Why do people always think if an older player played today they would be WAY better?

[atljonesbro]

I really don't understand the logic what so ever. So you think, "Oh he played in an era other than the current one, he must be better than everyone playing today."? There's no logic behind that at all. If you think players have gotten worse over time then you're sadly mistaken. That's completely backwards thinking. More of the aspects that make a player develop into what they become get BETTER over time and players learn BETTER ways to get better.

LET ME HIGHLIGHT THIS PART BEFORE SOMEONE SH1TS A COW. IM NOT SAYING ALL CURRENT PLAYERS ARE BETTER THAN OLDER PLAYERS OR OLDER PLAYERS ARE SCRUBS. IM SIMPLY SAYING YOUR NOSTALGIA AND HOMERISM OF ERAS MAKES NO SENSE.

[Colbertnation64]

It depends on the player. Wilt Chamberlain would be a poor mans Deandre Jordan according to idiots on here.

[Sarcastic]

In 2062, all the kids on ISH (vBulletin Version 3.5.4), will be calling Lebron a scrub.

[Colbertnation64]

In 2062, all the kids on ISH (vBulletin Version 3.5.4), will be calling Lebron a scrub.
That's why you must join me on a mission to post on this board or whatever the largest basketball board is at the time when I'm 60+. They will be forced to listen to my stories about Kobe until they accept that he's the best

[JMT]

Yet another of these threads from you?

Your other thread was full of sweeping generalizations about players, eras, and other posters. You were intolerant of anyone's opinion other than your own. You lumped all people of certain ages together, knowing nothing about them. You attributed the traits of a single poster to all that you assume are in that same age group.

Then you wonder why people don't think that you'd be a fair, thoughtful and unbiased judge of players?

Take a break. Don't post for a while. Look up "irony".

[atljonesbro]

Yet another of these threads from you?

Your other thread was full of sweeping generalizations about players, eras, and other posters. You were intolerant of anyone's opinion other than your own. You lumped all people of certain ages together, knowing nothing about them. You attributed the traits of a single poster to all that you assume are in that same age group.

Then you wonder why people don't think that you'd be a fair, thoughtful and unbiased judge of players?

Take a break. Don't post for a while. Look up "irony".
How about instead of a lecture you answer my question thanks.

[Kblaze8855]

So you think, "Oh he played in an era other than the current one, he must be better than everyone playing today."? There's no logic behind that at all.

Which is why nobody said it.

[CavaliersFTW]

I really don't understand the logic what so ever. So you think, "Oh he played in an era other than the current one, he must be better than everyone playing today."? There's no logic behind that at all. If you think players have gotten worse over time then you're sadly mistaken. That's completely backwards thinking. More of the aspects that make a player develop into what they become get BETTER over time and players learn BETTER ways to get better.

LET ME HIGHLIGHT THIS PART BEFORE SOMEONE SH1TS A COW. IM NOT SAYING ALL CURRENT PLAYERS ARE BETTER THAN OLDER PLAYERS OR OLDER PLAYERS ARE SCRUBS. IM SIMPLY SAYING YOUR NOSTALGIA AND HOMERISM OF ERAS MAKES NO SENSE.
Nobody says what your asserting. I think what's happening here is your misunderstanding peoples observations and discussions about how certain aspects of the game that have changed over time could benefit certain players from certain eras.

For example: This is a not a strong era for centers. Centers from the late 60's/early 70's or early 90's (two strong era's for centers) would have a field day against the pool of competition today. Nobody is saying all players from then are better than all players from now - it is only 1 specific part of the game that is being pointed out. Right now is a strong era for point guards, notice how you don't see people here making threads about K.C. Jones from the 60's being potentially better than Kyrie Irving? There's a reason for that. Your just not seeing the whole picture.

[atljonesbro]

Nobody says what your asserting. I think what's happening here is your misunderstanding peoples observations and discussions about how certain aspects of the game that have changed over time could benefit certain players from certain eras.

For example: This is a not a strong era for centers. Centers from the late 60's/early 70's or early 90's (two strong era's for centers) would have a field day against the pool of competition today. Nobody is saying all players from then are better than all players from now - it is only 1 specific part of the game that is being pointed out. Right now is a strong era for point guards, notice how you don't see people here making threads about K.C. Jones from the 60's being potentially better than Kyrie Irving? There's a reason for that. Your just not seeing the whole picture.
What I'm saying is people always say, "Man imagine is MJ played today he'd average 40 ppg" or "If Barkley played today he'd be MVP every year" stuff like that. It's extremely common on this forum.

[franchiez]

I think they would be worse.

[Calabis]

What I'm saying is people always say, "Man imagine is MJ played today he'd average 40 ppg" or "If Barkley played today he'd be MVP every year" stuff like that. It's extremely common on this forum.

Phil Jackson and Larry Brown said that shit, not us:roll:

[CavaliersFTW]

I think they would be worse.
http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/9483/negged.gif

[andgar923]

I'ma say it.

People insinuate/state that players from past eras would be better today because they were better.

Yeah

[abuC]

The great centers would be able to play in any era in my opinion, the skills that made Wilt/Kareem great would still allow them to get buckets today. I think wing play has advanced a lot though, can't really see a guy like Baylor putting up big numbers.

[CavaliersFTW]

The great centers would be able to play in any era in my opinion, the skills that made Wilt/Kareem great would still allow them to get buckets today. I think wing play has advanced a lot though, can't really see a guy like Baylor putting up big numbers.
Why not? What's so different about what he's doing vs what Lebron or Kobe does?

http://youtu.be/NseHzlD9rU0

[abuC]

Why not? What's so different about what he's doing vs what Lebron or Kobe does?

http://youtu.be/NseHzlD9rU0


LeBron is a lot bigger for starters, and Kobe clearly has a much more advanced handle and one on one moves. You put Baylor in a half court game with all these 6"8 to 6"10 SFs guarding him and how do you honestly think he'd do?

Centers have gotten much worse, but I feel wing players are much better.

[CavaliersFTW]

LeBron is a lot bigger for starters, and Kobe clearly has a much more advanced handle and one on one moves. You put Baylor in a half court game with all these 6"8 to 6"10 SFs guarding him and how do you honestly think he'd do?

Centers have gotten much worse, but I feel wing players are much better.
lol, how many 6-8 to 6-10 SF's are there in the NBA? 1? (Durant, 6-9). The rest have inflated list info and are no different in height than the guys he played in the 60s. Baylor was the same size as MWP, except he had unguardable fluidity and creativity offensively. Baylor is a blend of the fluidity of Kobe mixed with the power of Lebron. He's in between the two. U think a player built like that wouldn't put up numbers than you don't know basketball.

[abuC]

lol, how many 6-8 to 6-10 SF's are there in the NBA? 1? (Durant, 6-9). The rest have inflated list info and are no different in height than the guys he played in the 60s. Baylor was the same size as MWP, except he had unguardable fluidity and creativity offensively. Baylor is a blend of the fluidity of Kobe mixed with the power of Lebron. He's in between the two. U think a player built like that wouldn't put up numbers than you don't know basketball.

Inflated list info because they are listed with their shoes on, really? Also, he and Artest are not the same size, Ron's playing weight is 25-35lbs heavier than Baylor. I get that you romanticize these guys when you're making the vids, but I don't know how you can sit there and watch all that footage of Baylor and see that primitive handle and come to the conclusion he's a mix of Kobe and LeBron.

Just show me 1 perimeter guy today that is scoring 25+ppg with a game that resembles Baylors, and I mean with a really weak off-hand.

[CavaliersFTW]

Inflated list info because they are listed with their shoes on, really? Also, he and Artest are not the same size, Ron's playing weight is 25-35lbs heavier than Baylor. I get that you romanticize these guys when you're making the vids, but I don't know how you can sit there and watch all that footage of Baylor and see that primitive handle and come to the conclusion he's a mix of Kobe and LeBron.
Educate yourself

http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-pre-draft-measurements/

Draftexpress:

[QUOTE]Something you might notice is that up until sometime in the last 10-12 years, players were only measured without shoes at the main pre-draft camp. Players and various people who worked for teams had been complaining for years about barefoot measurements. Larry Johnson, the #1 overall pick in 1991 expressed his thoughts on the measurements after he came in an inch and a half below his listed height of 6’7”. "Ain't that pitiful?" Johnson said. "You don't go out there with your shoes off. Ain't that right?"

In this case, Larry Johnson being a 6’5

[abuC]

Educate yourself

http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-pre-draft-measurements/

Draftexpress:



And also, why is Dwight Howard gifted a 6-11 on NBA.com but only 6-10.25 in shoes (which may be from thicker shoes than he even plays in to begin with due to what is stated above). Why is Kevin Love gifted a 6-10 despite only being 6-7.75... is he wearing 2.25" shoes like a spice girl? C'mon man, there's no such thing as a consistent listing of players "in shoes" there never has been. Players just list whatever they want to list, and in this era players exaggerate a heck of a lot more than they did before the NBA became such a successful money machine. Players gotta keep their stocks high. But biologically players today aren't different than players then.


Shoes add inches to height, it's a variable, why does it bother you so much? Also, Dwight grew an inch after being drafted which is why he's listed at 6"11.

That really doesn't address how Baylor is supposed to score in todays league, I asked you to show me 1 perimeter player today that has put up 25+ppg with a crude handle like Baylors. I never said he'd be a scrub, I just said he wouldn't put up numbers like he did, perimeter play has advanced.

[CavaliersFTW]

Shoes add inches to height, it's a variable, why does it bother you so much? Also, Dwight grew an inch after being drafted which is why he's listed at 6"11.

That really doesn't address how Baylor is supposed to score in todays league, I asked you to show me 1 perimeter player today that has put up 25+ppg with a crude handle like Baylors. I never said he'd be a scrub, I just said he wouldn't put up numbers like he did, perimeter play has advanced.
U missing the point bro? U tried to assert players today are so much bigger than ones of his time. I'm pointing out to you that your wrong. P.S. Baylors handle isn't "crude" :roll:

Oh and MWP = 25ppg in '05. Nothing more needs said.

[magictricked]

Baylor had crude ball handling skills? Some people shouldn't be allowed to speak on things they have no clue about

[CavaliersFTW]

Shoes add inches to height, it's a variable, why does it bother you so much? Also, Dwight grew an inch after being drafted which is why he's listed at 6"11.

That really doesn't address how Baylor is supposed to score in todays league, I asked you to show me 1 perimeter player today that has put up 25+ppg with a crude handle like Baylors. I never said he'd be a scrub, I just said he wouldn't put up numbers like he did, perimeter play has advanced.
Entirely baseless, and not true at all :roll:

Andre Iguadala would not go out of his way to say that Bill Russell (in his 70's) was taller than Dwight Howard if Dwight had grown an inch. Howard was listed 6-11 immediately upon being selected, there was no gap between the draft and his 6-11 list height on NBA.com. He was listed 6-11 because that's what he wanted to be listed.

[abuC]

U missing the point bro? U tried to assert players today are so much bigger than ones of his time. I'm pointing out to you that your wrong. P.S. Baylors handle isn't "crude" :roll:

Oh and MWP = 25ppg in '05. Nothing more needs said.


He was 6"5, even if you add an inch and change for sneakers he's roughly the size of Andre Iguodala (SF), someone who isn't a prolific scorer and can't always get his own shot off. And his ball handling was crude when you're trying to draw a comparison to LeBron and Kobe, a mix of Kobe and LeBron would be the best player in the league by the way.



Really, Ron played 7 games that year, you know for the whole Palace thing, but apparently that didn't happen 50 years ago so you didn't know that.

[CavaliersFTW]

He was 6"5, even if you add an inch and change for sneakers he's roughly the size of Andre Iguodala (SF), someone who isn't a prolific scorer and can't always get his own shot off. And his ball handling was crude when you're trying to draw a comparison to LeBron and Kobe.


Really, Ron played 7 games that year, you know for the whole Palace thing, but apparently that didn't happen 50 years ago so you didn't know that.
My mistake on the MWP thing I didn't see he played only 7 games :oldlol:

But um.... Baylor is roughly the same height as Charles Barkley (PF), MJ (SG / SF), and Kobe (SG). and he's 1 inch taller than Wade (SG), and 6 inches taller than Iverson (PG) etc etc etc

6-5 players can flat out dominate offensively. Please, this discussion is ridiculous. Because he's 6-5 w/o shoes (MJ/Barkley/Kobe) he couldn't score today. :roll:

[abuC]

Entirely baseless, and not true at all :roll:

Andre Iguadala would not go out of his way to say that Bill Russell (in his 70's) was taller than Dwight Howard if Dwight had grown an inch. Howard was listed 6-11 immediately upon being selected, there was no gap between the draft and his 6-11 list height on NBA.com. He was listed 6-11 because that's what he wanted to be listed.

:rolleyes:


The Magic caught some heat for taking Howard over Emeka Okafor. But while Okafor has topped out at just under 6-10, Howard has grown an inch since the draft, arriving for training camp at right around 7-feet. "From what we understand, his growth plates still haven't closed, and there's continued growth to be expected," said coach Johnny Davis.

http://articles.nydailynews.com/2004-11-01/sports/18280029_1_lake-erie-johnny-davis-howard-over-emeka-okafor

An 18 year old kid growing, how shocking.

[magictricked]

"He was one of the most spectacular shooters the game has ever known", Baylor's longtime teammate Jerry West told HOOP magazine in 1992. "I hear people talking about forwards today and I haven't seen many that can compare with him."

Bill Sharman played against Baylor and coached him in his final years with the Lakers. "I say without reservation that Elgin Baylor is the greatest cornerman who ever played pro basketball", he told the Los Angeles Times at Baylor's retirement in 1971.

Tommy Hawkins, Baylor's teammate for six seasons and opponent for four (and later a basketball broadcaster) declared to the San Francisco Examiner that "pound for pound, no one was ever as great as Elgin Baylor." "Elgin certainly didn't jump as high as Michael Jordan", Hawkins told the San Francisco Examiner. "But he had the greatest variety of shots of anyone. He would take it in and hang and shoot from all these angles. Put spin on the ball. Elgin had incredible strength. He could post up Bill Russell. He could pass like Magic [Johnson] and dribble with the best guards in the league."

[abuC]

My mistake on the MWP thing I didn't see he played only 7 games :oldlol:

But um.... Baylor is roughly the same height as Charles Barkley (PF), MJ (SG / SF), and Kobe (SG). and he's 1 inch taller than Wade (SG), and 6 inches taller than Iverson (PG) etc etc etc

6-5 players can flat out dominate offensively. Please, this discussion is ridiculous. Because he's 6-5 w/o shoes (MJ/Barkley/Kobe) he couldn't score today. :roll:


Barkley was 270-280lbs, he's 1 of a kind.


And I don't understand why you keep listing guys who have more advanced one on one moves, the damn eye test look at Wade/Kobe/MJ and how they handle the ball in isolation, then go back and look at Baylor. It's just not the same, he was a small forward, you're talking about guys who are the same height as him that are shooting guards and are more fluid with better handles.

[KOBE143]

Players today are way way better than player of the past.. Old people like jlauber is still living in the past.. He and some of the older poster here can accept the fact that basketball back then was weak.. Players of the 60's will not even make the league or if ever they make it, they will become scrub at best..

[CavaliersFTW]

:rolleyes:



http://articles.nydailynews.com/2004-11-01/sports/18280029_1_lake-erie-johnny-davis-howard-over-emeka-okafor
My bad - the NY daily news says Dwight went from 6-9 to 7 feet tall now :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-wPViLyRfLeI/UD17AkJNi1I/AAAAAAAADj8/JS4qa8lgOtk/s800/01_howard_russesll.jpg

[eliteballer]

Baylor would probably be listed at 6-7 today.

[abuC]

My bad - the NY daily news says Dwight went from 6-9 to 7 feet tall now :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-wPViLyRfLeI/UD17AkJNi1I/AAAAAAAADj8/JS4qa8lgOtk/s800/01_howard_russesll.jpg


So, foreground vs background, damn dude you're starting to break down with troll like attempts.



Here they are on a more even plane -

http://www.slamonline.com/online/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/bill_russell_dwight_howard.jpg

[abuC]

By the way, I find it interesting that the Daily news isn't a viable source to you, but Chip McGee from the San Francisco Gazette circa 1963 saying Wilt could bench press a Soviet tank is a lot more believable.

[CavaliersFTW]

So, foreground vs background, damn dude you're starting to break down with troll like attempts.



Here they are on a more even plane -

http://www.slamonline.com/online/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/bill_russell_dwight_howard.jpg
Bill all hunkered down with Dwight 1 foot closer to the camera :roll: nice try

http://phillyburbs.csnphilly.com/02/24/12/Iguodala-makes-his-pitch-for-Magics-Howa/landing.html?blockID=657716

[QUOTE=Andre Iguodala]

[CavaliersFTW]

By the way, I find it interesting that the Daily news isn't a viable source to you, but Chip McGee from the San Francisco Gazette circa 1963 saying Wilt could bench press a Soviet tank is a lot more believable.
Drowning in defeat :lol

[abuC]

Bill all hunkered down with Dwight 1 foot closer to the camera :roll: nice try



:biggums:


Didn't you just try to post a picture of Russell much closer to the camera?

Also, when did Andre Iguodala become the lord of all things height related. Why are you so pressed too, Dwight growing an inch puts him at 6"11 in shoes, I have a source saying he grew an inch after getting drafted, all you have is Andre Iguodala's twitter feed.

I like how this has turned into an argument over Dwights height, and not the underlying issue which is Baylor would not be scoring 25+ppg, dude shot 43% for his career and you're trying to tell me he's gonna come into the league today and get buckets :coleman:

[abuC]

Drowning in defeat :lol:


You proved my point too, Andre Iguodala with the visual tape measure is a better source than Dwight's own team.

By the way, Chris Bosh was 6"11 1/2 in shoes and 6"10 1/4 without -


http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m1wadiijUe1qewi8do1_500.jpg

http://www.onemanfastbreak.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/usa_basketball_team.jpg

Dwight is 6"11 in shoes, deal with it.

[Colbertnation64]

ITT: Some guy with no idea on how travel rules have evolved through the years attempts to argue about stuff he's never researched.

[abuC]

ITT: Some guy with no idea on how travel rules have evolved through the years attempts to argue about stuff he's never researched.


:rolleyes:

We've seen these guys play in international ball with much more strict rules in regards to traveling and carrying, they still have advanced handles. Keep moving the goal posts though.

[CavaliersFTW]

:biggums:


Didn't you just try to post a picture of Russell much closer to the camera?

Also, when did Andre Iguodala become the lord of all things height related. Why are you so pressed too, Dwight growing an inch puts him at 6"11 in shoes, I have a source saying he grew an inch after getting drafted, all you have is Andre Iguodala's twitter feed.

I like how this has turned into an argument over Dwights height, and not the underlying issue which is Baylor would not be scoring 25+ppg, dude shot 43% for his career and you're trying to tell me he's gonna come into the league today and get buckets :coleman:
except that I have a source that claims he was only 6-9, and 6-10.25 in shoes + a player who says a 70 year old Bill Russell (who measured 6-9 and 5/8ths barefoot when young) is taller than Dwight Howard.

you have a source that claims he grew an inch to the full "7 feet tall" (funny, seeing as how he only ever measured 6-9... or at best, 6-10.25 "with the shoes he brought to draft camp") meaning said source never did any legit research in the first place to learn that Dwight never in fact measured to 6-11. That same 6-11 height that u tried to use as an excuse to say "well Dwight got listed 6-11 cause he grew an inch". No. Dwight listed 6-11 immediately cause players exaggerate their size to inflate their stock. That article wouldn't have come up with such a phony 6-11 to 7-0 claim to begin with if this wasn't true :oldlol: , they even tried to exaggerate his height further to 7-0 :oldlol: The article is straight up flawed from the get go. It aint credible bro.

The NBA, where players get bigger and bigger and bigger and bigger and bigger. On paper

[abuC]

except that I have a source that claims he was only 6-9, and 6-10.25 in shoes + a player who says he's taller than Dwight Howard

you have a source that claims he grew an inch to the full "7 feet tall" (funny, seeing as how he only ever measured 6-9... or at best, 6-10.25 "with the shoes he brought to draft camp") meaning said source never did any legit research in the first place to learn that Dwight never in fact measured to 6-11. That same 6-11 height that u tried to use as an excuse to say "well Dwight got listed 6-11 cause he grew into it". No. Dwight listed 6-11 immediately otherwise that article wouldn't have come up with such a phony number to begin with :oldlol: , and they even tried to exaggerate his height further to 7-0 :oldlol: The article is straight up flawed from the get go. It aint credible bro.

The NBA, where players get bigger and bigger and bigger and bigger and bigger. On paper


I only read the first sentence, apparently you stop growing at 18, and you have a learning disability that doesn't allow you to process the thought that they are listing his height with shoes on.

And instead of using a tape measure at the NBA Combine, they should just bring in Andre Iguodala.

[jstern]

I only read the title. Took sleeping pill and I'm too tired.

There's 2 reasons. For centers, it's the lack of quality centers in this era, so people assume that the Ewing's of the world will have an easier times not going up against the Olajuwon's of the world. When it comes to perimeter players, since the league change the rules to make it significantly better, and as a result it's what happened, people assume that the Drexler's of the world will also do better.

[CavaliersFTW]

I only read the first sentence, apparently you stop growing at 18, and you have a learning disability that doesn't allow you to process the thought that they are listing his height with shoes on.

And instead of using a tape measure at the NBA Combine, they should just bring in Andre Iguodala.
6-10.25? So that means he should have grown to the full 6-11.25 right?

Where in the article did it say that? To me it looks like it said 7 feet :roll:

Your drowning in defeat.

[abuC]

6-10.25? So that means he should have grown to the full 6-11.25 right?

Where in the article did it say that? To me it looks like it said 7 feet :roll:

Your drowning in defeat.


Reading comprehension isn't your strong point



arriving for training camp at right around 7-feet.

It didn't explicitly state he was 7 feet tall, just around there, Im right around 6"2......since I'm 6"1 and 3/4ths. I don't tell people I'm 6"2, just like he doesn't tell people he's 7 feet, hence he's listed at 6"11.

Have you finally understood such a daunting topic? You have no opinion on why he's taller than Chris Bosh in sneakers which says enough.

[CavaliersFTW]

Reading comprehension isn't your strong point




It didn't explicitly state he was 7 feet tall, just around there, Im right around 6"2......since I'm 6"1 and 3/4ths. I don't tell people I'm 6"2, just like he doesn't tell people he's 7 feet, hence he's listed at 6"11.

Have you finally understood such a daunting topic? No opinion on why he's taller than Chris Bosh in sneakers....
Yes, I understand that the NBA never learned how to round a decimal. They think that 6-10.25 = "6-11". And that Dwight grew an inch according to the NY post to the "full 7 feet".






Or






Dwight lied about his list height, and a poorly written obscure NY article states (based on nothing whatsoever) that Dwight grew an inch from his 6-11 height (which the editor thinks was his real height, despite it not being his real height) to "7 feet tall". Dwight is in fact, shorter than a 70+ year old Bill Russell. Who once listed only 6-9 (also untrue, but for different reasons) and is by now, probably barely over 6-9 himself - seeing as how when he was in his prime he was no more than 6-9 and 5/8ths. Keep drowning son. The NBA makes up list heights, it isn't based on "shoes". It isn't based on anything. It's inconsistent, it's whatever the player wants it to be. And in the past 30 years, players have exaggerated the number beyond reality a lot more so than the years prior.

[INDI]

I really don't understand the logic what so ever. So you think, "Oh he played in an era other than the current one, he must be better than everyone playing today."? There's no logic behind that at all. If you think players have gotten worse over time then you're sadly mistaken. That's completely backwards thinking. More of the aspects that make a player develop into what they become get BETTER over time and players learn BETTER ways to get better.

LET ME HIGHLIGHT THIS PART BEFORE SOMEONE SH1TS A COW. IM NOT SAYING ALL CURRENT PLAYERS ARE BETTER THAN OLDER PLAYERS OR OLDER PLAYERS ARE SCRUBS. IM SIMPLY SAYING YOUR NOSTALGIA AND HOMERISM OF ERAS MAKES NO SENSE.

Because most logical people take training into account. If Lebron played back in the days he would still have the mindset that he has but his skillset and style of play would look similar to that era.

If bill Russell played today it would be similar to Dwight. If Oscar played today, his game would look similar to the nets Jason Kidd with a better scoring ability etc...

[abuC]

Yes, I understand that the NBA never learned how to round a decimal. They think that 6-10.25 = "6-11". And that Dwight grew an inch according to the NY post to the "full 7 feet".






Or






Dwight lied about his list height, and a poorly written obscure NY article states (based on nothing whatsoever) that Dwight grew an inch from his 6-11 height (which the editor thinks was his real height, despite it not being his real height) to "7 feet tall". Dwight is in fact, shorter than a 70+ year old Bill Russell. Who is by now, probably barely over 6-9 himself - seeing as how when he was in his prime he was no more than 6-9 and 5/8ths. Keep drowning son.

Yeah, you definitely have a learning disability, mixed in with some tinfoil hat conspiracy theory stuff.

You won't address the obvious, which is he's taller than Bosh in sneakers, because that just destroys the point you're trying to make. You argue like a woman, talking about "winning" and being completely dishonest in doing so, posting pictures of Russell in the foreground with Dwight in the background, ignoring facts and just trying to "win" on some real bitch shit. If you're not even going to be objective I won't bother responding anymore.

[NumberSix]

I love how the depth of people analysis is "Oh, this is a weak era for centers".

Lol. You think it's just a coincidence that under 1 set of rules, centers dominated the league THEN as soon as the rules change, the are no dominant centers anymore? Just a coincidence? Really?

If past centers played today with the current rules, they'd mostly be worse than they were in their own eras, not better.

[Micku]

I love how the depth of people analysis is "Oh, this is a weak era for centers".

Lol. You think it's just a coincidence that under 1 set of rules, centers dominated the league THEN as soon as the rules change, the are no dominant centers anymore? Just a coincidence? Really?

If past centers played today with the current rules, they'd mostly be worse than they were in their own eras, not better.

I thought it was, but I don't think that's entirely the case.

The centers really started to go down hill around 1999ish. Shaq was the only dominate guy. He stayed like that for years and nobody came close to his level in the center position. All of the centers he competed against in the 90s, got old or suffered from injuries and retired shortly, and they couldn't compete with Shaq by time 2000. No other great center picked up the torch after Hakeem, David Robinson, and Ewing except for Shaq and Mourning, but Mourning was never the same again after 2000 too. Unless you count Duncan as a center. Who was the second and third best center in the early 00s where Shaq dominated? Then then compare that to the 90s.

Would those centers, and the centers in the 80s, dominate this era? I'm not hesitant to say yes, because who is really their competition besides D.Howard and Bynum? Would they average the same numbers is a different story. Depends on the situation I think. But no doubt they are more polish and have more offensive capability.

[abuC]

I love how the depth of people analysis is "Oh, this is a weak era for centers".

Lol. You think it's just a coincidence that under 1 set of rules, centers dominated the league THEN as soon as the rules change, the are no dominant centers anymore? Just a coincidence? Really?

If past centers played today with the current rules, they'd mostly be worse than they were in their own eras, not better.


Centers used to go to college and develop over the course of years -

Wilt - 4 years (2 years varsity)
Kareem - 4 years
Walton - 4 years
Hakeem - 3 years
Robinson - 4 years
Ewing - 4 years
Robinson - 4 years
Shaq - 2 years
Rik Smits - 4 years
Brad Daughtery - 4 years
Alonzo Mourning - 4 years


Compare that to guys in the league now, the guys with the most polished post games are almost all foreigners today, with a few exceptions. Yeah Bynum has a nice post game, but he also had a tutor spend time with him and help him develop.

It's not the rules, we're only 5 years removed from Yao averaging 25 a game.

[DaHeezy]

I really don't understand the logic what so ever. So you think, "Oh he played in an era other than the current one, he must be better than everyone playing today."? There's no logic behind that at all. If you think players have gotten worse over time then you're sadly mistaken. That's completely backwards thinking. More of the aspects that make a player develop into what they become get BETTER over time and players learn BETTER ways to get better.

LET ME HIGHLIGHT THIS PART BEFORE SOMEONE SH1TS A COW. IM NOT SAYING ALL CURRENT PLAYERS ARE BETTER THAN OLDER PLAYERS OR OLDER PLAYERS ARE SCRUBS. IM SIMPLY SAYING YOUR NOSTALGIA AND HOMERISM OF ERAS MAKES NO SENSE.


I think where you're going wrong with this is the same way Niquesports tends to bash on the youngins for not recognizing the past, you seem very narrow minded to the fact that the older generation is qualified to make those arguments. As fast as Niquesports discredits the younger POV you get your peacock feathers up when the oldies reminice about the past and validate it's greatness.

To state there is no logic behind older players having the abilty to be greater in todays era is a very ignorant statement. As much as you may be right, you will NEVER know, and that's where debate is healthy. The different eras are relevant to being on a level playing field. Sports in any genre is about the science of improving. They had the resources they had then, the resources are much better now. You're relevant to who your competition is. Does that not sound logical to you?

Put it this way, Alexander Graham Bell never invented an iphone. Does that make Steve Jobs smarter than him? No, but we also can't say that maybe Jobs could have invented the phone in Graham Bells day. That may not be a solid foundation to compare with but it is somewhat the point.

[tmacattack33]

Because most logical people take training into account. If Lebron played back in the days he would still have the mindset that he has but his skillset and style of play would look similar to that era.

If bill Russell played today it would be similar to Dwight. If Oscar played today, his game would look similar to the nets Jason Kidd with a better scoring ability etc...

Yes. I agree. You are using good predictive logic here.

And if you go further, using some more good predictive logic, you will realize that since today's population is larger than it was in 1970 and a higher percentage of people are playing basketball, today's talent pool is a lot larger than it was in the past, which makes today's players proportionally better.

[NewYorkNoPicks]

I really don't understand the logic what so ever. So you think, "Oh he played in an era other than the current one, he must be better than everyone playing today."? There's no logic behind that at all. If you think players have gotten worse over time then you're sadly mistaken. That's completely backwards thinking. More of the aspects that make a player develop into what they become get BETTER over time and players learn BETTER ways to get better.

LET ME HIGHLIGHT THIS PART BEFORE SOMEONE SH1TS A COW. IM NOT SAYING ALL CURRENT PLAYERS ARE BETTER THAN OLDER PLAYERS OR OLDER PLAYERS ARE SCRUBS. IM SIMPLY SAYING YOUR NOSTALGIA AND HOMERISM OF ERAS MAKES NO SENSE.


What youre saying is partially true but Certain eras are indeed weak eras or have rules/lacked rules that might have benefitted or negatively effected specific players.

For example Allen Iverson benefitted from the hand check rules which limited a physically stronger perimeter defender from imposing his strength on a guy like AI.

Another example was Wilt playing in an era of 6"7 centers. You can also look at a guy like Bynum and realize he wouldnt be as highly valued in the 90s as he is today; guys like Ewing, Hakeem, Shaq etc would make him look very average in comparison.

So certain players yes they may fit better/ worse depending on the era, but that doesnt mean that player is a scrub

[JMT]

How about instead of a lecture you answer my question thanks.

Because your question is absurd and lacks a premise.

People don't always think if an older player etc.

They just don't. You're wrong. There's nothing to answer.

[GOBB]

What youre saying is partially true but Certain eras are indeed weak eras or have rules/lacked rules that might have benefitted or negatively effected specific players.

For example Allen Iverson benefitted from the hand check rules which limited a physically stronger perimeter defender from imposing his strength on a guy like AI.

Another example was Wilt playing in an era of 6"7 centers. You can also look at a guy like Bynum and realize he wouldnt be as highly valued in the 90s as he is today; guys like Ewing, Hakeem, Shaq etc would make him look very average in comparison.

So certain players yes they may fit better/ worse depending on the era, but that doesnt mean that player is a scrub

No he didnt. He killed players prior to the rule being enforced. What are you talkin about? Do your homework.

[greymatter]

My bad - the NY daily news says Dwight went from 6-9 to 7 feet tall now :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-wPViLyRfLeI/UD17AkJNi1I/AAAAAAAADj8/JS4qa8lgOtk/s800/01_howard_russesll.jpg

Not to disagree about growing 3", but using that pic as "evidence" that he's shorter than Russell is misguiding. Russell is about half a foot closer to the camera and the shot is a close up. You could make Chris Bosh look just as big as Andrew Bynum with similar camera angle.

[atljonesbro]

Because your question is absurd and lacks a premise.

People don't always think if an older player etc.

They just don't. You're wrong. There's nothing to answer.
Actually their is something to answer seeing as this thread had 4 pages and i've gotten multiple answers already. What forum are you on? This forum overrates past players more than anywhere i've ever seen. I guess you really wouldn't notice since your main concern is not to contribute but to post smart a$$ comments to try to up yourself and gain rep. There's always that one guy on every forum who thinks he's a fu.cking genius but never contributes and posts cocky smart a$$ comments everywhere. That would be you here.

[INDI]

Yes. I agree. You are using good predictive logic here.

And if you go further, using some more good predictive logic, you will realize that since today's population is larger than it was in 1970 and a higher percentage of people are playing basketball, today's talent pool is a lot larger than it was in the past, which makes today's players proportionally better.

but were not going by talent pool, we are going by who actually played. Just to further my point that you have to adjust players games to the time period etc....

How many of you believe that if bob cousy played in this day and era that he would still do all that one handed dribbling??? EXACTLY, cousy would have had a different set of teachers but his bball dna would still be what is was always destined to be. So if you put cousy in todays game, he would probably play and dribble like nash (best example I could think of). Wilt would have a Javele Mcgee kind of athleticism with a superior scorer's touch (hopefully you get it by now).

[Rasheed1]

No he didnt. He killed players prior to the rule being enforced. What are you talkin about? Do your homework.


I saw that comment too :oldlol:

AI came entered the league in 96... The rules helped him get to the line EVEN MORE by the time they were instituted, but AI tore up defenses prior to the handchecking rule changes

[JMT]

Actually their is something to answer seeing as this thread had 4 pages and i've gotten multiple answers already. What forum are you on? This forum overrates past players more than anywhere i've ever seen. I guess you really wouldn't notice since your main concern is not to contribute but to post smart a$$ comments to try to up yourself and gain rep. There's always that one guy on every forum who thinks he's a fu.cking genius but never contributes and posts cocky smart a$$ comments everywhere. That would be you here.

Yes, and the majority of those posts point out what I did: that you're consumed with this conspiracy theory. There's a poster or two that you have a beef with, and you've made them "everybody" and "always" by applying a really childish lack of logic.

There are a good, solid group of posters here who are knowledgable about the game prior to 1990. I've not seen any of them, on any kind of regular basis, say that players from former eras would be better today, aside from the ovious advantages they'd have in conditioning, coaching and nutrition. Rather, they tend to argue against a myopic, limited side that randomly assumes that all those players would be far worse. That's the side making generalizations backed up by nothing; the side you're advocating.

[Kblaze8855]

Lol. You think it's just a coincidence that under 1 set of rules, centers dominated the league THEN as soon as the rules change, the are no dominant centers anymore? Just a coincidence? Really?




If there were young centers just before the change who suddenly fell off and never got where they were expected id say you had a point.

But unless you are gonna tell me Kwame, Darko, Curry, and Greg Odens issues were the rule changes....there have only been 2 centers drafted in the last 15 years who had the game to justify the assumption that they might join the Shaqs, Drobs, Ewing, and so on of the previous era.

Yao...and Dwight. And if you want to include Oden I wouldnt argue. Or maybe consider Amare a 5 even though he was drafted as a 4 and is one now.

The great centers who dont get hurt still become great centers. Be it Dwight doing 23/14 a couple years ago and leading a finals team or pre injury Yao doing 25/9.

Guys with that "....of all time" talent dont just fizzle out into the centers we are left with over the rule changes. They either get to that level or they get hurt. Nothing in the rules stops them.

Where are the guys who should be Hakeem, Drob, Shaq, Russell, Ewing, Mourning, Wilt, Parish, Kareem, Moses and so on...and arent due to the rules? Cousins? Bynum? Al Jefferson?

Its a lack of the players. Not the rules keeping them from showing it.

The late 60s through the early 90s simply had bigmen who wanted to play like bigmen. Around then tall players wanted to play like guards and less of them turned into what great centers used to be.

It isnt the rules that changed things. Its Michael, Magic, and Bird changing both what makes one a star and what tall people try to do.

Guys left the paint and lost a lot of the desire to dominate around the basket. Potentially great centers shoot more to become big forwards. Want to handle the ball and all. Guys like Lebron who are 6'9'' 270+ used to be thrown into the paint. Dude is Karl Malones size playing the point half the time.

Being huge and athletic became a mismatch to be exploited by matching up with smaller players at unusual positions for a big guy to play and straight up back to the basket paint players faded away.

You can see the guard play start to take over the minds of mobile tall guys as far back as Ralph Sampson. Before that as well im sure but hes one of the first straight up freaks who wanted to be Dr.J more than Kareem so hes out going coast to coast and gliding into the paint instead of beefing up and owning the league.

The players who have the game to be Hakeem and so on just arent bring produced anymore. The rules arent keeping them from showing it.

If we had an undercover Kareem hanging around....he couldnt stay hidden for long.

[CavaliersFTW]

If there were young centers just before the change who suddenly fell off and never got where they were expected id say you had a point.

But unless you are gonna tell me Kwame, Darko, Curry, and Greg Odens issues were the rule changes....there have only been 2 centers drafted in the last 15 years who had the game to justify the assumption that they might join the Shaqs, Drobs, Ewing, and so on of the previous era.

Yao...and Dwight. And if you want to include Oden I wouldnt argue. Or maybe consider Amare a 5 even though he was drafted as a 4 and is one now.

The great centers who dont get hurt still become great centers. Be it Dwight doing 23/14 a couple years ago and leading a finals team or pre injury Yao doing 25/9.

Guys with that "....of all time" talent dont just fizzle out into the centers we are left with over the rule changes. They either get to that level or they get hurt. Nothing in the rules stops them.

Where are the guys who should be Hakeem, Drob, Shaq, Russell, Ewing, Mourning, Wilt, Parish, Kareem, Moses and so on...and arent due to the rules? Cousins? Bynum? Al Jefferson?

Its a lack of the players. Not the rules keeping them from showing it.

The late 60s through the early 90s simply had bigmen who wanted to play like bigmen. Around then tall players wanted to play like guards and less of them turned into what great centers used to be.

It isnt the rules that changed things. Its Michael, Magic, and Bird changing both what makes one a star and what tall people try to do.

Guys left the paint and lost a lot of the desire to dominate around the basket. Potentially great centers shoot more to become big forwards. Want to handle the ball and all. Guys like Lebron who are 6'9'' 270+ used to be thrown into the paint. Dude is Karl Malones size playing the point half the time.

Being huge and athletic became a mismatch to be exploited by matching up with smaller players at unusual positions for a big guy to play and straight up back to the basket paint players faded away.

You can see the guard play start to take over the minds of mobile tall guys as far back as Ralph Sampson. Before that as well im sure but hes one of the first straight up freaks who wanted to be Dr.J more than Kareem so hes out going coast to coast and gliding into the paint instead of beefing up and owning the league.

The players who have the game to be Hakeem and so on just arent bring produced anymore. The rules arent keeping them from showing it.

If we had an undercover Kareem hanging around....he couldnt stay hidden for long.
This. Will rep after:

*You have given out too much Reputation in the last 24 hours, try again later.*

[NewYorkNoPicks]

I saw that comment too :oldlol:

AI came entered the league in 96... The rules helped him get to the line EVEN MORE by the time they were instituted, but AI tore up defenses prior to the handchecking rule changes

Iverson became a beast when they were instituted... Were all aware he was having big games even in his first year but you cant tell me he wasnt the player who benefited the MOST from that rule change

[KingBeasley08]

Centers like Wilt would be beast but some of the perimeter players would just suck. I can't even imagine guys like Jerry West and Bob Cousy dominating today's NBA :oldlol:

[abuC]

Iverson became a beast when they were instituted... Were all aware he was having big games even in his first year but you cant tell me he wasnt the player who benefited the MOST from that rule change


His MVP season happened with hand checking.

[INDI]

Centers like Wilt would be beast but some of the perimeter players would just suck. I can't even imagine guys like Jerry West and Bob Cousy dominating today's NBA :oldlol:

Nash did. And those guys were of that caliber. Just remember that you can't imagine their movements like they were still in the 60's, you have to imagine their game with the style of today's players

[Mach_3]

Barkley was 270-280lbs, he's 1 of a kind.


And I don't understand why you keep listing guys who have more advanced one on one moves, the damn eye test look at Wade/Kobe/MJ and how they handle the ball in isolation, then go back and look at Baylor. It's just not the same, he was a small forward, you're talking about guys who are the same height as him that are shooting guards and are more fluid with better handles.

If ANY player played back in Bill's day with the way the rules were enforced they ALL would dribble exactly like how Oscar did. Just about every single crossover today is a carry in the 60's.

[Mach_3]

Iverson became a beast when they were instituted... Were all aware he was having big games even in his first year but you cant tell me he wasnt the player who benefited the MOST from that rule change


Of course it did, it helped everyone. There was an explosion across the board in ppg in i think 05 it was the year they really started enforcing the hand check rule. Iverson would have absolutely RAPED the league had he been in his prime when the changes came about