Claims that modern players are continually getting bigger, stronger, faster, more athletic, etc.

I don't think it's controversial to say that modern NBA players could destroy most players from the '40s and '50s physically (and skills-wise too, tbh), but I see stuff like this brought out pretty often as sort of conventional wisdom. The most egregious one I can think of was an article arguing that Kobe was a better player than Jordan in part because the physical ability of Kobe's competition was much higher. Which seems like bullshit to me.

So I guess I'm curious about whether you think players are still getting better physically, and if so, is it because of a broader talent pool, better training, awesome designer steroids, or whatever.

it could be an illusion brought about by the more generous offensive rules that the NBA has put in place

like, you would assume that an increase in the raw physical ability would apply to both ends of the court - okay, players would be quicker on offense but they would be quicker on defense too.

I guess the claim is that greater physical ability = better overall performance. which is not at all clear to me in the same way it might be the case in, say, football

there's definitely a broader talent pool, and i'd imagine that better training, nutrition and surgical procedures are significant aids.

i don't watch much nba at all, but maybe the average current starter is rawer than in the near past, when most players spent more time in college?

in any case, i'm not sure that jordan's greatness necessarily relied on his physical talent.

i mean handchecking rules probably have changed the emphasis on what skills are valuable, especially for perimeter players. but i'm not sure they've changed who's actually in the nba other than at the margins. like maybe steve francis has a better career if he came into the nba now instead of a decade+ ago, but andre miller is still a pretty good player in the era of roses and westbrooks. xp

and it could be that player training has broken down somewhat, so that players end up being more reliant on raw physical ability

kobe and jordan both played against shaq who's the biggest ever so the argument is scientifically null & void

players have had 50 inch verticals since at least the early 80s, probably the 70s too.

who was it that first plucked a silver dollar off the top of the backboard while leaving change?

earl manigault?

pee wee kirkland?

i think it's true that players have generally gotten taller- partly just along with the general population and partly just with a larger pool of athletes playing basketball and taller athletes gravitating toward hoop- but not sure that means they're more 'athletic' really

main example i can think of is bill russell was what, 6'8" and was a pretty big center in his era. i think he'd still be a dominant athlete today but would probably end up a 4 instead

i'm disregarding a little bit the more recent trend toward slightly undersized 5s and 4s and the general tendency toward players about 6'4 to 6'8 ending up anywhere from pg to pf based on build and skills but i think the average team height is probably higher than 1950s-70s or so

I guess I'm only familiar with this argument from the NFL perspective where the claim is that stronger faster players lead to more injuries + concussions + brain trauma

dudes also definitely work out way more than even into the 80s citation tommy heinsohn checking out at halftime for a smoke and bird not really ever lifting weights

but overall yeah i think even if we've kind of hit a plateau of the average player's athleticism i think the training around them is still getting better- the phx staff must really be on to some new injury-prevention stuff and that crazy workout thing miami's three did this summer still seem like new ideas

FYI ppl (in the US) are getting shorter, in general

soon the nba will be dominated by dutchmen

hah, i actually did look for photos of bill russell standing next to more recent players before starting this thread.

he looks like he's maybe a couple inches shorter than kg
http://i.cdn.turner.com/sivault/si_online/covers/images/2008/0630_large.jpg

though he's also in his 70s

i do remember stuff in Playing for Keeps about tim grover working with mj in the early 90s on strength training to make him more durable, though it made him stronger for other purposes too. stuff like that probably has worked its way around the league since then.

A good book to read that touches on this subject is Full House by Stephen Jay Gould. My take would be that the argument doesn't hold water. There is a natural ceiling to human physical capacity, based on both physiology and physics. I don't care how scientifically you train, the potential gains are not unlimited.

With modern sports what has tended to happen is that the money rewards have increased to the point where it is worthwhile for every athlete to apply the best techniques, and so to capture as much of his potential as possible, in order to get a position in the league. The competition is cutthroat. However, this competitive trend raise the ceiling only a small amount, while raising the floor a much larger amount.

iow, Wilt and Russell would still be near the top of the league, but they could not dominate as much as they did in their era. In regard to the OP, Kobe is and Jordan was about as near to the ceiling as a player can get. Kobe might have to work just a bit harder on the floor to get an open look, but that doesn't raise his abilities over Jordan's.