Would college basketball be better if they banned the dunk? | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Would college basketball be better if they banned the dunk?

Status
Not open for further replies.
So dunking the ball is the reason big men are less skilled today than 20 or 30 years ago? Is that also the reason we see a lot less 7 foot power players in todays game?
 
Devland, wtf are you talking about in this thread? You're embarassing yourself.
 
You guys are a funny bunch. Some of you are extremely simple minded.
 
Devland said:
When the dunk was banned in the past , Players took a lot more work at developing moves around the basket. Kareem's would have never developed the sky hook if dunking was allowed. So in some ways yes players would be more skilled. I understand why people like the dunk. It is a much more "look at me" society now. I would like to see more technical fouls for hanging onto the rim though.
Expand ...

That Kareem example would be a great point...if it was true.
 
.-.
CTBasketball said:
Polycom we're not simple minded. This is like saying to your wife, "I think we should ban sex."

Its anarchy. I won't allow it.
Expand ...

Dunking is far from the best part of basketball....this is like saying to your wife "We should ban HJs" with the idea in mind that it'll improve the sex.

Just need to look at it from a different light.
 
polycom said:
In relation to UConn however I think it would be excellent for Amida to learn how to play in the post if he couldn't just catch the alley all day.
Expand ...

While we're at it, let's ban Gibbs from shooting the three. Make him learn how to play in the post by only counting dunks. Players in different positions have different strengths and the ability to get in position for dunks is not an inferior skill.

The alley oops aren't stopping Brimah from developing as a more well-rounded offensive player. There's nothing preventing him from posting opponents up or shooting from 15 feet (which he demonstrated more last season). Banning dunks would just lead to less excitement and more anticlimactic finishes.
 
I'll go modern era for you guys. Larry Bird was not allowed to dunk in high school and the beginning of his college career is there anyone in today's game that has the moves around the basket he did? Bob Lanier? Bob McAdoo? on the college level Tony Hanson? Toby Kimball? Look I'm not against the dunk. That was a boneyard reading comprehension issue (surprise). The original poster just asked a question and I responded with my opinion. I said "So in some ways yes players would be more skilled". Not that I dislike the dunk. I have enjoyed UConn games before and after the dunk rule. So should I erase all my pre-dunk UConn memories? Some of those games were as exciting as the more recent games. Except for the Perno era, UConn Basketball wasn't as bad as some people here think. And I liked Perno as a player. I actually feel bad for him. He was a hero as a player and coaching didn't work out for him so he caught some guff from the fans. I admit that caused me concern when Ollie was hired. I'm glad history didn't repeat itself.
 
Devland said:
When the dunk was banned in the past , Players took a lot more work at developing moves around the basket. Kareem's would have never developed the sky hook if dunking was allowed. So in some ways yes players would be more skilled. I understand why people like the dunk. It is a much more "look at me" society now. I would like to see more technical fouls for hanging onto the rim though.
Expand ...

Were you watching UConn yet when we had one Jerome Dyson?
 
.-.
Devland said:
I'll go modern era for you guys. Larry Bird was not allowed to dunk in high school and the beginning of his college career is there anyone in today's game that has the moves around the basket he did? Bob Lanier? Bob McAdoo? on the college level Tony Hanson? Toby Kimball? Look I'm not against the dunk. That was a boneyard reading comprehension issue (surprise). The original poster just asked a question and I responded with my opinion. I said "So in some ways yes players would be more skilled". Not that I dislike the dunk. I have enjoyed UConn games before and after the dunk rule. So should I erase all my pre-dunk UConn memories? Some of those games were as exciting as the more recent games. Except for the Perno era, UConn Basketball wasn't as bad as some people here think. And I liked Perno as a player. I actually feel bad for him. He was a hero as a player and coaching didn't work out for him so he caught some guff from the fans. I admit that caused me concern when Ollie was hired. I'm glad history didn't repeat itself.
Expand ...
Yes, I've seen better people around the the basket than Bird. Lanier and McAdoo were before my time but I'm pretty sure there are guys that have been better around the rim than them. Were you serious about Tony Hanson and Toby Kimball?
 
Seems like a decent idea for practice maybe. By the way, what was the rationale for not allowing dunking?
 
I'm not for banning the dunk. But there certainly is a bit of the "look at me" to it. I don't particularly notice players thumping their own chests or mugging for the camera after making a lay up.

What makes the Hamilton to Brimah type play fun to watch is as much the overall execution. What is really amazing to watch is the unexpected dunk, usually by a forward or guard who suddenly explode to the rim in traffic, like Purvis's incredible move last year, against whom I don't remember but I think it was #1 on Sports Centers top 10.
 
Eskapeesto said:
The popularity of dunking is related to a culture of selfies and social media? Really? Other than sounding like something an old curmudgeon might write in an op-ed column, is there anything to back that up?

Bowers+(4).jpg
Expand ...

As an offical old curmudgeon, I take offense to that statement. Well, as a curmudgeon, I take offense to most everything, but aside from that, this statement really torques me off! I love the game played above the rim.

Don't lump all us old curmudgeons together, dammit!

Now get the duck_K off my GD lawn!
 
polycom said:
Listening to Bill Simmons podcast today, him and Chuck Klosterman brought up the idea of making big men better if they couldn't dunk in college. As a fan of basketball this would be wonderful, it would expose the athletes who can't shoot and it would force big men to actually learn how to play. It also may make the NBA better...

In relation to UConn however I think it would be excellent for Amida to learn how to play in the post if he couldn't just catch the alley all day.

Thoughts?
Expand ...
Been done before. Didn't help then. See Alcindor, Lew.
 
They banned the dunk. It made the game less exciting. If your goal is to make it more boring, banning the dunk helps.

If you don't like dunking, there is a league for you, the WNBA.
 
.-.
There's nothing stopping the bigs from learning these skills as the rules stand. They don't have to dunk if it doesn't make their team better, and many bigs have learned other ways to score than dunking as it is.
Dunks are more exciting, and if a player has an opportunity to dunk, it's way less exciting to watch them drop the ball in.
 
Devland said:
Where did I say I didn't like dunks? I just said players were a lot more talented around the basket when there was no dunking. You can be athletic and have great moves around the basket without dunking. See Shabazz Napier
Expand ...
Hairs split. This thread is still ridiculous.
 
And the "look at me" mentality? So what, young athletes want to be noticed for their cool and exciting plays? Of course they do, everyone wants recognition when their hard work pays off and they're able to do something cool. Not to mention, you should get used to it because everyone can watch clips of people doing cool dunks, Steph Curry making cool plays, people showing off their skill in all kinds of ways all over the internet now. It's a way to build a name for yourself; executives in basketball notice, basketball fans who could buy your jersey notice, and so do women. Boom.
 
Chicks dig a big throw down. Layups, while fine and dandy, get you nothing. /end thread
 
Its amazing that this discussion mostly devolved into a polarizing name-calling fest. It is a theoretical basketball question, not pending NCAA legislation you need to campaign against.

Because NDakotaHusky asked; The dunk was banned (after Alcindor's 1st yr on 'varsity') literally because Lew Alcindor was so good that IF he had been allowed to dunk in college UCLA would have won 3/3 championships with him MORE easily. There is almost no modern equivalent in the men's game unless we retroactively banned Christian Laettner for being a dick. I guess Breanna Stewart is on the verge of accomplishing dominance in the women's game, however I think it is more of a team thing than solely her dominance (Taurasi was probably more individually dominant, but I digress).

I like Devland's point about Bird and I think that's the best combo answer. Banning the dunk for all players would definitely make the game less fun and likely decrease scoring due to the missed bunnies like Mano said. That's the last thing the game needs right now. However, for any one individual with NBA aspirations it could be a skill-increasing move to not dunk and work on perfecting other moves around the basket. Brimah might not be the best example as a borderline NBA player, but if a very-skilled sure-fire NBA bound yet earth-bound (think Zach Randolph) college player decided not to dunk this could absolutely help that player better develop
Hard to do this though as you can't just play 90% and be effective at basketball, it requires full effort all the time. Still anyone who's played has likely tried shooting with their off-hand more in non-critical games, worked on driving to their weak side etc...

So I think conceptually it can be productive for an individual, but because it'd bring down entertainment and quality of play for 3,000 players to help maybe 6 of them at the NBA level it is nowhere near worth considering.
 
intlzncster said:
Chicks dig a big throw down. Layups, while fine and dandy, get you nothing. /end thread
Expand ...

Yeah things have changes. Floppy hair and 6 straight jump shots from 22 get you nothing anymore. Game blows now! :oops:
 
.-.
Devland said:
How about banning Women's Basketball and other non-athletic sports such as NASCAR and baseball? Then there would be a lot more room on TV for real sports like NCAA football, NFL , NBA. NCAA men's basketball and some hunting shows sprinkled in. That would be a utopia.
Expand ...
Women's Basketball is a hobby, like Golf.
 
Dogdeacon said:
Its amazing that this discussion mostly devolved into a polarizing name-calling fest. It is a theoretical basketball question, not pending NCAA legislation you need to campaign against.

Because NDakotaHusky asked; The dunk was banned (after Alcindor's 1st yr on 'varsity') literally because Lew Alcindor was so good that IF he had been allowed to dunk in college UCLA would have won 3/3 championships with him MORE easily. There is almost no modern equivalent in the men's game unless we retroactively banned Christian Laettner for being a dick. I guess Breanna Stewart is on the verge of accomplishing dominance in the women's game, however I think it is more of a team thing than solely her dominance (Taurasi was probably more individually dominant, but I digress).

I like Devland's point about Bird and I think that's the best combo answer. Banning the dunk for all players would definitely make the game less fun and likely decrease scoring due to the missed bunnies like Mano said. That's the last thing the game needs right now. However, for any one individual with NBA aspirations it could be a skill-increasing move to not dunk and work on perfecting other moves around the basket. Brimah might not be the best example as a borderline NBA player, but if a very-skilled sure-fire NBA bound yet earth-bound (think Zach Randolph) college player decided not to dunk this could absolutely help that player better develop
Hard to do this though as you can't just play 90% and be effective at basketball, it requires full effort all the time. Still anyone who's played has likely tried shooting with their off-hand more in non-critical games, worked on driving to their weak side etc...

So I think conceptually it can be productive for an individual, but because it'd bring down entertainment and quality of play for 3,000 players to help maybe 6 of them at the NBA level it is nowhere near worth considering.
Expand ...

Have you ever actually watched Zach Randolph play? He's incredibly skilled around the basket, most of his shots are not dunks. Could you have picked a worse example to make your point - I don't think so. Let talk about Jahlil Okafor - he has incredible low post moves and skills - if he can do it, then what does dunking have to do with player development?
 
Zach Randolph.jpg
Onions said:
Have you ever actually watched Zach Randolph play? He's incredibly skilled around the basket, most of his shots are not dunks. Could you have picked a worse example to make your point - I don't think so. Let talk about Jahlil Okafor - he has incredible low post moves and skills - if he can do it, then what does dunking have to do with player development?
Expand ...
That is exactly why I picked Zach Randolph !?

Is this him ;)
 
Last edited:
Dogdeacon said:
Its amazing that this discussion mostly devolved into a polarizing name-calling fest. It is a theoretical basketball question, not pending NCAA legislation you need to campaign against.

Because NDakotaHusky asked; The dunk was banned (after Alcindor's 1st yr on 'varsity') literally because Lew Alcindor was so good that IF he had been allowed to dunk in college UCLA would have won 3/3 championships with him MORE easily. There is almost no modern equivalent in the men's game unless we retroactively banned Christian Laettner for being a dick. I guess Breanna Stewart is on the verge of accomplishing dominance in the women's game, however I think it is more of a team thing than solely her dominance (Taurasi was probably more individually dominant, but I digress).

I like Devland's point about Bird and I think that's the best combo answer. Banning the dunk for all players would definitely make the game less fun and likely decrease scoring due to the missed bunnies like Mano said. That's the last thing the game needs right now. However, for any one individual with NBA aspirations it could be a skill-increasing move to not dunk and work on perfecting other moves around the basket. Brimah might not be the best example as a borderline NBA player, but if a very-skilled sure-fire NBA bound yet earth-bound (think Zach Randolph) college player decided not to dunk this could absolutely help that player better develop
Hard to do this though as you can't just play 90% and be effective at basketball, it requires full effort all the time. Still anyone who's played has likely tried shooting with their off-hand more in non-critical games, worked on driving to their weak side etc...

So I think conceptually it can be productive for an individual, but because it'd bring down entertainment and quality of play for 3,000 players to help maybe 6 of them at the NBA level it is nowhere near worth considering.
Expand ...


Banning the dunk didn't make Bird a better player in the paint. Being a basketball savant, a 15 inch vertical, and the foot speed of a 3 legged turtle all but eliminated his need to dunk a lot.

I think the growth in importance of the 3-point shot had a bigger impact on the development of great post players. Once upon a time, if you were taller than 6'9" you were going to play in the paint, either willing or by force. If Kevin Garnett, Kevin Durant, or Dirk had been born 15 - 25 years earlier some coach would have tied them to the block until the forgot about shooting. The growth of the 3-pointer and everyone wanting to shoot them hurt post development. If you shoot 10/20 in the paint you get 20 points. If you shoot 8/20 from Three you get 24 points. Less physical toll and more points while being less efficient. Why wouldn't you develop a long range shot instead of a good drop-step?
 
Would this board be better off if this conversation was banned?...YES
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,239
Messages
4,559,331
Members
10,447
Latest member
Theuconnguy


Top Bottom