012-Durant 28.0

RPG
1992-Rodman 18.7
2012-Howard 14.5

APG
1992-Stockton 13.7
2012-Rondo 11.8

SPG
1992-Stockton 3.0
2012-Paul 2.53

BPG
1992-Robinson 4.5
2012-Ibaka 3.65

FT%
1992-Price 94.7
2012- Crawford 92.7


IGGY Conclusion--the 1992 players were much better shooters and athletes, than those in 2012.

Heh, actually most of these stats can be used to support Iggy's claim that the competition is better now than it was in 1992.

Using 1992 per game stats to make decisions itt

BADUU gettin his troll on hard

Lebron's gotta work on them fundamentals, someone needs to teach him how to make a bounce pass

rodman's rpg that year is nuts

Jesus, that's a sick pass. Definitely worth bumping this awful thread for.

Whats so amazing is like he is already setting up to make it before he even gets the outlet pass from under the rim, and then he executes it as well as anyone possibly could. So ridic.

Not sure what you're getting at here. The 1992 team was not constructed with the sole purpose of beating a hypothetical 2012 Olympic team either.

I would think PEDs would be the biggest edge for 2012 over 1992. The thing is, I don't think PED use is nearly as widespread in the NBA as it is in track and field nor the NFL. Plus I don't think PED use improves basketball ability as much as it improves track or football ability because bball doesn't rely as much on pure athleticism.

I could see that maybe strength and conditioning is implemented at a younger age now on average, especially to poorer youth where this may not have happened 20-30 years ago. But I also don't think it's hard for an elite talent to catch up on strength and conditioning in college so I don't think it effects NBA players at all.

I'd need to see some type of evidence on the improved scouting for opposing teams and player tendencies. I don't see how there could be any improvement at all from 1992 to 2012. NBA teams pay guys a lot of money to scout and there were plenty of great coaches back in '92.

I think these edges, if they exist at all for the 2012 team, couldn't overcome the havoc DRob/Ewing/Malone/Barkley would wreak in the paint. They just couldn't be defended over the course of the game.

LOL that you're still trying to say Barkley/Malone vs. Durant is a mismatch in favor of the '92 squad. Especially with FIBA 3-point line.

I believe the FIBA rules allow much more aggressive handchecking like before the NBA rule change. I'm not sure what the FIBA rules are regarding obstructing players coming off screens, but if those are like the old NBA rules that would effect this as well. Basically even though the FIBA line is shorter, having Jordan and Pippen as wing defenders and them being able to play much more aggressively on the wing will nullify the 3 point advantage of 2012.

On the other hand, how is 2012 going to nullify the advantage of DRob/Ewing/Barkley/Malone in the paint with Chander/KLove/Davis? They don't have an equivalent post defense to Jordan/Pippen, 2 of the 3 greatest wing defenders ever, on the wing.

It's interesting to note that the 5 events where the 1992 winner wouldn't have finished in the top 10 are distance events. All but one are over 10,000 meter races. Two of them are walking. Given that humans have been elite long distance runners for millenia, as it's how we survived, it seems pretty much a lock that these improvements are due to tech advances in tracks and PEDs. I'm not seeing how big improvements in distance events, particularly walking, say much about how much basketball has impoved. I would almost be willing to bet that humans are worse genetically now for distance racing than we were before the Olympics existed.

Aside from those events, the rest look pretty damn close to the 1992 competition which is what I've been saying all along. It's not really clear to me why you think this is a point in your favor since track is notorious for PED use and there have been large technological improvements in the way tracks are built for traction and energy return over the last 20 years. The latter is obviously irrelevant for basketball, and the former is much much less relevant for basketball than it is for track.

Also, what Nicholasp27 said about the plateau for the times you listed over the past 50 years. I don't get at all how you're seeing a clear downward trend past like 1960. If we're comparing 2012 Olympic basketball to the 1960 All-NBA team that data may be relevant. Then again, maybe not, because they're not even remotely the same sport.

Man you really need to take the blinders off. There's more to basketball than chucking 3 point shots. I've been saying "post play" over and over and over again. If you think Durant/Chandler/KLove/Davis can handle DRob/Ewing/Barkley/Malone in the post I think you may need to start sorting by some other made up statistic.

So Durant would guard Barkley and Malone?

But Jordan is basically the poster child for PED use in the NBA...I mean he got ****ing huge late in life

Neither would be able to guard the other, at all, on the defensive end.

Not sure why exactly you think this makes it a definitive mismatch in favor of the DT. I'd think it would be easier to provide help defense to Durant on Malone/Barkley inside than it would to Malone/Barkley trying to guard Durant all over the place.

obviously you're not obligated, but is ts% invalid? why did you ignore the following...

-------------------

couildn't resist.

here are the dimensions of the 3-point lines:

21.65 ft (6.60 m) to 22.15 ft (6.75 m): FIBA
22 ft (6.70 m) to 23.75 (7.24 m): NBA

I just don't think that the relatively small difference expands the number of 12ers who would be taking 3s, or makes the 12ers' 3-point shooters that much more accurate. and imo any increase in shooting % is more than countered by the DT's enormous low-post advantage.

no one's charted it yet and no one's going to bother, but both teams have huge matchup issues. the 12ers wouldn't put durant on malone/barkley, the DT wouldn't put them on Durant. well, maybe malone, but I kinda doubt that would go well, unless the refs allowed malone to rough him up.

Derrick Rose disagreed, then quickly agreed.
http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/e...38893/29489681
Not sure why you'd think PED use wouldn't improve basketball. Practically every aspect of the sport could be increased using a PED. EPO for increased endurance, steroids for increased explosive ability, even something like caffeine pills for increased energy or adderall for increased focus and attention for gameplanning.


In a vacuum evolution alone would be enough to assume better scouting. The coaches of the early 2000 typically learned and cherry picked the more effective tactics of the great coaches in 1992.
The growth of something like the MIT Sloan conference shows how much more interest there is in more advanced scouting, coaching tactics, gameplanning, etc there is compared to 1992.
Just the advanced in video recording and playback make it much easier for coaches to scout players. Much less the visual tracking cameras/software some teams use.
http://espn.go.com/blog/playbook/tech/post/_/id/492/492

given how good some of the DT defenders already were, then how good would they be with an advanced scouting report before they played the 12ers?

probably less than the 12ers who have played their careers vs teams who scout them better than the DTers who haven't had their flaws analyzed as thoroughly.

You're missing the point. There's a reason that every single NBA team attempts at least 12 3-pointers a game and most attempt many more while FIBA teams shoot around 20 3-pointers a game in 40 minutes. It's because it's optimal strategy to do so. If it weren't, some teams would just pound it inside like they did in the early 90s. The reason they didn't do it back then, is that the 3-point shot was still a relatively new rule, and it takes a while for coaches to adjust, players to suit their training to the coaches adjustments, the coaches to readjust based on the players new skills, and the players to readjust their training based on the new coaching, etc., etc. The fact that the Dream Teamers didn't do this was a major hole in their games, and they need to be much better in the other areas to make up for this. Just comparing stats doesn't prove anything since those are all relative to the league that they played in, but fundamental holes in your game are fundamental holes in your game.

Also, in addition to 3-point shooting being more important with the shorter line, it's also more important on a team with multiple inside scorers. That's why LeBron and Wade were less effective playing together than they were separately as they were both primarily inside scorers, and why the front office in Miami worked so hard to surround them with shooters. If LeBron and Wade are both trying to score in the paint, and then they brought in Marc Gasol to try to score in the paint too, it would be a terrible fit, and even with a pick and pop big man in Bosh, they still were less effective together than they had been separately. This is despite the fact that LeBron James is a better 3-point shooter than any of the starters on the Dream Team. If you have Magic, Michael, Pippen, Barkley, and Robinson all trying to score in the paint, you know what's going to happen? The paint's going to get really clogged up, especially if the 2012 team decides to play a zone. The 2012 team is much more balanced and can score both inside and outside, so they fit together much better. Barkley might be a lot more valuable than Kevin Love surrounded by Hersey Hawkins, Armen Gilliam, Johnny Dawkins, and Charles Shackleford where he's expected to do all the scoring anyway and the other players are trying to stay out of his way, but when he's on the court with Michael Jordan and David Robinson, having another inside scorer is redundant, much more redundant than Wade was on the floor at the same time as LeBron. When multiple players are already better inside scorers, Kevin Love's significantly more valuable.


The starting lineup for the 2012 team is Paul/Kobe/LeBron/Durant/Chandler. If Barkley and Robinson are playing at the same time for the Dream Team, Barkley's going to have to guard someone. Who do you suggest if not Durant? Kobe? That's not going to go all that much better. Meanwhile, the 2012 team can either put LeBron on Jordan and Durant on Barkley if Jordan's still the primary threat, or if it turns into a monster mismatch as you suggest, they can put LeBron on Barkley and Durant on Jordan. Either way, the matchups are in favor of the 2012 team.

is it just me or does it seem the fiba rims are like 11 feet? I guess its just the camera angle.

If one must compare track standards over different summer Olympics, it seems to me that a more telling metric would be the evolution of A and B qualifying standards - how much progression has there been for your average Olympian?