"But superheavyweights back then were BAD!"

I’ll take a shot:

For one thing, youth sports is much bigger now than 100 years ago — when whatever youth sports took place happened on the sandlot. So there’s actual practice and drills which enhance coordination and muscle memory. And those who excel athletically are thus identified at a younger age and a good percentage of them get more advanced training in all facets of sports.

Fewer people, in the U.S. at least, are going into boxing than there were in the 1920s, 30s, 40s and so on, but those that do probably played more organized sports earlier and those who box get much more early training as amateurs than typically happened then. You didn’t see a lot of guys in the older days with 100 or more amateur fights like you do now.

Then of course there’s the end of segregation and the access to sports by more Black athletes — and athletes is an operative word here. More Black fighters (in the U.S. especially) took up boxing out of poverty and necessity in the older days, whereas now aptitude plays a part. If 100 inner-city youth walk into a boxing gym and try it out in a year, the ones who stay are probably the ones who are more athletic and have more early success.

Then of course there’s weight training, nutrition and such. I did a quick google search and the average American female today weighs as much as the average male of the 1960s — some of that is we’re a fat, lazy society but there’s also just larger people and almost anyone these days has been introduced to some level of athletics and training at an earlier age.

With heavyweights, we’re seeing an emerging generation that took up boxing later after excelling to some degree in other sports: Deontay Wilder was on a basketball scholarship and started boxing at like 18 or 19, there are more former football players who try boxing later, etc.

 

I do, although I wouldn't call it "extraoridinary". The biggest difference is not really related to athleticism, but to development of skills required in different environment with different rules.

I never denied that the NBA is more talented than ever though.

 

Big men "fighting small" and ceding much of their size advantages, and little guys doing whatever it is you're getting at.

 

It's always the most overlooked aspect of these comparisons, I agree.

 

The only centers who can’t shoot in the NBA these days are specialists like shot-blockers utilized in certain situations (and they are also explosively athletic) and what Charles Barkley called ‘the NBA’s welfare program for 7-foot white men — there’s one on the end of every bench.’ Those guys can eat up a few minutes and catch a few fouls but that’s about the limit of their utility.

The pure post player is becoming extinct.

 

That was always the case though. You couldn't never be a star without any skills outside of size.

Outside of Wilt and Shaq (massive physical outliers), no pure post player was ever a superstar. You always needed far more than that.

 

So putting aside the outliers from each era, you don't think that today's NBA teams are on average significantly more athletically gifted than their predecessors from the 50s and 60s?

 

How so? How would you describe the skillset for fighting a bigger man who gives up his height and reach advantages, exactly?

 

You introduced the superstar to the discussion (I’d include Kareem Abdul-Jabbar with the two you mentioned) but those with only pure post skills were more sought-after and employable in the NBA a couple of generations ago. A Luke Longley who played center for Michael Jordan’s Chicago Bulls wouldn’t play today unless he developed a long-range jumpshot.

For decades, literally every NBA team had a starting center with back-to-the-basket post skills. Now if you see a guy post up it’s probably a 6-9 guard who has a couple of inches on the guy guarding him.

Today’s forwards are as big as yesterday’s centers. Today’s guards are, in many cases, as large as yesterday’s forwards.

 

It depends on what you mean by "significantly". I think there is a visible difference, but it's not as drastic as many people believe.

 

Yeah, but a lot of that has to do with rules changes which were not related to gradual improvement of players. Luc Longley was never a post player by the way.

That's not true. You had a lot of centers who didn't play in the post. Basketball was always very varied sport, full of different styles.

Or Joel Embiid, who is definitely not a PG.

Centers are the smallest since the late 1950s.

That's also not true, players are shorter on average than ever since the late 1950s.

 

The number of 3-pointers taken by 7-footers has gone up 231% in 10 years. The are no more post players in the traditional sense.