adminNEW YORK. — I was wondering whether the NBA had better “big men” in the 1990s than now or have they become an endangered species?
Where are the true “big men” of the game? Maybe the “bigs” of today aren’t big enough or skilled enough anymore?
Are college coaches not training “bigs” because they don’t know how to equip them with the skills they need to remain relevant in today’s game? Have coaches totally given up on the impact of the big men?
In the 90s, the “bigs” were faster, taller, better and more skilful.
They were the MVPs, the highest paid and always the first picks in the draft.
Players like Shaquille O’Neal and Nate Robinson led the league in scoring, Karl Malone scored more points than any player back then, even more than Michael Jordan.
Dikembe Mutombo and Alonzo Mourning led the league in total blocks, while perhaps no one was as domineering as Hakeem Olajuwon.
Don’t get me wrong here – most of today’s NBA players are still big, but the dominant players don’t come in the kind of packages we had in the 90s.
Players of the 1990s were over seven feet tall and possessed sheer athleticism beyond their massive frames that it took the exceptional talents of gifted players like Magic Johnson and Michael Jordan to make the headlines – otherwise, it was always about the big men.
Think of the likes of San Antonio’s athletic and big David Robinson who could run, jump, block shots and had a huge presence in the paint or Houston’s skilful Hakeem Olajuwon, whose footwork was better than that of a salsa dancer.
Or who can forget the legendary Shaq?
Talk about power, strength, athleticism and brute force.
All the above mentioned players dominated the game and their achievements and accolades speak volumes of their impact on the sport.
Every team has had some “big man” at some point. Utah had Carl Malone, in Denver there was Mutombo, Seattle could count on Shawn Kemp, New York had Patrick Ewing and Charlotte Alonzo Mourning.
It was always the battle of the big men in the 90s, but nowadays it would appear that their role and influence in the game have become less important or perhaps the other players have learnt how to neutralise their influence? What do you think?
Where did it all go wrong?
My opinion is that true centres have become less important to the league. Today, a good inside big man is less valuable because most teams like closers and big-time shooters.
Centres today have developed a perimeter game also. I believe the expansion of their game is what makes centres better because they can step out to mid-point range and take the shot instead of always having to pound it inside.
During the last few years, the league has moved away from the traditional play of basketball, which featured slow steady play and a big guy in the middle.
These days, smaller teams with high octane and exciting offenses like the Los Angeles Clippers, known as the Lob City, are playing a new kind of basketball above the rim, with dazzling alley-hoop dunks and sensational highly talented point guards making tons of no-look passes.
Teams like that have no use for a slow centre, who simply wants to get out in the open and run.
However, I strongly believe that the future of the NBA is in the return of the centres in the form of these young athletes. I believe that there has been yet another shift in how the game is being played.
The Chicago Bulls are trying to get slower offensively, as can be seen with the new addition of centre Andrew Bynum on trade.
The Indiana Pacers are one of the best teams in the east because of a dominant centre in Roy Hibbert.
The Houston Rockets are having a beautiful season and will be back in the playoff because of their centre, Dwight Howard.
So, in as much as the game has progressed to force a change from the old-school ways surely a good centre makes the world of difference in the game of basketball?
In the end I guess only time will tell. — SuperSport.
Online Reporter