• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

2021-2022 Cavaliers General Discussion: Trade Deadline Edition

Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Who Should the Cavs Trade For?

  • Murray

    Votes: 18 37.5%

  • Lavert

    Votes: 17 35.4%

  • White

    Votes: 1 2.1%

  • Seth Curry

    Votes: 1 2.1%

  • Schroeder

    Votes: 7 14.6%

  • Tatum

    Votes: 3 6.3%

  • Hart

    Votes: 3 6.3%

  • Ingram

    Votes: 1 2.1%

  • Brown

    Votes: 2 4.2%

  • Jim Chones

    Votes: 9 18.8%
  • Total voters
    48
Status
Not open for further replies.
Derek said:
Players shot way more FT back in that era, and it was easier to score in general. Just because there were more dirty plays doesn’t mean that the actual defense was better. Steph would have been a god amongst men.
Click to expand...
There wasn't more dirtier plays…..there was more of a physical presence on defense.
 
foucault87 said:
Knowing our cavs. We go 7-1 with a 40 pt loss to orlando
Click to expand...
With Allen & Markkanen back, the Cavs could go 3-0 this week against Brooklyn, Phoenix, & Orlando. Brooklyn isn’t all that good and is very beatable without Kyrie. If we lose to any of those teams, it will be to Phoenix.
 
Last edited:
Ohioplayer00 said:
There wasn't more dirtier plays…..there was more of a physical presence on defense.
Click to expand...
That's right. Rule changes don't necessarily affect all players' games equally across the board. The simplest example of that is what has happened this year with the drawing of fouls. The rule is the same for everyone, and yet guys like Harden and Trey Young are affected more than most.

The rules permitting zone defenses had the net effect of lowering scoring across the board, but how much that affected individual players depends a lot on the type of game they have.

Guys who are disrupted more by physical contact would have had a relatively more difficult time 30 years ago than would other guys less affected by contact. Mark Price always had a tough time against physical defenders, and would have excelled even more under the current rules.

But the bottom line is there's no way to actually prove how Curry would have fared 25 years ago, or how Price or MJ would have fared today.
 
Ohioplayer00 said:
All time low???? Didn't remember a ton 125, 135 and 140 point games back then! Defense is an afterthought in today’s game.
Click to expand...
Pace and defense are not the same thing. The game was a crawl based on possesions per game in the late 90s-early 00s. Games were borderline unwatchable. The modern game is as fast as it has been since the mid 80s. Only know instead of taking bad midrange jumpers, we have a lot of 3s. The game has not been this exciting in years.
 
foucault87 said:
Pace and defense are not the same thing. The game was a crawl based on possesions per game in the late 90s-early 00s. Games were borderline unwatchable. The modern game is as fast as it has been since the mid 80s. Only know instead of taking bad midrange jumpers, we have a lot of 3s. The game has not been this exciting in years.
Click to expand...
It’s clear you never watched Magic and Showtime….or KJ and the Suns….or the Iceman and the Spurs. “Bad” midrange jumpers??? It’s clear you have never played the game. Because today’s game is all about “forced up out of the flow of the game” three pointers. Three and four one fast breaks end up with somebody firing up a long three ball. Talk about boring! There is no creativity in the game today because all people do is work the ball around the perimeter until they can fire up a three pointer.
 
Ohioplayer00 said:
It’s clear you never watched Magic and Showtime….or KJ and the Suns….or the Iceman and the Spurs. “Bad” midrange jumpers??? It’s clear you have never played the game. Because today’s game is all about “forced up out of the flow of the game” three pointers. Three and four one fast breaks end up with somebody firing up a long three ball. Talk about boring! There is no creativity in the game today because all people do is work the ball around the perimeter until they can fire up a three pointer.
Click to expand...
Hard to watch games that happened before I was born.

But yes, midrange jumpers are always bad unless its a late shot clock bail out situation. The math on this is pretty clear and its why you see every team adopting Moreyball offense. A mediocre 3 pt shot attempt is always better than a mediocre 2 pt one. Why would you take less efficient shots? A proper offense today isn't forcing up shots out of the flow of the offense. That is the flow. We can argue about the aesthetics of it, but the math is very clear.
 
foucault87 said:
Pace and defense are not the same thing. The game was a crawl based on possesions per game in the late 90s-early 00s. Games were borderline unwatchable. The modern game is as fast as it has been since the mid 80s. Only know instead of taking bad midrange jumpers, we have a lot of 3s. The game has not been this exciting in years.
Click to expand...
3 pointers are the NBA's excessive easy passing rules in the NFL. Has it gone too far??? The NFL for example shouldn't bring back bump and run, but maybe restore a few rules to make it tougher.
 
The elimination of hand checking was a huge change for the NBA. I'd like to see how that would affect today's players who can move freely around the court with and without the ball with little resistance compared to the days before hand checking was first restricted, then the tightening of the rule, and then the complete outlawing of it.

Another thing that changed was the flagrant foul rule, which didn't exist in the old era. Smaller, quicker players actually had legit fear for their health and safety if they dared to attack inside the paint. Now speed can be used as an asset whereas in those days they got completely flattened, clotheslined, whatever, with only a common foul as a repercussion.

To say some of today's players would kick ass then the same way they do now is a pretty sketchy position that fails to take certain realities into account.
 
Dont want to keep distracting in the Cavs thread with this, but I think its really hard to say the game isnt healthier now than it has been for a few decades. Part of that is just how strong the talent pool is today compared to like 2002 (Nets back to back finals yikes). Another part is a series of rule changes that have toned down a lot of the negative or less interesting aspects of the game (excessive fighting, bad midrange heaves from journeymen). The game is not what it was in even the late 90s/early 00s. But it is a beautiful one and I love watching these modern speed ball offenses.

Do some teams push the three point hunting too far? Sure. I haven't been able to watch a Rockets game since they had Yao. Hardens offense is the least aesthetic thing on the planet. But we see a lot more good stuff based on motion, smart passing, and high IQ - the 14 Spurs, Heat this year, and yes, even the Warriors. I could write a few hundred words on these competing styles, but neither would really be possible without the rule changes that broke offenses open in the late 00s.
 
foucault87 said:
Hard to watch games that happened before I was born.

But yes, midrange jumpers are always bad unless its a late shot clock bail out situation. The math on this is pretty clear and its why you see every team adopting Moreyball offense. A mediocre 3 pt shot attempt is always better than a mediocre 2 pt one. Why would you take less efficient shots? A proper offense today isn't forcing up shots out of the flow of the offense. That is the flow. We can argue about the aesthetics of it, but the math is very clear.
Click to expand...
You just made my point!!! How can you make a case of players not being good or not if you have never seen them play. I have the advantage of seeing both generations play.
And how is the three point shot more efficient when the top three point shooter is Seth Curry (not Steph) at 44% and the top FG shooters is Jokic at 60%, Durant at 58% and Gannis 49%!!! Quit while you’re ahead!
BTW three of best ballers in the league (Butler, Gannis and Rosen) live on the mid range shot.
 
Last edited:
Ohioplayer00 said:
And how is the three point shot more efficient when the top three point shooter is Seth Curry (Steph) at 44% and the top FG shooters is Jokic at 60%, Durant at 58% and Gannis 49%!!! Quit while you’re ahead!
Click to expand...

You may want to think about this and edit while you still have a chance....
 
Ohioplayer00 said:
You just made my point!!! How can you make a case of players not being good or not if you have never seen them play. I have the advantage of seeing both generations play.
And how is the three point shot more efficient when the top three point shooter is Seth Curry (Steph) at 44% and the top FG shooters is Jokic at 60%, Durant at 58% and Gannis 49%!!! Quit while you’re ahead!
BTW three of best ballers in the league (Butler, Gannis and Rosen) live on the mid range shot.
Click to expand...

The change in midrange shot distribution is actually fascinating. It is basically only a shot stars take now. It is still efficient for someone with high usage to take a few 18 footers, along with their already high FT and 3pt rates. It is still an objectively bad shot, but if you are good enough, then sure you can take them (DDR, LMA, KD, Dirk). The main change is that all the long 2s that scrubs like Travis Outlaw used to take are just corner 3s now. Much more efficient. Point is, it makes the game more watchable when we aren't waiting for John Salmons to dribble the air out of the ball and take a fading 18 footer
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-14: "Time for Playoff Vengeance on Mickey"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:14: " Time for Playoff Vengeance on Mickey."
Top