Well said.

Of course in the world of 2012 team fanboys, there were no athletes in 1992.

This pretty much says it all as to who is better. Sorry Iggy.

http://www.faniq.com/blog/2012-vs-Th...ers-Blog-52264

Call me crazy, but the level and program of development for your modern top basketball player blows away anything the '92 guys had. The growth of national AAU circuit crushes. Today's players have been pushed harder and harder to elevate above the OK Plateau (see expertise literature). This isn't close. They play better basketball. Not only are they bigger, stronger, faster, they have better handles, shoot better, move without the ball better, much better defense, and so on.

Now, if Michael Jordan or Magic Johnson or Larry Bird was born in 1984, they might be better than LeBron. They weren't, though. They came up through a weaker system that challenged them less. thus, they didn't develop the skills as much.

Basketball today is ridiculously better

If basketball today is ridiculously better, Karl Malone would not have won an MVP right before he turned 36 years old in 1999. It would simply be impossible. This is definitive empirical evidence that the "basketball today is ridiculously better" argument is indefensibly wrong.

Improved development programs for youth would only accelerate the development of young basketball players. In other words, they peak earlier. This does not make their peak higher. Irrelevant for comparing the elite of the NBA.

The OK Plateau is completely irrelevant. It's apparently a cognitive psychology term describing how people learn and organize new skills in their head. It's basically a model showing how amateur's push themselves past their skill plateaus to become better. What the heck are you people even arguing anymore?

It's more evidence that LOL MVP voters.

this

Athletes today are much more advanced than a generation ago. Herschel Walker would be lucky to make a CFL roster in modern times.

Karl Malone would disappear in the modern NBA

he's a crummy version of Kevin Love

So you think MVP voters would cast enough votes to select someone who is old, unathletic and can't even compete with the much younger, bigger, faster, stronger, better skilled modern athletes?

Could you give a detailed description on how an old, decrepit Dream Team member managed to perform well enough against a league with Shaq at his absolute peak so that a panel of voters decided he was the most valuable player in the league? This should be interesting.

and, 1999 was 13 years ago!
It's closer to LOL '92 than 2012

should be evidence of how back the 90s were compared to today

the same way people delusionally hold that Kobe is better than LeBron... or D.Rose... or whoever

popularity contests man

and Malone shows how ****ty bball used to be

Let me just sum up MVP voters for you:

Steve Nash: 2 MVP awards
Shaquille O'Neal: 1 MVP award

Hell, even Allen Iverson won a MVP award.

A 40 year old MJ took a dump on Kevin Garnett at his peak. Whenever the Dream Team players in their old age compete against these modern, superior athletes who are in their prime the "modern, superior" basketball players with elite development at 6 years old get trounced.

You may want to reconsider your position because every shred of empirical evidence shows that you are wrong.

would anyone, going into the '99 season say, "I'd rather have Karl Malone this year than Shaq."

Not once single ****ing person would. That's the MVP voting for ya'

So you are saying Steve Nash and Allen Iverson are unathletic relative to their peers and could not compete, yet they won MVP awards?

Are you even thinking before you write this ****?

The point is it overlapped with Shaq's era, while he was at his peak. The point, it flew over your head about 10 posts ago.

No I'm saying MVP voters are dumb as **** and thus the MVP award means nothing.

no... they don't

watch Jordan get his weak ass jumpers up

do you see any of the 2012 team with such weak ****?

Jordan might get his extra FT or two kicking out his leg and wimpering for a call, but most of his moves look slow and awkward compared to today's players.


It's cool that people think a '67 corvette is awesome, but don't pretend it's a better car than the '12 corvette.

That's all this debate is... sentimentality for a past that meant something special. Onward and upward we go.

Matt R should go back to arguing the greatness of TDKR

Maybe when LeBron wins a championship in a full season where Derrick Rose and Dwight Howard aren't hurt we can talk. But then again, maybe not since a 33 year old Shawn Marion and a 38 year old Jason Kidd completely shut down LaBum just one year ago.

Sort by birthyear, become expert. Well, at least if you ignore all the contradicting empirical evidence staring you in the face.

No... I get your point
it's dumb

assumes a static member overlapping who is not being driven to higher levels by the young talent showing up

that's a ridiculous position

your empirical evidence is about the Heat losing in the finals???? WTF

We'll never know on this point anyway as Jordan played before the new zone rules created to help the defense so they stood a chance against modern scoring talent

because, modern scorers kick ass and couldn't be stopped under the old rules (where those '92 DTers could)

Holy crap! I have an interwebs stalker. How cute!

I thought you were actually on the '92 side when you posted the "lack of killer instinct" crap earlier this page and were making a sarcastic and pretty funny remark. Apparently I was wrong and you are just dumb.

But yeah, Batman would totally fall through the ice and it really took me out of TDKR. Can't believe all these logical holes in a comic book movie about a dude trained as a ninja who dresses up as a bat and fights clowns. I can see why it bothered you. I was just trolling that other thread, there are way better action movies based on comic books out there.

Now that we're past that we can go back to LOL'ing at the sort by birthyear'ers.

I'm on the 50/50 side but the arguments made by the 92 side ITT are much worse than the 12