This raises an interesting question, though. Records in all individual sports are better than before. In swimming or track and field, I can think of no record that is 20 or 30 years old. Bob Beamon's longjump record stood for a long time, but has since been broken. Certainly training methods and changes in technique are a major factor, but it is likely that other factors are at work as well--improved nutrition, genetics, etc.--that have led to improved physical performance. Example: Mark Spitz set 7 world records in the '72 Olympics. His winning times wouldn't have cracked the top 100 at US Olympic Trials in 2016. In fact, in some events, he wouldn't have won the California State high school meet.
You might find this interesting since you discussed records:
The elite athlete of every era would adapt and use the training techniques /rules of the game of that era to be elite in the period they are in. (if a time machine was an option to fast forward or rewind time)
think of it.. 6 or 7 billion people, and each decade, there are 7 or so players that are better than 7 billion other people at the time... each of those 7 players are better than 1 billion other people in the world when they competed in their sport.
Each if placed in a different era would figure out how to excel using that era's training/science available for that period....
The debate how a player of years past would do today..... continues on... my view is they all would be elite of any era would be elite...
goBears
This raises an interesting question, though. Records in all individual sports are better than before. In swimming or track and field, I can think of no record that is 20 or 30 years old. Bob Beamon's longjump record stood for a long time, but has since been broken. Certainly training methods and changes in technique are a major factor, but it is likely that other factors are at work as well--improved nutrition, genetics, etc.--that have led to improved physical performance. Example: Mark Spitz set 7 world records in the '72 Olympics. His winning times wouldn't have cracked the top 100 at US Olympic Trials in 2016. In fact, in some events, he wouldn't have won the California State high school meet.
Mike Powell's record has officially stood for longer than Beamon's. Beamon's was set in 1968, and Powell beat it 23 years later in 1991, which was 27 years ago. Deadspin had an article during the 2016 Olympics theorizing that his record will never be broken:
Quote:
The answer may be very simple: that Mike Powell's record has edged against the limit of human potential, leading fewer athletes to take interest in ever challenging ita negative feedback loop of fewer elite athletes competing in long jump and less television time being dedicated to it.
No one has really come close to Powell's record since he set it.
Excellent post, SFCity. I would only add that I think to a degree, it is cyclical. With the Warriors and Spurs (and to a lesser extent the Celtics) we are moving back toward a more interesting game. And while the game in Wilt's day was fantastic, the Bad Boy Pistons era was almost unwatchable.
The elite athlete of every era would adapt and use the training techniques /rules of the game of that era to be elite in the period they are in. (if a time machine was an option to fast forward or rewind time)
think of it.. 6 or 7 billion people, and each decade, there are 7 or so players that are better than 7 billion other people at the time... each of those 7 players are better than 1 billion other people in the world when they competed in their sport.
Each if placed in a different era would figure out how to excel using that era's training/science available for that period....
The debate how a player of years past would do today..... continues on... my view is they all would be elite of any era would be elite...
goBears
I agree with your point as an idea, or a hypothetical, but it would not be practical, even with your time machine to transport players forward or back into different eras. The reason is that a player can not just unlearn all that he has learned playing a sport from perhaps the age of 10 to the age of say, 25. Of those 15 or so years, he has been practicing, drilling, scrimmaging, and playing games in competition to learn and perfect the techniques and skills to the extent that they resulted in him earning the status of an elite player. I don't think an elite dribbler of the past like Nate Archibald, who executed changing hands with his dribble by making small adjustments in his dribble to change the angle in which the ball hit the floor, along with head and shoulder fakes, and then be asked to join today's NBA, where that move is not used as often to change hands as carrying the ball to execute a crossover. It would likely take him a few years to become considered elite at today's crossover, and he would be playing against defenders every night who have had 15 or so years of experience in defending against the crossover.
Conversely, an elite dribbler of today like Stephan Curry, if he were transported back into an earlier era where palming or carrying the ball was not allowed, would also have problems becoming an elite player. Different problems. Curry would have to break a habit, the habit of carrying the ball when executing a change of hands on the dribble, because it would not be allowed under the rules of the day. This is a skill that Curry has likely been practicing for 15 or so years, and now in the heat of games, he would have to control all the instincts he has played with, to not carry the ball. Otherwise, he would be whistled for palming the ball, and his team would lose the ball to his opponent.
I think that in terms of dribbling, Nate Archibald would have an easier time of adapting to the modern game, but that is not a sure thing. Both Archibald and Curry have enough other skills and athleticism to be able to very good, maybe even elite, players in other eras. Curry is an elite three point shooter, but there was no three point shot in the earlier era of say the 1970's. Coaches always liked to have players who could shoot from that range, but only once in while to keep defenses honest, because the shot was only worth two points and the percentages were more in the shooter's favor if he shot more from closer range. Coaches would not give Curry the green light to shoot 10-15 threes in a game in those days. I think any elite players of today would have difficulty becoming an elite player in early eras, simply because the rules were more restrictive back then. They would be handcuffed. The old-time elite player wishing to play today and be an elite player, would enjoy all the freedom of the modern rules, but whether he could learn the new skills and also match the athleticism of the modern elite players is questionable. In the end, I just don't think the players of eras can be compared. The game was so different long ago.
Nate (Tiny) Archibald led the NBA in 1968 in scoring and assists, one of only two players to have done that, I think. 34 points and 11.4 assists. Here is a video of Tiny demonstrating the
Here is another guy who could bounce a ball pretty well, Earl Monroe. He executed most of his crossovers with his back to the basket! He gets away with a little palming here:
I give up. I've tried pasting the URLs, inserting the URLs, etc. I have a lot to learn from the youngsters here. Sorry. If you are interesting in seeing the videos of Nate Tiny Archibald dribbling and Earl the Pearl doing some magic with the ball, then google "Nate Archibald dribble video", and "Earl Monroe mixtape video".
I give up. I've tried pasting the URLs, inserting the URLs, etc. I have a lot to learn from the youngsters here. Sorry. If you are interesting in seeing the videos of Nate Tiny Archibald dribbling and Earl the Pearl doing some magic with the ball, then google "Nate Archibald dribble video", and "Earl Monroe mixtape video".
You got it right SF. The videos work on both your posts
I give up. I've tried pasting the URLs, inserting the URLs, etc. I have a lot to learn from the youngsters here. Sorry. If you are interesting in seeing the videos of Nate Tiny Archibald dribbling and Earl the Pearl doing some magic with the ball, then google "Nate Archibald dribble video", and "Earl Monroe mixtape video".
You got it right SF. The videos work on both your posts
That is weird. The videos were missing on both posts in both of my browsers, even when I logged out and logged back in. Now they miraculously appear. Wow. Anyway, you can see in the videos what some old players could do, even within the restrictive rules. Dribblers like Marques Haynes and Leon Hilliard of the Globetrotters could do even more with a ball. I remember attending the Examiner Basketball School for kids, run by Hank Luisetti. Hank invited Leon one time, gave him the ball and told the kids to see if they could steal it from him as he dribbled. He dribbled all over that gym, with 40-50 kids chasing him, and not one of us ever laid a hand on that ball as he dribbled it. If 50 kids tried to chase Stephen Curry dribbling around a gym today, with the freedom he has, it would be even harder for them to even touch the ball.
