Jerry West: NBA is the Weakest He Has Ever Seen.

[LAZERUSS]

http://espn.go.com/espnradio/play?id=10521754

Listen at about the 11 minute mark.

Oh, and this year's upcoming NBA draft is a poor draft.

And before some idiot jumps in and claims that he is an old senile coot...he is a two-time NBA Executive of the Year, and under his reign in LA, the Lakers won six titles. And, he is currently the head consultant of the Golden St. Warriors...

[moe94]

How the hell is the draft poor?

[Trentknicks]

How the hell is the draft poor?
None of them are professionals who can earn money.

[LAZERUSS]

How the hell is the draft poor?

Probably because the best players in college generally only play one year,...and are playing against peers, the best of which, only play one year...and the rest of them are not good enough to make NBA rosters.

[hawksdogsbraves]

http://espn.go.com/espnradio/play?id=10521754

Listen at about the 11 minute mark.

Oh, and this year's upcoming NBA draft is a poor draft.

And before some idiot jumps in and claims that he is an old senile coot...he is a two-time NBA Executive of the Year, and under his reign in LA, the Lakers won six titles. And, he is currently the head consultant of the Golden St. Warriors...

Uh, he is a senile old coot. Dude is 75, you can't take anything he says seriously at this point :oldlol:

[PHILA]

6:00 Mark

SVP: If we could put a time machine in play, and that (1969-70) Jerry West comes and plays in the league today, how would that Jerry West do in this league?

West: "It looks like to me that every good player that drives to the basket really has a chance to get a favorable call. There's a lot of of players I see in this league that I really feel that I could have competed against on the highest level, and scoring the ball would not have been a problem. I think it's easier to score today than it ever has been."

[Smook A.]

Oh and this year's upcoming NBA draft is a poor draft.
http://24.media.tumblr.com/9be32afea6761c94473bdb40b8924610/tumblr_mqggo5PmNQ1rb3l3wo1_500.gif

[LAZERUSS]

Uh, he is a senile old coot. Dude is 75, you can't take anything he says seriously at this point :oldlol:

I agree. With his resume you have to wonder how the hell the man ever got a job after he retired from playing in the NBA. What has he done since?

[hawksdogsbraves]

Probably because the best players in college generally only play one year,...and are playing against peers, the best of which, only play one year...and the rest of them are not good enough to make NBA rosters.

This... this is the most nonsensical thing I've read all day...

[Round Mound]

:applause:

[hawksdogsbraves]

I agree. With his resume you have to wonder how the hell the man ever got a job after he retired from playing in the NBA. What has he done since?

Hey now I respect Jerry West both as a player and as a front-office guy, but once you're in your mid-70's you're on a slippery slope to senile-ville. There's a reason he's not a GM anymore.

[moe94]

Probably because the best players in college generally only play one year,...and are playing against peers, the best of which, only play one year...and the rest of them are not good enough to make NBA rosters.

What? That would mean every single draft for quite some time has been horrid.

I actually listened. He didn't even expand. :coleman:

[outbreak]

it isn't that the players are weak inherently, it's that the NBA has gone soft and just wants highlights. The rules favours the offensive players far too much and if your drive aggressively and are a star player you'll usually get a foul call without even having to try and get the ball in the basket.

[Akrazotile]

The thing he is definitely right about is that dudes get bailed out by refs when they go to the rim EASY AS ****.

It's not even just star players. It's every player. Drive to the basket and the ref will just assume contact and blow the whistle. It's a serious problem in this league.

Silver, get on this shit ASAP.

[LAZERUSS]

What? That would mean every single draft for quite some time has been horrid.

I actually listened. He didn't even expand. :coleman:


Maybe Embiid will go to become a dominant pro, but he is currently averaging 11.1 ppg, 7.9 rpg, 1.4 apg, 2.6 bpg, and shooting .624 from the field. Good, but nothing sensational.

Two days ago he faced a Sooner team whose tallest player was 6-8 (one of only two 6-8 players on their rosters), and in 30 minutes, he scored 12 points, on 3-5 shooting, with 13 rebounds.

He has faced the half-blind 7-1 soph Isaiah Austin, who is certainly not a great player, twice this season, and combined, he averaged 8.5 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 1.0 bpg, and shot .385 from the field.

And yet we are supposed to assume that he is another Hakeem?

[moe94]

LAZ, calling this upcoming draft poor when we just witnessed what might possibly be the worst of all time is silly. Can it be 84/96/03 level? Probably not, but those are the absolute best of the best. Can it be as good as 08 and 09? Absolutely. Were they also bad drafts?

[Black and White]

Wait, this is a poor draft now? :facepalm

[BigMacAttack]

Dont really agree with him but anyone who is blatantly disregarding the mans opinion because of his age is probably an idiot. I do agree about guys getting bailed out.

[Rose'sACL]

check the FTA attempts by year and you will see how wrong you are.
Average free throw attempts have been declining pretty much every year since 80s started.
Average free throw attempts were 29 in 1980-81 and now it is 23.5 FTA.
perimeter players have been getting faster and stronger too so if they were getting those easy calls without getting touched then they would most definitely drive to the basket every time.

[IGOTGAME]

I really like Embiid but the rest of the draft is a little harder to pick. Still don't think its weak but I respect Jerry West's opinion.

I agree about the league being the weakest its been since i started watching tho.

[LAZERUSS]

LAZ, calling this upcoming draft poor when we just witnessed what might possibly be the worst of all time is silly. Can it be 84/96/03 level? Probably not, but those are the absolute best of the best. Can it be as good as 08 and 09? Absolutely. Were they also bad drafts?

The problem is...there is just no CERTAIN great player in college right now. Again, I have read those that claim that Embiid will go #1. Why? Because he is 7-0? Because, statistically, and against WEAK competition, he has hardly been a dominant player.

Anyone can draft a player on potential, but that is exactly what a GM would be doing right now with Embiid. He could just as easily be a 7-0 bench-warmer as so many other's have been, or maybe even a complete bust.

[BigMacAttack]

What? That would mean every single draft for quite some time has been horrid.

I actually listened. He didn't even expand. :coleman:

If he thinks the NBA is at its weakest ever he probably doesnt rate many of the recent drafts.

[Black and White]

The problem is...there is just no CERTAIN great player in college right now. Again, I have read those that claim that Embiid will go #1. Why? Because he is 7-0? Because, statistically, and against WEAK competition, he has hardly been a dominant player.

Anyone can draft a player on potential, but that is exactly what a GM would be doing right now with Embiid. He could just as easily be a 7-0 bench-warmer as so many other's have been, or maybe even a complete bust.

Isn't that the same risk with every draft tho?

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

After Durant, Lebron and Melo...who else is a srs scoring threat?

As early as 2005, we at least had Kobe/Tmac/Carter/Melo/Lebron/Pierce/Iverson/Arenas

Not the most efficient, but still talented and more fun to watch.

[moe94]

Isn't that the same risk with every draft tho?

Which is why I'm so confused. I think LAZ's problem is that no one is lighting it up like Beasley.

[Rose'sACL]

The problem is...there is just no CERTAIN great player in college right now. Again, I have read those that claim that Embiid will go #1. Why? Because he is 7-0? Because, statistically, and against WEAK competition, he has hardly been a dominant player.

Anyone can draft a player on potential, but that is exactly what a GM would be doing right now with Embiid. He could just as easily be a 7-0 bench-warmer as so many other's have been, or maybe even a complete bust.
just answer me one thing and you can continure with your stupid thread.
NBA during the 60s was 70-80% white. it is not racism when people say that blacks are and have been more athletic and better at basketball. there have been some great white players but they are very few in numbers.
The big question is : were those white guys actually blacks with white paint on them?

[LAZERUSS]

Isn't that the same risk with every draft tho?

Not really. Everyone knew that Wilt was going to be great. Same with Oscar, Hayes, KAJ, and Walton (yes, he was great, albeit only briefly.)

Why? Because those guys dominated in college, for FOUR years, and playing against other great college players, who also played FOUR years. Hell, by their JR seasons they were already considered among the best players in the world.

[Black and White]

Which is why I'm so confused. I think LAZ's problem is that no one lighting it up like Beasley.

Any player can be a bust, you draft on potential and skills that you see through scouting and workouts, but you never really know how they will translate to the NBA game until they actually get there, but if they are dominating college you would think that they would naturally have a good chance of succeeding in the NBA.

[DuMa]

its not a weak draft class but yes i agree the current culture and rules of the NBA make the incoming rookies soft and not as hardworking as the previous elite players of the NBA. they are so coddled and babied, it is quite sad when things dont go their way. (biggest example i can think of is DeMarcus Cousins)

BRING BACK handchecking!

[LAZERUSS]

just answer me one thing and you can continure with your stupid thread.
NBA during the 60s was 70-80% white. it is not racism when people say that blacks are and have been more athletic and better at basketball. there have been some great white players but they are very few in numbers.
The big question is : were those white guys actually blacks with white paint on them?

By the early 60's the best basketball PLAYERS (whether white or black) were PLAYING in the NBA. And maybe you can give the exact percentages by the end of the decade, but I can guarantee you it was not 80% white.

[Rose'sACL]

its not a weak draft class but yes i agree the current culture and rules of the NBA make the incoming rookies soft and not as hardworking as the previous elite players of the NBA. they are so coddled and babied, it is quite sad when things dont go their way. (biggest example i can think of is DeMarcus Cousins)

BRING BACK handchecking!
these players also play under more pressure compare to players of past eras. it evens out actually.
Horace grant in his recent interview said the same thing about social media and media as a whole. he said that there were some things going on during his chicago days that would have been blown up if people had camera phones and twitter/facebook back then.

[BigMacAttack]

Thinking about it the NBA is pretty weak right now. The deepest position is Point guard, and none of the current great Points can win a chip. The C position is weak, PF is weak. SF is doing ok but made to look a lot better by two crazy talents, outside of the top two there is only George and Melo then a big drop off. SG is ****ed too.

[Rose'sACL]

By the early 60's the best basketball PLAYERS (whether white or black) were PLAYING in the NBA. And maybe you can give the exact percentages by the end of the decade, but I can guarantee you it was not 80% white.
it was 75-80% white at start of the 60s. by the end of 60s at most it would have been 30-40% blacks.
Compare that to league today that is close to 80% black. better training and better nutrition are normal things which would have helped athletes of any era and lets say they would have been as fast as players in today's league.
Racism is a totally outside factor though and i am a firm believe that racism was a big factor till the 70s. actually, mid 70s. the wilts and the russels made it because of their talent but i am sure racism stopped a lot of average black players who were better than average white players of that era. I am not even mentioning the impact of racism on kids who might have been NBA level players but quit because of racism.
always remember that best talent will always make it but i am sure racism did stop a lot of average black players from making it into the NBA when they were most probably better than a lot of the white players.

[fpliii]

it was 75-80% white at start of the 60s. by the end of 60s at most it would have been 30-40% blacks.
Compare that to league today that is close to 80% black. better training and better nutrition are normal things which would have helped athletes of any era and lets say they would have been as fast as players in today's league.
Racism is a totally outside factor though and i am a firm believe that racism was a big factor till the 70s. actually, mid 70s. the wilts and the russels made it because of their talent but i am sure racism stopped a lot of average black players who were better than average white players of that era. I am not even mentioning the impact of racism on kids who might have been NBA level players but quit because of racism.
always remember that best talent will always make it but i am sure racism did stop a lot of average black players from making it into the NBA when they were most probably better than a lot of the white players.
Do you want to go on record as saying that?

[gts]

Jerry West isn't the first person I've read or heard lately that is saying there's no difference makers in this coming draft... Seems the longer the NCAA season goes on the hype machine from last fall gets quieter and quieter

Now there's talk that some of those guys that were talked about as being front runners for the number 1 spot might not even come out.

[CavaliersFTW]

just answer me one thing and you can continure with your stupid thread.
NBA during the 60s was 70-80% white. it is not racism when people say that blacks are and have been more athletic and better at basketball. there have been some great white players but they are very few in numbers.
The big question is : were those white guys actually blacks with white paint on them?
That is factually incorrect, do your homework before you toss around these alleged statistics you lazy f*ck.

[Rose'sACL]

Do you want to go on record as saying that?
i counted players in the early 60s for all teams and came up with those stats.

I asked you, cavsftw and many others "knowledgable" posters to give me stats about percentage of blacks in the league in many previous threads but you guys take it as an insult so i am not going to count players for every team for every year to please you guys.
Go ahead and give me a stat. i would be happy to accept whatever number you come up with.
I am just making it clear that racism was a big factor in the 60s and it defnitely must have stopped black players who were not as talented as wilts and russels to try very hard to make it into the NBA.
Some team even played a certain number of black players only from what i have read online. i can only go by what i have read here and many other places. you can post another article about racism not playing a big part in the nba in 60s and i would be happy to read that.

[LAZERUSS]

it was 75-80% white at start of the 60s. by the end of 60s at most it would have been 30-40% blacks.
Compare that to league today that is close to 80% black. better training and better nutrition are normal things which would have helped athletes of any era and lets say they would have been as fast as players in today's league.
Racism is a totally outside factor though and i am a firm believe that racism was a big factor till the 70s. actually, mid 70s. the wilts and the russels made it because of their talent but i am sure racism stopped a lot of average black players who were better than average white players of that era. I am not even mentioning the impact of racism on kids who might have been NBA level players but quit because of racism.
always remember that best talent will always make it but i am sure racism did stop a lot of average black players from making it into the NBA when they were most probably better than a lot of the white players.

The NBA must have IMMEDIATELY became mostly black in the early 70's then...

http://books.google.com/books?id=4oCEPNRvfLAC&pg=PT11&lpg=PT11&dq=black+players+playing+in+the+NBA+since+1960&source=bl&ots=Gaxef-rv5v&sig=JaN_xS8TJJCa7Tnozx2NbcSZ_4A&hl=en&sa=X&ei=JosOU7GUJ-zy2gXBkYDQAg&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAjgK#v=onepage&q=black%20players%20playing%20in%20the%20NBA%20sin ce%201960&f=false

"By 1972 the NBA had expanded to 17 teams, and nearly 250 players had played at least one game that season. Only 27 were white, and many of them were fringe players or seven-footers."

[Rose'sACL]

That is factually incorrect, do your homework before you toss around these alleged statistics you lazy f*ck.
go and dig up wilt and lick his bones you crazy idiot who thinks that jordan missed playoffs not once but multiple times.
your comment is a great example why everyone thinks you are biased. i never insult anyone, even the trolls but you come here and write stuff like you are a big basketball expert and only your opinion counts.

[Rose'sACL]

The NBA must have IMMEDIATELY became mostly black in the early 70's then...

http://books.google.com/books?id=4oCEPNRvfLAC&pg=PT11&lpg=PT11&dq=black+players+playing+in+the+NBA+since+1960&source=bl&ots=Gaxef-rv5v&sig=JaN_xS8TJJCa7Tnozx2NbcSZ_4A&hl=en&sa=X&ei=JosOU7GUJ-zy2gXBkYDQAg&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAjgK#v=onepage&q=black%20players%20playing%20in%20the%20NBA%20sin ce%201960&f=false

"By 1972 there were 250 players who had played at least one NBA game...and only 27 were white."
give me stats for early 60s. what is so hard? i must do all the work. i would be happy to accept whatever you come up with.
also, lol @ started one game.

[fpliii]

i counted players in the early 60s for all teams and came up with those stats.

I asked you, cavsftw and many others "knowledgable" posters to give me stats about percentage of blacks in the league in many previous threads but you guys take it as an insult so i am not going to count players for every team for every year to please you guys.
Go ahead and give me a stat. i would be happy to accept whatever number you come up with.
I am just making it clear that racism was a big factor in the 60s and it defnitely must have stopped black players who were not as talented as wilts and russels to try very hard to make it into the NBA.
Some team even played a certain number of black players only from what i have read online. i can only go by what i have read here and many other places. you can post another article about racism not playing a big part in the nba in 60s and i would be happy to read that.
I think you're mixing the 50s with the 60s. I do think a big transformation occurred in the 60s, but it was likely early in the decade.

If you want, I'll check 68-69 (since you said late 60s).

[CavaliersFTW]

go and dig up wilt and lick his bones you crazy idiot who thinks that jordan missed playoffs not once but multiple times.
your comment is a great example why everyone thinks you are biased. i never insult anyone, even the trolls but you come here and write stuff like you are a big basketball expert and only your opinion counts.
http://www.hollyscoop.com/sites/hollyscoop.com/files/Cryinggifs_01_1.gif

[LAZERUSS]

I think you're mixing the 50s with the 60s. I do think a big transformation occurred in the 60s, but it was likely early in the decade.

If you want, I'll check 68-69 (since you said late 60s).

It was clearly early in the decade of the 60's. Why? Yes, racism was a part of it, but the reality was, the best players in colleges at that time, were mostly white (and again, for a variety of reasons.)

In any case, aside from Connie Hawkins, who was banned, not because of race, but for supposedly a gambling scandal, I can't think of some truly great black basketball player that somehow slipped thru the cracks. Why would an NBA team allow Russell, Wilt, and Oscar to dominate the league, and continue to ignore some great black prospect?

[Rose'sACL]

I think you're mixing the 50s with the 60s. I do think a big transformation occurred in the 60s, but it was likely early in the decade.

If you want, I'll check 68-69 (since you said late 60s).
i am assuming about late 60s as i didn't have time to count every year. i started in 60-61.
why can't anyone give me a stat about early 60s. please don't take it as an insult. i don't have the resources to watch games on early 60s so i am hoping you guys can make it easier for me given how many hours you guys have spent on watching early 60s games and stats.

[fpliii]

i am assuming about late 60s as i didn't have time to count every year. i started in 60-61.
why can't anyone give me a stat about early 60s. please don't take it as an insult. i don't have the resources to watch games on early 60s so i am hoping you guys can make it easier for me given how many hours you guys have spent on watching early 60s games and stats.
Which specific year do you want me to do next? You said that 30-40 percent of the league was black in the late 60s so I'm doing 69 now.

[Rose'sACL]

It was clearly early in the decade of the 60's. Why? Yes, racism was a part of it, but the reality was, the best players in colleges at that time, were mostly white (and again, for a variety of reasons.)

In any case, aside from Connie Hawkins, who was banned, not because of race, but for supposedly a gambling scandal, I can't think of some truly great black basketball player that somehow slipped thru the cracks. Why would an NBA team allow Russell, Wilt, and Oscar to dominate the league, and continue to ignore some great black prospect?
russle thinks that racism was big even when he was winning titles for celtics. he hated the city.
Just think for a moment. a kid likes basketball but his parents tell him that because of racism,he would not make it. lets say he ignores that but reaches his mid to late teens and actually sees how much racism was present in those days. That right there would have killed a lot of future players who weren't crazy talented but were still better than a lot of white players.

[Rose'sACL]

Which specific year do you want me to do next? You said that 30-40 percent of the league was black in the late 60s so I'm doing 69 now.
read my comment again. do 60-61. i would be happy with that. i assumed about late 60s given what i saw for 60-61. i went to basketball ref and saw player's name and googled him to see if he was black as i didn't know any players other than the few famous ones.

[LAZERUSS]

BTW, I have heard that "mostly white" argument used against Chamberlain in these discussions. But he was just CRUSHING the likes of Bellamy, Reed, Thurmond, and Russell in the 60's. He had seasons of 30 ppg against Thurmond, 40 against Reed and Russell, and over 50 against Bellamy. And in those years the H2H's ranged from nine to 12.

[gts]

Which specific year do you want me to do next? You said that 30-40 percent of the league was black in the late 60s so I'm doing 69 now.

Lucky dog....

[fpliii]

read my comment again. do 60-61. i would be happy with that. i assumed about late 60s given what i saw for 60-61. i went to basketball ref and saw player's name and googled him to see if he was black as i didn't know any players other than the few famous ones.
I didn't have a problem with your claim about 60-61. I'm not disagreeing that the league was mostly white as of that year.

Anyhow, from 59-60 through 68-69 there were a total of 1200 player seasons. I'll look into all of them and do at least a couple of comparisons for each season and for the decade as a whole: total players in the league and percentage of minutes (doing percentage of shots would be interesting too, but that's for another day).

[LAZERUSS]

russle thinks that racism was big even when he was winning titles for celtics. he hated the city.
Just think for a moment. a kid likes basketball but his parents tell him that because of racism,he would not make it. lets say he ignores that but reaches his mid to late teens and actually sees how much racism was present in those days. That right there would have killed a lot of future players who weren't crazy talented but were still better than a lot of white players.

I'm not denying that racism existed. But basketball was the most progressive of the major team sports. And again, there were other reasons why there were a smaller percentage of blacks playing. Probably the main reason was socio-economic. The best players in colleges at that time, were white. Why? Because they came from more affluent families.

[fpliii]

Lucky dog....
:rockon:

[CavaliersFTW]

Which specific year do you want me to do next? You said that 30-40 percent of the league was black in the late 60s so I'm doing 69 now.
do '66 and '61 if you get time, take into account starting line ups too, because the starting line ups are far more telling than the raw percentage of 'white players' vs 'black players'... as Laz indicated with his 1972 statistic, the black players were the ones getting minutes... The 1962 Warriors for example had 2 centers, Wilt Chamberlain and Joe Rucklik... This would indicate statistically that the warriors had a 50/50 split on white vs black centers but guess which center actually played.

Even in the early 60's, when the behind-closed doors 'quota' was in effect, teams may have only allowed let's say 3 black players per roster... but guess which black players made it into the league at that time? The best ones on the planet... and guess what that meant as far as playing time goes? By the mid-late 60's there were all-black starting 5's. Just like today. By that time it didn't matter what the ratio of black players to white players were as far as who was playing, starting line ups looked virtually the same as today. Rapid changes happened from the 1950's to the mid 1960's, and they didn't render any of the dominant 50's or 60's players to suddenly become less effective, which is Rose's agenda. He wants to imply that the league's racial ratio's meant something significant to the dominance of the top players back then. This assumption that he's trying to push, is where he's really off base.

[LAZERUSS]

I didn't have a problem with your claim about 60-61. I'm not disagreeing that the league was mostly white as of that year.

Anyhow, from 59-60 through 68-69 there were a total of 1200 player seasons. I'll look into all of them and do at least a couple of comparisons for each season and for the decade as a whole: total players in the league and percentage of minutes (doing percentage of shots would be interesting too, but that's for another day).


Throw the ABA in there, as well.

[fpliii]

Throw the ABA in there, as well.
I can do that later maybe, though the ABA in 67-68 and 68-69 wouldn't be terribly useful since it was a minor league at the time (and a lot of the players those seasons wouldn't get major minutes in the NBA) That wasn't the case in 73-74, 74-75, 75-76 obviously (and potentially in earlier seasons), but early on it was.

[Rose'sACL]

BTW, I have heard that "mostly white" argument used against Chamberlain in these discussions. But he was just CRUSHING the likes of Bellamy, Reed, Thurmond, and Russell in the 60's. He had seasons of 30 ppg against Thurmond, 40 against Reed and Russell, and over 50 against Bellamy. And in those years the H2H's ranged from nine to 12.
i have wilt in my top 3 of all time given his crazy stats alone. i just **** with you and cavsftw because you guys are as biased as pauk but act like you are above it all.
Bird is my favorite player of all time but do you see me saying that 80s was the best decade and no other decade comes close and that kobe would have been just a star and not a superstar in 80s? kobe/lebron/durant would have been superstars in any era they played in.
I am talking about average and above average players which in most probability weren't as good as players of today because of racism as well as better facilities for players.

[fpliii]

do '66 and '61 if you get time, take into account starting line ups too, because the starting line ups are far more telling than the raw percentage of 'white players' vs 'black players'... as Laz indicated with his 1972 statistic, the black players were the ones getting minutes...

Even in the early 60's for example, when the behind-closed doors 'quota' was in effect, teams may have only allowed let's say 3 black players per roster... but guess which black players made it into the league at that time? The best ones on the planet... and guess what that meant as far as playing time goes? By the mid-late 60's there were all-black starting 5's. Just like today. By that time it didn't matter what the ratio of black players to white players were as far as who was playing, it was virtually the same as today. Rapid changes happened from the 1950's to the mid 1960's, and they didn't render any of the dominant 50's or 60's players to suddenly become less effective, which is Rose's agenda. He wants to imply that the league's racial ratio's meant something significant to the dominance of the top players back then. This assumption that he's trying to push, is where he's really off base.
I'm doing all seasons from 59-60 through 68-69. It might take some time, but I'll try and do it quickly.

[BasedTom]

He's just mad that the Lakers are the worst team in the West

[LAZERUSS]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jiYbIyOYCG0

[Rose'sACL]

do '66 and '61 if you get time, take into account starting line ups too, because the starting line ups are far more telling than the raw percentage of 'white players' vs 'black players'... as Laz indicated with his 1972 statistic, the black players were the ones getting minutes...

Even in the early 60's for example, when the behind-closed doors 'quota' was in effect, teams may have only allowed let's say 3 black players per roster... but guess which black players made it into the league at that time? The best ones on the planet... and guess what that meant as far as playing time goes? By the mid-late 60's there were all-black starting 5's. Just like today. By that time it didn't matter what the ratio of black players to white players were as far as who was playing, it was virtually the same as today. Rapid changes happened from the 1950's to the mid 1960's, and they didn't render any of the dominant 50's or 60's players to suddenly become less effective, which is Rose's agenda. He wants to imply that the league's racial ratio's meant something significant to the dominance of the top players back then. This assumption that he's trying to push, is where he's really off base.
so you're saying that average players don't matter in basketball. nice to know that. Defense is the first thing that suffers there.

[CavaliersFTW]

so you're saying that average players don't matter in basketball. nice to know that. Defense is the first thing that suffers there.
In an 8-12 team league, where starters play the lion share of minutes even more so than they do today, having 3-7 black players that are the best on the planet mixed in with some white starters that were also the best on the planet it meant that the benches full of white guys back then never got minutes and meant little to nothing, those white guys that never got minutes were pretty much a non-factor, and inflate the ratio of white players vs black players. Token white guys. Laz's 1972 statistic says it all. By the mid to late 60's the ratio of white and black players that you'd expect to see on the floor actually playing the game would look no different than what you'd expect to find today. I know this from watching the film, and understanding who was on rosters back then and who was actually getting minutes. Fpliii already pointed out, you're confusing 50's with 60's with your allegations of race ratio. On top of that, as I pointed out, you're assumption that this had any effect on the dominant players back then is where you really go off base.

[CavaliersFTW]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEgynFUSJjg

How different does this look than anything you'd watch today?

[CavaliersFTW]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PUNc8ILqSs

How about this?

[JohnFreeman]

West played in the weakest era...

[sportjames23]

http://espn.go.com/espnradio/play?id=10521754

Listen at about the 11 minute mark.

Oh, and this year's upcoming NBA draft is a poor draft.

And before some idiot jumps in and claims that he is an old senile coot...he is a two-time NBA Executive of the Year, and under his reign in LA, the Lakers won six titles. And, he is currently the head consultant of the Golden St. Warriors...


HA! The Logo has spoken, like a boss!

I don't want to hear any of you whiny bitches call the 80s or 90s a weak era. West just confirmed what the rest of us already knew--today's NBA is the weak era.

[Rose'sACL]

HA! The Logo has spoken, like a boss!

I don't want to hear any of you whiny bitches call the 80s or 90s a weak era. West just confirmed what the rest of us already knew--today's NBA is the weak era.
no one calls 80s a weak era. some people call 90s weak but they do so because media(most people in marketing) and people like you are not satisfied that people think jordan is the best ever. you try to turn him into a god and that is why people say 90s was weak to **** with idiots like you.

[dannysc305]

http://espn.go.com/espnradio/play?id=10521754

Listen at about the 11 minute mark.

Oh, and this year's upcoming NBA draft is a poor draft.

And before some idiot jumps in and claims that he is an old senile coot...he is a two-time NBA Executive of the Year, and under his reign in LA, the Lakers won six titles. And, he is currently the head consultant of the Golden St. Warriors...


He's salty LA is irrelevant

[RIP CITY]

I agree with him on this being a weak era. Don't think this Draft is weak but it's definitely overrated.

[oh the horror]

I like how Jerry, who's assembled some great teams after his playing career and continues to have a great eye for players throws this opinion out there and this man who has forgotten more about basketball than most here on this board is just written off and the general response is "oh he mad".


Only here :oldlol:

[CavaliersFTW]

...i never insult anyone, even the trolls...
okay then...



HA! The Logo has spoken, like a boss!

I don't want to hear any of you whiny bitches call the 80s or 90s a weak era. West just confirmed what the rest of us already knew--today's NBA is the weak era.
no one calls 80s a weak era. some people call 90s weak but they do so because media(most people in marketing) and people like you are not satisfied that people think jordan is the best ever. you try to turn him into a god and that is why people say 90s was weak to **** with idiots like you.
...yeah

[CavaliersFTW]

He's salty LA is irrelevant
He works for the Warriors

[LAZERUSS]

Damn...CavsFTW with total domination throughout this topic...

[KOBE143]

Agree

Without Kobe playing, this era has been the weakest..

Prime Wilt would avg 100ppg today

[Rose'sACL]

In an 8-12 team league, where starters play the lion share of minutes even more so than they do today, having 3-7 black players that are the best on the planet mixed in with some white starters that were also the best on the planet it meant that the benches full of white guys back then never got minutes and meant little to nothing, those white guys that never got minutes were pretty much a non-factor, and inflate the ratio of white players vs black players. Token white guys. Laz's 1972 statistic says it all. By the mid to late 60's the ratio of white and black players that you'd expect to see on the floor actually playing the game would look no different than what you'd expect to find today. I know this from watching the film, and understanding who was on rosters back then and who was actually getting minutes. Fpliii already pointed out, you're confusing 50's with 60's with your allegations of race ratio. On top of that, as I pointed out, you're assumption that this had any effect on the dominant players back then is where you really go off base.
3-7? i am doing the counting again and i have done 4 teams till now and blacks are 3/11, 4/11, 3/12 and 2/15 till now. these are for celtics, philly, syracuse and knicks respectively. this is the 60-61 season.
I am going by basketball reference as i must confess i wasn't watching basketball in the 60s.
according to you only star players mattered and bench and guys other than stars didn't matter. why can't u just be a knowledgeable poster instead of posting this shit?
Players other than the stars do things in the game that influences games of stars on the other team no matter how many minutes stars play. i never said that star players from that era would not be able to play today. i just think that their stats would take a good hit like going from 28 ppg to 24 ppg or going from 17 rebounds a game to 12-13 rebounds per game.
Racism is not like nutrition and better training facilities. it is an outside factor that likely influenced a lot of black players who were not star material but were still better than a lot of white players.

[CavaliersFTW]

3-7? i am doing the counting again and i have done 4 teams till now and blacks are 3/11, 4/11, 3/12 and 2/15 till now. these are for celtics, philly, syracuse and knicks respectively. this is the 60-61 season.
I am going by basketball reference as i must confess i wasn't watching basketball in the 60s.
according to you only star players mattered and bench and guys other than stars didn't matter. why can't u just be a knowledgeable poster instead of posting this shit?
Players other than the stars do things in the game that influences games of stars on the other team no matter how many minutes stars play. i never said that star players from that era would not be able to play today. i just think that their stats would take a good hit.
Racism is not like nutrition and better training facilities. it is an outside factor that likely influenced a lot of black players who were not star material but were still better than a lot of white players.
Yeah you're in 60-61... which does not encapsulate an entire decade of rapid changes. As such 60-61 represents the extreme 'white' end of the spectrum, do 68-69 and see how many you come up with, which is why I said 3-7 - get it?

[Rose'sACL]

okay then...


...yeah
go ahead and see his post history. only you would agree with him. he clearly insults everyone who doesn't think that jordan was a god. He insults people who think jordan is the GOAT but don't treat him like a GOD.

[Deuce Bigalow]

West played in the weakest era...
'67-'72 was probably the strongest era. Players consisting of Wilt, Russell, Oscar, West, Baylor, Reed, Frazier, Barry, Thurmond, and Kareem. Teams consisting of the Russell/Havlicek/Jones' Celtics, Wilt's Sixers, West/Baylor's Lakers, Frazier/Reed's Knicks, and Kareem/Oscar's Bucks.

[Rose'sACL]

Yeah you're in 60-61... which does not encapsulate an entire decade of rapid changes. As such 60-61 represents the extreme 'white' end of the spectrum, do 68-69 and see how many you come up with, which is why I said 3-7 - get it?
do 68-69 then. i said that i did numbers for 60-61 and assumed percentages for late 60s like you assume a lot of things like only star players mattering.
give me the numbers. i don't feel like i am some basketball jesus. i can take a loss unlike you.
league is close to 80% non-white now. i don' think it even compares.

[LAZERUSS]

Yeah you're in 60-61... which does not represent the entire decade, actually it represents the extreme end of the spectrum, do 68-69 and see how many you come up with, which is why I said 3-7 - get me?

And before someone rips Wilt's numbers later in the decade...

He had TWO 60+ point games in the 68-69 season, including the most efficient 60+ point game from the field in NBA history (29-35.) And, the night before SI ran an article claiming that Wilt could no longer score, he hung the first of those 60 point games. And, in a stretch of 17 straight games, he averaged 31.1 ppg, which also included a 35 point game against Russell (which was his highest against Russell since his 46 point game in game five of the '66 EDF's.)

Oh, and his new coach came to Wilt before the start of the 69-70 season, and asked Chamberlain to become the focal point of the Lakers offense. In the first nine games of the season, Wilt was leading the NBA in scoring, at 32.2 ppg (and on a .579 FG%.) Unfortunately, he shredded his knee in that ninth game, and was never the same again. Incidently, that 69-70 season was Kareem's rookie season, and he averaged 28.8 ppg.

[iamgine]

Do '64-'65 to get the feeling of the 60s.

[russwest0]

The LeBron era is among us...

Don't worry though, Durant gonna breathe some excitement back into the NBA.

[IncarceratedBob]

How about this dude learns to dribble with his left hand before he starts talking shit about modern players

[Rose'sACL]

And before someone rips Wilt's numbers later in the decade...

He had TWO 60+ point games in the 68-69 season, including the most efficient 60+ point game from the field in NBA history (29-35.) And, the night before SI ran an article claiming that Wilt could no longer score, he hung the first of those 60 point games. And, in a stretch of 17 straight games, he averaged 31.1 ppg, which also included a 35 point game against Russell (which was his highest against Russell since his 46 point game in game five of the '66 EDF's.)

Oh, and his new coach came to Wilt before the start of the 69-70 season, and asked Chamberlain to become the focal point of the Lakers offense. In the first nine games of the season, Wilt was leading the NBA in scoring, at 32.2 ppg (and on a .579 FG%.) Unfortunately, he shredded his knee in that ninth game, and was never the same again. Incidently, that 69-70 season was Kareem's rookie season, and he averaged 28.8 ppg.
wtf is with you guys and wilt? i am talking about eras. stop being so sensitive. do i have to make a wilt highlight video to make you guys realize that i think wilt is an all time great according to me?

[LAZERUSS]

Do '64-'65 to get the feeling of the 60s.

http://i.cdn.turner.com/nba/nba/celtics/photos/1964-1965-team-photo350235.jpg

And four of their five starters were black.

[CavaliersFTW]

3-7? i am doing the counting again and i have done 4 teams till now and blacks are 3/11, 4/11, 3/12 and 2/15 till now. these are for celtics, philly, syracuse and knicks respectively. this is the 60-61 season.
I am going by basketball reference as i must confess i wasn't watching basketball in the 60s.
according to you only star players mattered and bench and guys other than stars didn't matter. why can't u just be a knowledgeable poster instead of posting this shit?
Players other than the stars do things in the game that influences games of stars on the other team no matter how many minutes stars play. i never said that star players from that era would not be able to play today. i just think that their stats would take a good hit like going from 28 ppg to 24 ppg or going from 17 rebounds a game to 12-13 rebounds per game.
Racism is not like nutrition and better training facilities. it is an outside factor that likely influenced a lot of black players who were not star material but were still better than a lot of white players.

:biggums:

dude... race has nothing to do with the players stats back then, see this is that assumption I was calling you out for I knew you'd say something retarded like this :facepalm

Gus Johnson went from grabbing 11-13 rebounds from 1964 to 1970 and then suddenly his rebounding spiked to 17rpg...

Rudy LaRusso went from averaging 12-14ppg from 1960 to 1967 then all of the sudden averaged 22 and 21ppg and made the all star teams...

Baylor dropped off, because he got injured... other players spiked up because new opportunities to shine came about.

There are many things that defined stats... the ratio of black to whites in the 60's on the floor isn't one of them, as I said, by the mid 60's you'd fail to even recognize a difference of ratio of white to black players to begin with.

[CavaliersFTW]

Do '64-'65 to get the feeling of the 60s.
No you have to do multiple seasons, there is no one season that can blanket the decade, that was a decade of rapid change

[JohnFreeman]

The LeBron era is among us...

Don't worry though, Durant gonna breathe some excitement back into the NBA.
I think the Durant era is the problem..no one wants to watch someone run into the lane and flail their arms

[fpliii]

Do '64-'65 to get the feeling of the 60s.
I'm doing each year from 59-60 through 68-69. It's taking some time though to look up some of the more obscure players.

I should be done later tonight.

[LAZERUSS]

I'm doing each year from 59-60 through 68-69. It's taking some time though to look up some of the more obscure players.

I should be done later tonight.

You are to be applauded for your effort...

[russwest0]

I think the Durant era is the problem..no one wants to watch someone run into the lane and flail their arms

You mean LeBron circa 2012 finals while Durant was lighting it up with 31PPG on 55% with just 6FTA per game?

:oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

You're really that ****ing stupid, huh?

[CavaliersFTW]

I'm doing each year from 59-60 through 68-69. It's taking some time though to look up some of the more obscure players.

I should be done later tonight.
Remember - the guys who were getting minutes are the only thing that is important here in determining how many blacks vs whites were actually out there competing throughout the course of a game and season. Do not confuse a deep bench of token white guys with 'white competition' - the competition was the guys getting minutes.

[fpliii]

Remember - the guys who were getting minutes are the only thing that is important here in determining how many blacks vs whites were actually out there competing throughout the course of a game and season. Do not confuse a deep bench of token white guys with a league that was 'mostly white competition' - the competition was the guys getting minutes.
True. Well, as I said there are 1200 player-seasons. I've done 782 already. Here are the partial results (%'s are those by black players):

Total % Games % Minutes %
1959-60 36% 37% 37%
1960-61 38% 40% 43%
1961-62 38% 39% 45%
1962-63 40% 44% 48%
1963-64 43% 47% 54%
1964-65 52% 55% 59%
1965-66 53% 54% 59%
1966-67 54% 56% 59%
1967-68 56% 57% 61%
1968-69 59% 60% 61%
Decade 48% 50% 54%
After I'm done, I'll upload the spreadsheet to Google Docs.

It's possible that a lot of the more obscure players I haven't done yet are black, but it's also possible that they're not, so the final results could differ a bit.

Total % = Players in the league that season.
Games % = Games played that season.
Minutes % = Minutes played that season.

[LAZERUSS]

wtf is with you guys and wilt? i am talking about eras. stop being so sensitive. do i have to make a wilt highlight video to make you guys realize that i think wilt is an all time great according to me?

I'll tell you why...

because we have heard and read every ridiculous attempt to disparage Chamberlain's career.

CavsFTW posted footage of a college Wilt just blowing away his peers with his SKILLS, and then half the responses were..."Look, he is dominating short white guys."

Of course, Wilt then took those SKILLS to the NBA, where he was routinely scoring 50 ppg against 6-10 - 7-0+ BLACK centers, including HOFers. And he was still blowing away the league, at the end of the decade.

[Rose'sACL]

I'll tell you why...

because we have heard and read every ridiculous attempt to disparage Chamberlain's career.

CavsFTW posted footage of a college Wilt just blowing away his peers with his SKILLS, and then half the responses were..."Look, he is dominating short white guys."

Of course, Wilt then took those SKILLS to the NBA, where he was routinely scoring 50 ppg against 6-10 - 7-0+ BLACK centers, including HOFers. And he was still blowing away the league, at the end of the decade.
if you don't expect those responses then you are detached from reality. very little footage is available and given that racism was a big problem, most people would say that.
Why can't you be happy that knowledgeable posters think that wilt is at least top 5 all time if not top 3? very few people have time or resources to watch wilt or look at great players he played against.
People also get a little irritated when you and cavsftw act like wilt's stats wouldn't be as good in today's league .he isn't have those 50 and 45ppg seasons if he played now. he would still be probably the best player or among top 3 in any era since the 80s but he isn't posting those numbers.

[Rose'sACL]

True. Well, as I said there are 1200 player-seasons. I've done 782 already. Here are the partial results (%'s are those by black players):

Total % Games % Minutes %
1959-60 36% 37% 37%
1960-61 38% 40% 43%
1961-62 38% 39% 45%
1962-63 40% 44% 48%
1963-64 43% 47% 54%
1964-65 52% 55% 59%
1965-66 53% 54% 59%
1966-67 54% 56% 59%
1967-68 56% 57% 61%
1968-69 59% 60% 61%
Decade 48% 50% 54%
After I'm done, I'll upload the spreadsheet to Google Docs.

It's possible that a lot of the more obscure players I haven't done yet are black, but it's also possible that they're not, so the final results could differ a bit.

Total % = Players in the league that season.
Games % = Games played that season.
Minutes % = Minutes played that season.
thanks.

[ralph_i_el]

This is the worst West has ever seen the NBA...

...because he's old and blind

[JUDGE WITNESS]

True. Well, as I said there are 1200 player-seasons. I've done 782 already. Here are the partial results (%'s are those by black players):

Total % Games % Minutes %
1959-60 36% 37% 37%
1960-61 38% 40% 43%
1961-62 38% 39% 45%
1962-63 40% 44% 48%
1963-64 43% 47% 54%
1964-65 52% 55% 59%
1965-66 53% 54% 59%
1966-67 54% 56% 59%
1967-68 56% 57% 61%
1968-69 59% 60% 61%
Decade 48% 50% 54%
After I'm done, I'll upload the spreadsheet to Google Docs.

It's possible that a lot of the more obscure players I haven't done yet are black, but it's also possible that they're not, so the final results could differ a bit.

Total % = Players in the league that season.
Games % = Games played that season.
Minutes % = Minutes played that season.
cavsftw knows his sh1t

[arifgokcen]

Probably because the best players in college generally only play one year,...and are playing against peers, the best of which, only play one year...and the rest of them are not good enough to make NBA rosters.
whatttttttt

[CavaliersFTW]

True. Well, as I said there are 1200 player-seasons. I've done 782 already. Here are the partial results (%'s are those by black players):

Total % Games % Minutes %
1959-60 36% 37% 37%
1960-61 38% 40% 43%
1961-62 38% 39% 45%
1962-63 40% 44% 48%
1963-64 43% 47% 54%
1964-65 52% 55% 59%
1965-66 53% 54% 59%
1966-67 54% 56% 59%
1967-68 56% 57% 61%
1968-69 59% 60% 61%
Decade 48% 50% 54%
After I'm done, I'll upload the spreadsheet to Google Docs.

It's possible that a lot of the more obscure players I haven't done yet are black, but it's also possible that they're not, so the final results could differ a bit.

Total % = Players in the league that season.
Games % = Games played that season.
Minutes % = Minutes played that season.
Awesome, this will be great to know I don't think anyone has taken the time to actually do the math and get accurate figures for this yet :cheers:

[russwest0]

This is the worst West has ever seen the NBA...

...because he's old and blind

Nah, watch the Eastern Conference.

[fpliii]

thanks.

Awesome, this will be great to know I don't think anyone has taken the time to actually do the math and get accurate figures for this yet :cheers:
:cheers:
Sure thing guys. Maybe after this we can extend it forward and back a few seasons (50s there are fewer players in the league and in the 70s there are probably more photos of players). The introduction of the shot clock and the merger probably are interesting studies, but I think the main transformation happened in the 60s. The big jump is either 61-62 to 62-63 or 64-65 to 65-66, it seems.

Anyhow, I'll post more complete numbers when I get more done.

[Rose'sACL]

:cheers:
Sure thing guys. Maybe after this we can extend it forward and back a few seasons (50s there are fewer players in the league and in the 70s there are probably more photos of players). The introduction of the shot clock and the merger probably are interesting studies, but I think the main transformation happened in the 60s. The big jump is either 61-62 to 62-63 or 64-65 to 65-66, it seems.

Anyhow, I'll post more complete numbers when I get more done.
i don't know what tools you have but it took me 10 minutes to do just the 61 season. it is really tiring.
thanks for doing that.

[fpliii]

i don't know what tools you have but it took me 10 minutes to do just the 61 season. it is really tiring.
thanks for doing that.
I'm just doing it in excel (sumif formula for totals to get percentages) but I'm looking in old Sporting News guides for players I can't find on Google image search.

EDIT: First though I'm doing a search on B-R to get a list of all player seasons, and I exported to a .csv. Sorting alphabetically so I don't have to do anyone twice.

[tpols]

*

..

[Rose'sACL]

I'm just doing it in excel (sumif formula for totals to get percentages) but I'm looking in old Sporting News guides for players I can't find on Google image search
i just did by google image search. somehow found nearly everyone by picture or by some article. wiki article also tells you by the way it is written if the player was black.
i wasn't able to find a few though. i just did 60-61 though.

[fpliii]

1107/1200 players done:


Total % Games % Minutes %
1959-60 28% 27% 28%
1960-61 31% 33% 36%
1961-62 35% 37% 42%
1962-63 41% 42% 47%
1963-64 40% 44% 50%
1964-65 50% 53% 57%
1965-66 50% 51% 57%
1966-67 51% 52% 56%
1967-68 55% 56% 58%
1968-69 55% 57% 57%
Decade 45% 47% 50%

[CavaliersFTW]

1107/1200 players done:


Total % Games % Minutes %
1959-60 28% 27% 28%
1960-61 31% 33% 36%
1961-62 35% 37% 42%
1962-63 41% 42% 47%
1963-64 40% 44% 50%
1964-65 50% 53% 57%
1965-66 50% 51% 57%
1966-67 51% 52% 56%
1967-68 55% 56% 58%
1968-69 55% 57% 57%
Decade 45% 47% 50%
I've you've got anybody you can't identify let me know

[SilkkTheShocker]

Jerry West in this era wouldn't even start for a D League team. He should honestly just shut his old f.ucking mouth

[bukowski81]

just answer me one thing and you can continure with your stupid thread.
NBA during the 60s was 70-80% white. it is not racism when people say that blacks are and have been more athletic and better at basketball. there have been some great white players but they are very few in numbers.
The big question is : were those white guys actually blacks with white paint on them?

Dude its not that black players are more athletic and better at basketball, is just that there is more black people playing basketball.

Just like there are more white people playing tennis, soccer, swiming, gymnastics, etc, and thats why they dominate those sports.

[Rose'sACL]

Dude its not that black players are more athletic and better at basketball, is just that there is more black people playing basketball.

Just like there are more white people playing tennis, soccer, swiming, gymnastics, etc, and thats why they dominate those sports.
are you kidding me ? will you also say that about runners? what is wrong with people in accepting that a certain race has some advantages?
A few Asian countries have great average IQ scores but people say the same thing like you are saying. why is it so hard to accept that genes do play a big part in how a person ends up?
you need to work hard ofcourse but genetics are the biggest factor in where most people end up.

[iamgine]

Dude its not that black players are more athletic and better at basketball, is just that there is more black people playing basketball.

Just like there are more white people playing tennis, soccer, swiming, gymnastics, etc, and thats why they dominate those sports.
Plain wrong. The amount of black vs all other races combined playing basketball is won by other races with a wide margin.

[bukowski81]

Plain wrong. The amount of black vs all other races combined playing basketball is won by other races with a wide margin.

Really?? In American colleges,the main source of NBA players?

[bukowski81]

are you kidding me ? will you also say that about runners? what is wrong with people in accepting that a certain race has some advantages?
A few Asian countries have great average IQ scores but people say the same thing like you are saying. why is it so hard to accept that genes do play a big part in how a person ends up?
you need to work hard ofcourse but genetics are the biggest factor in where most people end up.

I dont want to debate this alot because is pointless, but if that was the case blacks would dominate every sport where athletic ability is important, and they dont.

They dominate the ones that they play the most, just like whites dominate the ones they play the most, asians the ones they play the most, etc...

[aj1987]

6:00 Mark

SVP: If we could put a time machine in play, and that (1969-70) Jerry West comes and plays in the league today, how would that Jerry West do in this league?

West: "It looks like to me that every good player that drives to the basket really has a chance to get a favorable call. There's a lot of of players I see in this league that I really feel that I could have competed against on the highest level, and scoring the ball would not have been a problem. I think it's easier to score today than it ever has been."
These guys from the '60's and so insecure. Dude couldn't even dribble properly with his off hand and he wants to talk about the current league being weak?

FT's? Is the guy stupid? The last guard to average at least 10 FT's per game in 5 or more seasons? Jerry West. The only other player who has 5+ seasons with 10+ FT's per game? Oscar with 7 seasons. Those guys played in literally the weakest era ever and have the audacity to call out the state of the current league? If West was playing in today's NBA, he'd get cut after a week and sent to the Euroleague.

Let me make this simple. Dude averaged more FT's over his career than MJ, LeBron, Kobe, and Wade, and these are the players who people complain about getting a shit ton of calls. They all average 1 LESS FT than West over their careers.

The last guard to average over 12 FT's a game? West. The ONLY player to average over 12 FT's a game in the modern era? Shaq. Oh, and Wilt has 12+ FT's 6 times in his career.

[BigMacAttack]

I dont want to debate this alot because is pointless, but if that was the case blacks would dominate every sport where athletic ability is important, and they dont.

They dominate the ones that they play the most, just like whites dominate the ones they play the most, asians the ones they play the most, etc...

So they dominate the sports the play and dont dominate the sports they dont play?

Are you retarded?

[Pointguard]

Maybe Embiid will go to become a dominant pro, but he is currently averaging 11.1 ppg, 7.9 rpg, 1.4 apg, 2.6 bpg, and shooting .624 from the field. Good, but nothing sensational.

Two days ago he faced a Sooner team whose tallest player was 6-8 (one of only two 6-8 players on their rosters), and in 30 minutes, he scored 12 points, on 3-5 shooting, with 13 rebounds.

He has faced the half-blind 7-1 soph Isaiah Austin, who is certainly not a great player, twice this season, and combined, he averaged 8.5 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 1.0 bpg, and shot .385 from the field.

And yet we are supposed to assume that he is another Hakeem?
He's much better than Hakeem was in his first year. Much more skilled, more productive, way better habits, way more resourceful, more creative, better touch and several other things. The fouls they call in the college game are crazy this year and there are articles on this - so Embiid hasn't played that much. His coach didn't want him to leave Kansas and just didn't play him at the beginning of the year. Embiid is about equal to Tim Duncan's freshman year. Duncan tho a late starter himself like Hakeem, had a lot more experience than Embiid (9th grade start compared to Embiid's 11th grade).

Embiid dribbles out of double teams, going as far out as the three point line and dribble hard to lay it back up... with the right hand only touching the ball to pick it up. I never saw any other center do that in the NBA. This is only his third year playing...

[bukowski81]

So they dominate the sports the play and dont dominate the sports they dont play?

Are you retarded?

Well yea thats the point dumbass, do you want me to repeat it again to see if you catch it this time?

Blacks dominate the sports they play the most, whites dominate the sports they play the most, asians dominate the sports they play the most, etc...

[Rameek]

There are just too many teams in the league.
Too much potential and athleticism not enough IQ or maturity.
There needs to be a real developmental league for those that dont go to school so they can learn to play.

[iamgine]

Really?? In American colleges,the main source of NBA players?
Kids from all races all over the world play basketball. Their numbers are much greater than black people that plays.

[bukowski81]

Kids from all races all over the world play basketball. Their numbers are much greater than black people that plays.

Agreed, but they dont play it as a way to earn their life in the the future.

You can not tell me that a kid playing on the streets of a random country that maybe doesnt even have a pro league is the same as someone who actually plays in a country where he is good enough he will make a lot of money out of it.

Kids in Europe see soccer more than basketball as a possible way to make money in the future.

[houston]

west a hater what new

[LT Ice Cream]

Too bad his own team is struggling to maintain 7th place in this weakest era.

[fpliii]

Okay, finished it up. Here's the Google Doc, as promised:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wAJwRWhTyY7813xGy8KKbxzcIk8O_EBLmJAAojp3mKg

First page is the data, second page is the list of all players.

Here's the final table:

Total % Games % Minutes %
1959-60 25% 27% 28%
1960-61 30% 33% 36%
1961-62 33% 36% 42%
1962-63 41% 42% 47%
1963-64 39% 44% 50%
1964-65 49% 52% 57%
1965-66 50% 51% 56%
1966-67 50% 52% 56%
1967-68 53% 54% 58%
1968-69 55% 56% 57%
Decade 44% 46% 50%

In the future we can maybe expand this forward or backward.

[CavaliersFTW]

Okay, finished it up. Here's the Google Doc, as promised:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wAJwRWhTyY7813xGy8KKbxzcIk8O_EBLmJAAojp3mKg

First page is the data, second page is the list of all players.

Here's the final table:

Total % Games % Minutes %
1959-60 25% 27% 28%
1960-61 30% 33% 36%
1961-62 33% 36% 42%
1962-63 41% 42% 47%
1963-64 39% 44% 50%
1964-65 49% 52% 57%
1965-66 50% 51% 56%
1966-67 50% 52% 56%
1967-68 53% 54% 58%
1968-69 55% 56% 57%
Decade 44% 46% 50%

In the future we can maybe expand this forward or backward.
Awesome thank you very much, btw how did you count guys like say, Lenny Wilkins that are mixed race?

[fpliii]

Awesome thank you very much, btw how did you count guys like say, Lenny Wilkins that are mixed race?
Black. If you guys want we can switch him and others, though.

EDIT: If you click the link, the second page (click the tab at the bottom) of the spreadsheet lists all players, and notes how they were categorized.

[bdreason]

30% black to 60% black sounds about right. I was actually expecting a little bit higher % by the end of the 60's. I remember reading an article where it estimated 40-50% black by the mid 60's.

[fpliii]

I added 54-55 through 58-59 and 69-70 through 75-76 to the file. I'll just fill in the guys who I've already covered before going to sleep, and maybe work on the rest tomorrow when I get home from work.

[Calabis]

Uh, he is a senile old coot. Dude is 75, you can't take anything he says seriously at this point :oldlol:

:facepalm

Yet you sitting in ur boxers typing on this here forum are a young astute student of the game and has drafted college talent for nba franchises and actually played at the highest level. Ur contributions to the game are noted...cant wait for the new NBA logo

http://comps.canstockphoto.com/can-stock-photo_csp1112475.jpg

[FPJ]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEgynFUSJjg

How different does this look than anything you'd watch today?

Its not different at all, today's WNBA plays exactly like that. No D, girly passes to whoever is open, no offensive strategy (lets all run and pass to whoever's open, the 4 vs 2 which often happened cause some players were lazy to come back and play defense and that 4 vs 2 often ended with a jumper)... yea, sounds awesome.

I'll never understand why everyone overrates those years. It was great for that specific time period but thats about it. The Jordan ->Shaq era was the GOAT imo. Had everything from hard D to amazing offense, and players were allowed to talk shit and back it up which made for great tv imo.

[senelcoolidge]

Too many playes that only play 1 or 2 years that are not complete players. Too many guys come into the league as projects. When guys played 3 to 4 years they came in as more complete players that could contribute right away. It's not rocket science. It's one of the reasons the NBA is so weak today..great athletes but not so good basketball players. West knows what he's talking about.

[SpanishACB]

always remember that best talent will always make it but i am sure racism did stop a lot of average black players from making it into the NBA when they were most probably better than a lot of the white players.

Where you born with the demagogy condition?

Most probably better. Hahahahaa.


What about nutrition? What about poberty? What about education? Do those things influence the amount of elite sportsmen a country has?

Maybe those black players, that were "most probably bettter" than the white kids playing the 60s maybe weren't?

So all those most probably better black players that never got to play because white kids with less skill and racism stopped them from playing you're saying they were ready to play?

Because MOST PROBABLY in the 60s, they were poor, lacked nutrition, lacked education and most likely the self steem to succeed as an elite sportsman with all the pressure that gives.

But white kids in the 60s MOST PROBABLY were better prepared mentally.

See? It's the same kind of demagogy, an argument based on assumptions and no proof.

So can you stop comparing players that played the game with players that never played but you assume would be better because they're black? Be done with this neo form of backwards racism, it's on of the worst kinds of iliteracy.

[JohnFreeman]

He is a racist

[Nikola_]

He is a racist

but but its ok if its against whites

[JohnFreeman]

but but its ok if its against whites
Yep

[ILLsmak]

I think it's drive and rules that make the game weak. People aren't really encouraged to improve.

-Smak

[SHAQisGOAT]

Its not different at all, today's WNBA plays exactly like that. No D, girly passes to whoever is open, no offensive strategy (lets all run and pass to whoever's open, the 4 vs 2 which often happened cause some players were lazy to come back and play defense and that 4 vs 2 often ended with a jumper)... yea, sounds awesome.


:rolleyes:

:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

[BoutPractice]

Jerry West knows what he's talking about. But that doesn't mean he's always right.

What we're seeing here is best described as a transition period.

The amazing, historically underrated 90s class of players that dominated the 00s is either retired or slowly going away, namely the "big 5" of Duncan, Shaq, Kobe, Dirk, and KG. Those 5 players alone pretty much shaped the landscape of the 00s and their time is now over.

Logically the 10s will be dominated by the 00s players. Now that all the 00s drafts are over and we're in 2014, we can quite safely say where the defining players who should logically be splitting the 10s cake should be found.

We basically find them in the 03 class (particularly at the top with LeBron and DWade), Dwight for 04, Chris Paul for 05, KD for 07, and the really good 08 (Rose, Westbrook, Love) and 09 (Griffin, Harden, Curry) class.
The first thing that jumps at you is that this batch of superstars is lacking a true superstar bigman. The second is that there are several tiers within it, and at the very top you have LeBron, Durant, and Wade... after those 3 the rest doesn't compare to the likes of KG and Dirk for the 90s - in other words it's top heavy. Two players out of this top 3 ended up playing on the same team (like Kobe and Shaq, except Kobe split in his prime whereas they joined in their prime which has very different implications), joining another HOFer from 03 in Chris Bosh.

By doing that they formed a dynasty, but similar to the 90s, there is no true equal competitor to restore the balance of power. 11 and 13 were the old 90 guard's swan song, a proud last campaign for the kings of the 00s (ultimately successful in Dirk's case, and unsuccessful in Duncan's)... 12 is symptomatic of the more current problem we're facing: the obvious counter to the Heat dynasty would be a prime Durant with a superteam of his own... however his team is still very young, they had to get rid of Harden and Westbrook is always an injury away from ruining the prospect of a dynasty in the making. If Durant doesn't get an equally good, well run superteam or somehow lead an inferior cast to the title in the mid 10s, the 10s could be quite boring as a whole: Heat dominating the first half with no real competitor, then Thunder dominating the end still with no real competitor.

As for the 2014 class, I actually think it's really good, and the best bet to provide the superstars the 20s will need (along with 2012's AD).

[aj1987]

@BoutPractice,

Dude was complaining about FT's, when he and Oscar were the 2 guards who managed to get 10+ FT's in 5 separate seasons. Oscar had 7 of those seasons, BTW. The next highest for a guard is AI with 3 of those seasons. The rest of the guards have either 2 or less.


http://i.imgur.com/UeZan.jpg

[raprap]

senile old man. 1999-2002 was worse.

[Jameerthefear]

who gives a shit? tell jerry to shut his old ass up. played in the ****ing 60's for ****ing sake

[Rose'sACL]

Where you born with the demagogy condition?

Most probably better. Hahahahaa.


What about nutrition? What about poberty? What about education? Do those things influence the amount of elite sportsmen a country has?

Maybe those black players, that were "most probably bettter" than the white kids playing the 60s maybe weren't?

So all those most probably better black players that never got to play because white kids with less skill and racism stopped them from playing you're saying they were ready to play?

Because MOST PROBABLY in the 60s, they were poor, lacked nutrition, lacked education and most likely the self steem to succeed as an elite sportsman with all the pressure that gives.

But white kids in the 60s MOST PROBABLY were better prepared mentally.

See? It's the same kind of demagogy, an argument based on assumptions and no proof.

So can you stop comparing players that played the game with players that never played but you assume would be better because they're black? Be done with this neo form of backwards racism, it's on of the worst kinds of iliteracy.
wtf? how was i racist here? if you don't think that racism gave an unfair advantage to whites in those eras then i don't know what to tell you. i am white. i don't like most black players off the court. i don't like most black musicians.
Blacks still aren't on the same footing when it comes to education but it is their own doing. they are given a fair chance and it is them who fck up when other races who moved here even after them have been doing a lot better since extreme racism ended.
acknowledging that at some time racism was a big factor in america is not neo form of backwards racism.
Neo form of backwards racism would be if i apologized to each african american i meet for things that happened in the past when i wasn't even born yet. that is what a lot of white people do and it is wrong.
stop being so sensitive.

[Dr.J4ever]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEgynFUSJjg

How different does this look than anything you'd watch today?
I got a kick out of watching Doc vs Larry Bird in 1980 on the side panel of your You Tube video. Doc and Bird beasting, but Doc won that match up that day in the ECF in 1980. Thanks!

But really, the game is very different than it was even during the 90's,let alone the 80's or 60's. What's different? a lot.

The 3 point shot,zone allowed under the defensive 3 second rule, and hand checking have changed the nature of the game. This has caused teams to change emphasis on strategies and tactics.

Shoot the three, get in the lane, and don't take long 2's. That's the game today. Scouts and coaches have focused on finding players that can do these things. It's a PG dominated league, and rare is the big man who dominates the paint like the old dinosaurs of the past like Moses, KAJ, Russel, and Wilt. No more.

And please, no more discussions of how diluted the talent is compared to the past. The influx of internationals have proven that a worldwide pool of talent is better than ever.

Defenses are more sophisticated than ever before. Post defense is better than ever with aggressive double teams, sometimes with a blindside defender akin to a qb blitz in the NFL. This is something that didn't even exist in the 80's, as far as I can remember. BTW, I watched a LOT of 80's basketball.

It's not necessarily better, but it is more entertaining, you have to admit.
So let's just enjoy.

[BoutPractice]

On a related topic... I've noticed people keep saying, every year "there isn't a superstar on the level of (insert past superstar here) in this draft".

Think about it for two seconds and you'll see it doesn't make sense. The NBA is constantly being replenished with superstar talent. There's at least one genuine superstar joining the league every two years. Just look at the 00s. Even in the bad 01 draft you had Parker and Gasol, top 100 to 50 players. 02, Yao, HOFer, Stoudemire, superstar. 03, you get multiple all-time greats including a guy who's being heavily pushed as a GOAT candidate. 04, you get the decade superstar's center, not historically great but still a superstar. 05, a guy who's been called one of the greatest PGs ever. 06's a mediocre draft but Roy was still a perennial all-star before getting injured. 07, you get a guy so good he's threatening to overtake that 03 guy an army of followers wants to anoint as the GOAT. 08, you get a 3rd year MVP and a guy for whom 30/20 games are routine. 09, potentially several future HOFers. Etc. etc. etc.


There have been tons of exceptional talents in the past... we too easily overlook that before they came into the league they were being scrutinized as "not exceptional" or "won't be as good as X" because scouts and draft experts were hedging their bets. If you were there back then you can remember how they were actually being judged, some of the things you were hearing.

Here are some things people actually said in the past:
LeBron? That guy's all hype, can't shoot.
Wade? Too small, PG/SG tweener who can't shoot.
Dwight? He's no better than Emeka Okafor, he has no real basketball skills, not sure if he's a PF or a C... the next Kwame Brown.
Chris Paul? Yet another small 6'0 PG who's playing good in college... we get those every year, what makes this one different?
Kevin Durant? Have you seen how skinny this guy is? I don't see how he's that different from Rashard Lewis or Jonathan Bender. (I remember the Rashard Lewis comparisons distinctly) Even if he turns out to be an all-star, he'll be an empty stats scorer, perennial loser... we heard this one a lot too.
Russell Westbrook? We're talking about a former backup defensive PG who was taking a backseat to Darren Collison... a guy about whom almost everyone said he can't play PG (well, they're still saying it, but it's not stopping him from dominating).
Kevin Love? Are you even serious? You're telling me this slow, undersized white dude is going to have 40/20 games every day for breakfast? Get out of there.
Blake Griffin? Another undersized PF with T-Rex arms, he'll get killed in the NBA. Next Kenyon Martin at best.
Stephen Curry? Another JJ Redick, Trajan Langdon type. Completely replaceable shooting specialist, the kind of player who gets great stats in college then has to move to a small niche role in the NBA, how can you not see this?
Kyrie Irving is small and looks slow and unathletic as hell.
Anthony Davis is way too skinny, taking a defensive specialist first is risky as hell. He's the next Tyson Chandler, Marcus Camby at best.


We can play that game all day long. The truth is, the great ones overcome their flaws, or succeed in spite of them because they have a competitive advantage somewhere else. Keep this in mind when people are nitpicking about the flaws of this year's candidates. I can almost guarantee the 2014 class has at least one HOFer in it.

...Probably tl:dr. Should stop procrastinating and get to work.

[AintNoSunshine]

I'm literally laughing to death right now:lol

Players today probably run circles around player from his playing day.

[Calabis]

Just heard what he said on ESPN.....not a damn thing wrong with what he said. There are no instant impact players anymore...it usually takes 2 to 3 years for them to develop. Where as back in the day they didn't draft on potential "fresh out of high school". U could get guys back then and u knew what u were getting because the stayed in school and developed...where as now u draft him and hope they develop.

[ralph_i_el]

players get easy free throws today...but they shot more free throws in his era? Confusing :facepalm time for logo to gogo (to the nursing home)

[SHAQisGOAT]

@BoutPractice,

Dude was complaining about FT's, when he and Oscar were the 2 guards who managed to get 10+ FT's in 5 separate seasons. Oscar had 7 of those seasons, BTW. The next highest for a guard is AI with 3 of those seasons. The rest of the guards have either 2 or less.




players get easy free throws today...but they shot more free throws in his era? Confusing :facepalm time for logo to gogo (to the nursing home)

If you look at the 1973-74 season, for example (in order not to use estimate pace), the average league pace was 107.8 and the 5 guys that went to the line more weren't cracking over 7 free-throw attempts per game (per36 min).. just last season, the average league pace was 92.0 and you had dudes reaching 9 or more FTA's per game, several above 7 (all per36 min). That's a big discrepancy when you think about it. One thing is that you can't expect a role player to have the same treatment as a star, obviously.
So yea, he makes a pretty solid point, and it's clear to check while watching the games too. Y'all should check the facts before spitting nonsense :rolleyes:

I'm just laughing at all the "nobodies"(relative to the basketball world), in this thread, talking shit about Jerry :lol That's one of the biggest figures (and minds) ever, as far as basketball, in his playing days and afterwards, I won't extend myself much about his comments - can't say I totally agree but plenty of changes have made the game "easier" and worse/more boring, at least to me - but he makes some valid points and has all the right to his opinion on that subject.

[SHAQisGOAT]

It's not necessarily better, but it is more entertaining, you have to admit.
So let's just enjoy.



Looking at it all, if everything I'd call it worse but it is what it is. I still enjoy it and watch it (my favorite sport too so I can't change that) but to me it's becoming less entertaining, and it was clearly more entertaining before, at some point(s). Again, can't do much about it (and society also "lends a hand") and I'm still watching/enjoying it.

[sportjames23]

Jerry West is a Legend and the best GM in NBA history. He can say what the fvck he wants to. :bowdown:

[TheMan]

I do think the NBA is going through a weak era today. Let's just look at the top players per decades starting in the 80's (when I started watching)...

80's Magic, Bird, MMalone, JWorthy, McHale, KAJ, young MJ, Barkley, Drexler, KMalone, Hakeem, Zeke...that's a great group of top talent there.
90's prime MJ, Barkley, Hakeem, KMalone, JStockton, Glove, DRobinson, young beastley Shaq, Zo, THardaway, Penny, RMiller, GHill, Ewing...another great set of talent
00's prime Shaq, Kobe, AI, TMac, RayRay, TParker, KG, JKidd, TimD, LeBron, CP3, Dirk, Nash, Prime Wade...again a great group of talent
So far it's almost half of the 10's and after LeBron and KD and maybe Melo, there's a big gap of talent...CP3, but nowhere near his 08 version, Rose may never be the same from his MVP form:(, same with DHoward, Paul George started hot but has cooled off, Harden has too many negatives in his game, Blake Griffin also. Don't like WBrook, so sue me. KLove is a nice player but put him in the 90's or even 00's and he won't be as good.

The 10's need some of the young guys coming into the league to start beasting to rescue this decade from being one of the weakest ever. This isn't a slam on LeBron because surely there will be LeBrontards getting up in arms over this post. LeBron is a great player in any era, this one just sucks right now. And it's not his fault.

[aj1987]

If you look at the 1973-74 season, for example (in order not to use estimate pace), the average league pace was 107.8 and the 5 guys that went to the line more weren't cracking over 7 free-throw attempts per game (per36 min).. just last season, the average league pace was 92.0 and you had dudes reaching 9 or more FTA's per game, several above 7 (all per36 min). That's a big discrepancy when you think about it. One thing is that you can't expect a role player to have the same treatment as a star, obviously.
So yea, he makes a pretty solid point, and it's clear to check while watching the games too. Y'all should check the facts before spitting nonsense :rolleyes:

I'm just laughing at all the "nobodies"(relative to the basketball world), in this thread, talking shit about Jerry :lol That's one of the biggest figures (and minds) ever, as far as basketball, in his playing days and afterwards, I won't extend myself much about his comments - can't say I totally agree but plenty of changes have made the game "easier" and worse/more boring, at least to me - but he makes some valid points and has all the right to his opinion on that subject.
You want to bring up pace when it's related to FT's, but not when it comes to their other stats? :rolleyes:
The next time you want to adjust the pace, adjust overall stats as well. In other words, if he wasn't playing at an ~115 pace, dude's stats would be good at best.
Oh yeah, West averaged over 9 FT's per game 7 times and Oscar did it 4 times. PER 36. Last season, the ONLY player who averaged over 9 FT's a game (PER 36), while playing a significant amount of games and minutes was DH. You know, the dude who gets fouled on purpose.

Don't blame me for hating on a guy, who spouts nonsense and couldn't even dribble properly with his off hand. Are you gonna agree with LeBron or Wade or Kobe etc., if they say that the mid '00's to mid '10's were the greatest basketball years ever? Honestly, if West was to play in today's NBA, he'd be a role-player.


Also, if you think basketball is "easier" or "boring" today, :facepalm.

[Rose'sACL]

SHAQisGOAT posts everything in bold. he is very insecure because he knows he is wrong.

[SHAQisGOAT]

You want to bring up pace when it's related to FT's, but not when it comes to their other stats? :rolleyes:
The next time you want to adjust the pace, adjust overall stats as well. In other words, if he wasn't playing at an ~115 pace, dude's stats would be good at best.
Oh yeah, West averaged over 9 FT's per game 7 times and Oscar did it 4 times. PER 36. Last season, the ONLY player who averaged over 9 FT's a game (PER 36), while playing a significant amount of games and minutes was DH. You know, the dude who gets fouled on purpose.

Don't blame me for hating on a guy, who spouts nonsense and couldn't even dribble properly with his off hand. Are you gonna agree with LeBron or Wade or Kobe etc., if they say that the mid '00's to mid '10's were the greatest basketball years ever? Honestly, if West was to play in today's NBA, he'd be a role-player.


Also, if you think basketball is "easier" or "boring" today, :facepalm.

Huh? I was discussing fta's, didn't bring up stats and adjusted this or that... Way to miss the ****ing point. Arguing with kids it's a hard thing to do :facepalm
Adjusting pace for what? I was just saying that EVEN at a higher pace (around 15 difference), the best guys at going to the line, back then, weren't even that close to going as much as the ones today (mainly talking about stars all-around obviously), on average of course. Those are facts, can't refute them. Plus those were just a couple of examples out of many. And, also on average, the paint was more clogged back then. Now think about all that, it's ridiculous and West certainly has a point. Furthermore, watch the tape son, clear to see.

As for the pace and stats, obviously someone like Wilt wouldn't be averaging 20 rpg today (or anyone for that matter), and so on... But all the adjusted pace thing is very subjective, can't be done straight up mathematically, let's say, as some geeks might do. Let's look at a player like West, he would be able to get "his" 19/20 shots in any era (if anything the lesser role players around him would get less shots), get over 6 apg, not as many rebounds but still 4/5. Obviously he wouldn't be putting up like 31/6/7 all together but would be a great player regardless, just as he was (same for Wilt and so on).
All that shit gets overblown, much more for a decade like the 80's (with about 10% higher pace, plus the pace was decreasing, after the 70's, as the FG% was increasing, so it goes against what many people say, another "myth", another subjective aspect) for example I've seen dudes "adjust" Bird's stats and they were considerably "worse"... Larry would get his 20 shots regardless (even taking more 3's now), get plenty of assists without much USG% as usual, his TRB% is about the same as Shawn Marion's and Matrix is smaller, played with worse rebounders on average, but was still able to grab 9.0 rpg in 35 mpg for his career. Bird averaged about the same at today's pace: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=po1M--HaINA
Even looking at his 1992 season.
PER also "takes away" too much from players playing at a - not considerable - higher pace, that's why about 7/8 of the top10 all-time leaders in PER were active in the last 10 seasons or so. It's like looking at the top10 leaders in RPG (almost all of them playing the 60's, if not all) and say they're the best rebounders ever.
And let's not forget, rules were stricter back in the day, assists were much harder to get in West's day, so on, all the "luxuries" (everything you can think of) weren't up to par, if he played today he would "get" the same as his peers, as it happened back in the day.. Main point is that a dude like West - since we're talking about him here - would be a great player with great stats, any time, regardless.

Yes it's easier for the (mostly perimeter) offensive player (and mostly stars), league makes sure of it with written/unwritten rules, and I didn't say boring (at least for the best teams) but that it has become more boring, mainly talking about players dribbling up the clock then taking a "dumb" shot, ball-movement and team play is worse, post-game too, lots of "dumb" players on the court, corny shit and hype rules everything, too much flopping, less competitiveness...

Yea, you've pretty much showed your true colors and level of knowledge by saying West would be a role player today, this discussion is over.
:facepalm
I've said this in another thread, I believe replying to you:


He wouldn't destroy him but most likely he would win the matchup more times than the other way around (I won't discuss that 1on1 bullshit, talking about 5on5 basketball here, taking everything into account, not just strictly individually also). Really close though because, imo, speaking of peaks, they're pretty close, but I'd still take West probably.
From the footage I've seen he was very effective (you can say he didn't have a "modern" style, I don't care, oh and he played under much stricter rules), had a picture perfect jumper with a lightning quick release, could really pass the ball, played great D.. And he smoked great and/or pretty athletic defenders more than enough. Plus his peers, many players, coaches, experts, people who've saw him, so on, hold him in pretty high regard. And he was clutch af with an extremely competitive mind.
You wanna talk about style, eye-test, footage, whatever.. look at this dude:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfWkiO2Iz08
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kq1oUk7sgRY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qv0YS1wHoQ
To compare him to active players, that's like a mix of Curry and Rubio, on an over 6'5, 200 lbs frame. He was playing while West was still active, never was considered or regarded as better.
This dude walked into the league a couple of years after West's retirement, super athletic with a really good jumper and game: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6OsKy1c5A0
Never considered better.
Tiny was very similar to AI, before AI, never considered better.
John Havlicek also had a similar "style" of play you talk about for West, he was still putting up prettty good numbers in 1978, at 37 years old, two years before Bird and Magic got in the league, who were the big superstars til Jordan (who still got beat by them), same Jordan who was still able to drop 40 at 40 years old, in the 00's, against some of the best defenses.
Just some examples out of countless. So yea, just stop with the nonsense, too many people underrate players like West just because..




SHAQisGOAT posts everything in bold. he is very insecure because he knows he is wrong.

You're the one looking insecure for having to bring that up every single time :oldlol:

Yea very insecure, especially for having to "debate" with ignorant children such as yourself :rolleyes:

[Jasper]

http://espn.go.com/espnradio/play?id=10521754

Listen at about the 11 minute mark.

Oh, and this year's upcoming NBA draft is a poor draft.

And before some idiot jumps in and claims that he is an old senile coot...he is a two-time NBA Executive of the Year, and under his reign in LA, the Lakers won six titles. And, he is currently the head consultant of the Golden St. Warriors...
That would mean his Warriors team will win the championship ... because the choosen one "WEST" is consulting them :facepalm

Even Dr Jack said stupid things in his lifetime

[aj1987]

Huh? I was discussing fta's, didn't bring up stats and adjusted this or that... Way to miss the ****ing point. Arguing with kids it's a hard thing to do :facepalm
Arguing with geezers who think the weak ass '60's were better than present days NBA is pretty ****ing hard as well.


Adjusting pace for what? I was just saying that EVEN at a higher pace (around 15 difference), the best guys at going to the line, back then, weren't even that close to going as much as the ones today (mainly talking about stars all-around obviously), on average of course. Those are facts, can't refute them. Plus those were just a couple of examples out of many. And, also on average, the paint was more clogged back then. Now think about all that, it's ridiculous and West certainly has a point. Furthermore, watch the tape son, clear to see.
I was talking about only the GUARDS. The most FT's for a guard last season was Harden. He got 10.2 FT's and that's his career high. Per 36, he stands at 9.6. Still less than what West averaged. If we're talking about players in general, Wilt averaged 17 FT's in one season. Yeah, the '60's was real ****ing exciting basketball. Stop acting like basketball is all about FT's nowadays. FACT is (and no, not your adjusted bullshit) players average FEWER FT's today.

How the hell is the league weak today? Sure, the NBA has cracked down on hard fouls, but who gives a shit about that? If I wanted to see people try to knock each other out, I'd go watch boxing or MMA.



And let's not forget, rules were stricter back in the day, assists were much harder to get in West's day, so on, all the "luxuries" (everything you can think of) weren't up to par, if he played today he would "get" the same as his peers, as it happened back in the day.. Main point is that a dude like West - since we're talking about him here - would be a great player with great stats, any time, regardless.
Not if you actually watched whatever footage is there of him. Dude would at best be a borderline top 25 player in the league. There's absolutely no way in hell, that he'd be averaging 30/6/7 on 50%. You might not remember or just plain don't understand defenses, but today's defenses and defensives are MUCH better than the almost "MDA style" defenses of the '60's and '70's.


Yes it's easier for the (mostly perimeter) offensive player (and mostly stars), league makes sure of it with written/unwritten rules, and I didn't say boring (at least for the best teams) but that it has become more boring, mainly talking about players dribbling up the clock then taking a "dumb" shot, ball-movement and team play is worse, post-game too, lots of "dumb" players on the court, corny shit and hype rules everything, too much flopping, less competitiveness...
All I can say is :facepalm The Heat? The Spurs? I'd rather Melo Kobe jack up 25 shots a game, then see Wilt jack up 40 shots a game or Pettit take 25 shots and 12 FT's a game to score 31 points. If you honestly believe that flopping didn't exist in the '70's and '80's, then you're just stupid. Lets also not forget that current NBA has much better defenses as well. Stricter '60's rules? The league where they allowed superstars to goal tend? :facepalm



Yea, you've pretty much showed your true colors and level of knowledge by saying West would be a role player today, this discussion is over.
:facepalm
I've said this in another thread, I believe replying to you:
If you actually believe that a guy who couldn't dribble properly with his off hand would be a top 5 player in the NBA, then yeah, this discussion is definitely over. Nothing more than an average 15/3/4 player.

GTFO with that shit. I'll say this again. West is an absolute moron for calling the current league weak. Dude played in the weakest era ever.

[germanfellow]

one has to understand one thing though:

in todays league, a guy like jerry west would have been brought up differently, would have trained differently, would have received other medical treatment, probably would have been faster and stronger than the actual jerry west was, would play under more sophisticated game strategies, etc etc,... in order to get a fair comparison we really have to ask ourselves if his talent-level (athletic, technique, iq, poise, etc) promises to produce a great player if all the other variables had been adjusted adaquately...

[FireDavidKahn]

How the hell is the draft poor?
Overrated would be the right word.

[NattyPButter]

lol not reading this large thread but did get to the part where West think he would had done good in todays NBA. That shit is just laughable...the ball would be stolen the moment he touch it cuz he doesnt dribble correctly. He would also get locked down since he would be slower then todays players. He would be on the bench

[Pointguard]

Currently the league is not booming with superstars, or guys with post up games, dominant inside play, aggressive basket attackers, multi-skilled smart players, tough guys, skilled shot blockers, defensive standouts, shot blockers, standout leaders, strong minded high flyers or even a lot of creative penetrators. Variety sucks and everybody just wants to shoot.

So I could see West being bored with the game. After Rose went down, there was nobody contending with Lebron on any level (excitement, leadership, dynamic play, hard take it to you players, players that show up for a great H2H) for like two years. About five years ago the top tier had Lebron, Kobe, Wade, DH, Dirk, CP3, Mello and a couple of others... not just Lebron top tier, then Durant second tier, fall off. Paul, fall off, Its a pretty bad time.

Injuries to Rose/Wade/Rondo even Amare', fall offs by Mello/DH/CP3 along with the old guard tiring, its just a not a good looking time. Thank goodness Kyrie is an exciting dynamic player! Hopefully DH's back woes are a thing of the past... .

As far as West talking bad about the draft he might be trying to get a dumb team to trade, so I won't read into that. I really believe Wiggins is going to be an all time great on the wings as will Embiid be at center. Parker is at worst a mix between Mello and Pierce. Exxum should be the premier slasher in the league and all are very smart players. Randle and Smart both have a good shot as multiple all stars. While I see both as tweeners they both have unique qualities the league really needs - toughness, great bball instincts and moves galore.

[fpliii]

Found an interesting link:

http://www.tidesport.org/RGRC/2011/2011_NBA_RGRC_FINAL%20FINAL.pdf

According to page 19, for years in the sample (89-90 to 10-11), the league has generally been in the mid/high 70s in terms of what percent of players are black. Based on what Laz was saying a few pages earlier, it would seem the league got close to that point by the early 70s.

I've only got to 68-69 so far (55% of the league and increasing), when I get some more years done I'll bump the thread and let you guys know.

[KingBeasley08]

Let's be real. West would be a slightly better JJ Reddick in today's game

[Soundwave]

He's not wrong, the quality of big men in the game is horrible and the overall game is reaching new levels of rock bottom.

The NBA has 4-5 too many teams and its watering down the overall product to sometimes embarrassing levels ... like the Lakers beating the Cavs with like 4 eligable players and one guy literally laying down on the bench and taking a nap.

http://larrybrownsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/chris-kaman-bench.jpg

That's just sad, but it in a lot of way sums up about 50% of the match ups on any given night.

Also for all the hype, Andrew Wiggins has been a dissapointment and Embid ... people are really just excited because he's big and can actually move on the floor ... but 11.6 ppg and 7 rpg doesn't really scream the next coming of David Robinson or Tim Duncan.

There hasn't been a true game changer to enter the NBA since Durant like seven years ago. Kyrie and all these other guys are faux "stars" ... there's nothing like Shaq or LeBron or Jordan or even Ewing coming into the NBA.

[Soundwave]

senile old man. 1999-2002 was worse.

Prime Shaq, Duncan, Iverson, Garnett, Vince Carter, T-Mac, and a peak athletic Kobe was worse? Eh, I dunno about that.

I'd rather watch those Kings-Lakers match-ups than pretty much anyone in the league now and Vince Carter in those days was more entertaining than anyone in the league today.

[jstern]

What I found the most interesting was Jerry saying that his past playoff loss still haunts him to this day. Most people hear something like that and not think anything of it, just dismiss it and not really think about that pain being real over something that doesn't seem significant to them. Since there have been things in my life that on the surface might not seem like a big deal to others, but they affect me, so that clicked with me.


Also I don't think his issue is so much with the players, but with the rules that is currently giving out an inferior product.

[AussieG]

LeBron and Durant are studs but after that it drops off quite steeply.

Maybe I'm just getting sick of the NBA, but why wasn't I sick of it 5 years ago or 15 years ago?

It seems weaker but it's not just one factor. There are other things, other factors.. teams don't isolate as much and play team ball more. It averages out the players somewhat, there isn't as much hero ball. And the rules have changed a bit. Allowing for a different style of play.

Is it soft? Not in the playoffs, but in the regular season it is a bit.

[La Frescobaldi]

check the FTA attempts by year and you will see how wrong you are.
Average free throw attempts have been declining pretty much every year since 80s started.
Average free throw attempts were 29 in 1980-81 and now it is 23.5 FTA.
perimeter players have been getting faster and stronger too so if they were getting those easy calls without getting touched then they would most definitely drive to the basket every time.

This was your only attempt in the entire thread to make a valid point. Everything else you said on here was ludicrous. I don't blame you for that, really; when it comes to '60s hoops, or really anything to do with the '60s or '70s, you obviously don't know what you are talking about. If you are interested in overcoming your ignorance, you should find out how and why it was not all those famous civil rights advocates of the '60s who overthrew inequality. It was Dwight Eisenhower, in the 1950s, who did that. Everything that came afterward was the easy stuff... consolidating what he did 10 and 20 years earlier. It was Ike that took the hardest decisions. You don't have to believe it; after all, some people don't bother with inquiry, and still believe the earth is flat.

But this post about FTAs looks valid, on first glance...... which makes it more important than the display of ignorance.
Unfortunately, this is also flawed. Interior players today don't play defense, indeed they are warned off from playing defense by the referees. Instead, they just stand vertically, with their arms in the air while the guy drives to the basket. There are fewer fouls today because they all know the league blows the whistle anytime there is a display of defense.... so they don't play defense.

I've said it for years, the circle around the basket is a stupidity, it's bad for the game, and it needs to be thrown out with the rest of the garbage.

As far as the Logo's comment, the NBA has been declining in some ways the past few years, and naturally that is because.... it's stupid to think that boys can play with men.
The 3 or 4 year college rule has it's good points and bad, but it certainly made for better quality basketball players in the NBA. And, it should be brought back, not only because a man's body develops power during those 3 or 4 years, but because his mind does too.
A guy that works out in the gym is doing a great thing for himself.... but the biggest, most powerful muscle is the brain, and that same gym rat will never exercise the most powerful muscle he's got. He builds a great torso but his brain is pure lard. The greatest players, the very best, have all been highly intelligent, well-spoken, articulate.... and they did that by working hard on developing that big muscle.

[CavaliersFTW]

This was your only attempt in the entire thread to make a valid point. Everything else you said on here was ludicrous. I don't blame you for that, really; when it comes to '60s hoops, or really anything to do with the '60s or '70s, you obviously don't know what you are talking about. If you are interested in overcoming your ignorance, you should find out how and why it was not all those famous civil rights advocates of the '60s who overthrew inequality. It was Dwight Eisenhower, in the 1950s, who did that. Everything that came afterward was the easy stuff... consolidating what he did 10 and 20 years earlier. It was Ike that took the hardest decisions. You don't have to believe it; after all, some people don't bother with inquiry, and still believe the earth is flat.

But this post about FTAs looks valid, on first glance...... which makes it more important than the display of ignorance.
Unfortunately, this is also flawed. Interior players today don't play defense, indeed they are warned off from playing defense by the referees. Instead, they just stand vertically, with their arms in the air while the guy drives to the basket. There are fewer fouls today because they all know the league blows the whistle anytime there is a display of defense.... so they don't play defense.

I've said it for years, the circle around the basket is a stupidity, it's bad for the game, and it needs to be thrown out with the rest of the garbage.

As far as the Logo's comment, the NBA has been declining in some ways the past few years, and naturally that is because.... it's stupid to think that boys can play with men.
The 3 or 4 year college rule has it's good points and bad, but it certainly made for better quality basketball players in the NBA. And, it should be brought back, not only because a man's body develops power during those 3 or 4 years, but because his mind does too.
A guy that works out in the gym is doing a great thing for himself.... but the biggest, most powerful muscle is the brain, and that same gym rat will never exercise the most powerful muscle he's got. He builds a great torso but his brain is pure lard. The greatest players, the very best, have all been highly intelligent, well-spoken, articulate.... and they did that by working hard on developing that big muscle.
:applause:

[Dro]

Wow, ish gets more and more ignorant everyday...The league IS soft...how the hell can some of you stans say its not? Watched Durant or Harden lately?

[MichaelCorleone]

Trying to stay relevant.:facepalm

[Soundwave]

Trying to stay relevant.:facepalm

ISH: where a 13-year-old 5 foot 6 kid's basketball opinion matters more than Jerry West.

[LAZERUSS]

I get so sick-and-tired of those that claim that West couldn't dribble with his left hand, or couldn't go left...all of which is completely assinine.

ShaqisGoat covered some of this earlier, but take a look at this footage...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soLH6bau9uo

These are little kids, from 1962, emulating what the Globetrotters had been doing for years before that.

And he already presented footage of Pistol Pete, who was doing things with a ball in the 60's, which haven't been duplicated since.

And yet, we are supposed to believe that a "handicapped" West was able to average 30 ppg in his regular seasons, and 40 ppg in some of his post-seasons, without being able to dribble?

As for this ridiculous argument that defenses are much better today...how come the league eFG%'s are approaching 50%?

And how come Kareem had seasons, from 1969 thru the 70's, in which he shot .539, .529, .518, and even .513 (in the middle of the decade BTW)? And yet, he never shot below .564 in his first eight seasons of the 80's, and in fact, had career high's of .604 and .599 in that decade? And how come a peak/prime Kareem could only shoot .464 against an old Wilt in 28 H2H games, or .440 against an aging Nate in 40 H2H games? And yet, a 38-41 year old Kareem shot .607 against a 23-26 year old Hakeem in 23 career H2H's? Hell, a 38-39 year old Kareem, in TEN STRAIGHT games against Hakeem, averaged 32 ppg on .621 shooting, which included three games of 40+, and a high of 46 (on 21-30 shooting, and in only 37 minutes.) And in the same week he was crushing Hakeem with that 46 point game, he pounded Ewing with a 40 point game on 15-22 shooting. This from a KAJ who couldn't jump over a match-stick.

And before someone jumps in and ALSO claims that today's players are much better offensively, explain this to me. In the 58-59 season, the NBA shot .756 from the FT line. As of right now...the NBA is currently shooting .754. And keep in mind that there were leagues in the 70's that shot over .770.

As for the percentage of black players argument. West led the league in scoring in his 69-70 season, at 31.2 ppg. Just the year before, in the Finals, he won the FMVP with a 39 ppg series. In his 71-72 season, at age 33, and clearly on the downside of his career, he finished second in the MVP voting, and averaged 26 ppg, 10 apg, and shot .477 from the field (in a league that shot .455 overall.) This from league that was already about 70+% black.

As I have repeatedly proven...there has never been any year in NBA history, in which a new group of players came into the league, and just crushed the existing players...and that includes 1980 when Magic and Bird arrived.

And finally...put today's NBA players back into the 60's and 70's, and they wouldn't get the ball past half-court before being whistled for traveling or palming the ball. Allow players like West and Oscar, who were already brilliant at driving the ball, the ability to take four steps and to "scoop dribble" with impunity, and they would be even more unstoppable today.

[SHAQisGOAT]

Let's be real. West would be a slightly better JJ Reddick in today's game

Why not a different (but better overall) version of Steve Nash?
Why not a rich man's (prime) Manu Ginobili?
:confusedshrug:
And that's since we're comparing him to recent white guards... because, you know, in the last years there's never been an elite black player with less or about the same athleticism as a Jerry West, even shorter with an inferior wingspan :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Y2ktors]

Maybe Embiid will go to become a dominant pro, but he is currently averaging 11.1 ppg, 7.9 rpg, 1.4 apg, 2.6 bpg, and shooting .624 from the field. Good, but nothing sensational.

Two days ago he faced a Sooner team whose tallest player was 6-8 (one of only two 6-8 players on their rosters), and in 30 minutes, he scored 12 points, on 3-5 shooting, with 13 rebounds.

He has faced the half-blind 7-1 soph Isaiah Austin, who is certainly not a great player, twice this season, and combined, he averaged 8.5 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 1.0 bpg, and shot .385 from the field.

And yet we are supposed to assume that he is another Hakeem?

nothing about his game reminds me of Hakeem.

[Pointguard]

Also for all the hype, Andrew Wiggins has been a dissapointment and Embid ... people are really just excited because he's big and can actually move on the floor ... but 11.6 ppg and 7 rpg doesn't really scream the next coming of David Robinson or Tim Duncan.

Embiid is definitely further along the line than Duncan, Hakeem and Robinson as freshmen and Robinson played against scrubs. And I'm sure Embiids light years better than them in his third year of learning the game. Only Duncan is close in the skills department as Freshmen. And the college game is called incredibly soft.

The thing about Wiggins that surprised me is that I rarely see a game where his athleticism comes into much play, which is where his hype was given. His touch lately (this year) has been great. He has a very good floater and he's hitting three pointers. He is slimmer than I thought and will have to play SG. If you take strength out of the equation, I don't know who I would say is a better athlete than him in the NBA.

[oh the horror]

Wtf does West being able to play in today's league have to do with his very sharp ability to scout talent and put together good rosters?


Say whatever you want, every team he's had a hand in, he has made competitive or championship caliber.

[oh the horror]

Trying to stay relevant.:facepalm



Yes I'm sure a hall of fame, icon who is the actual logo of the league is trying to stay relevant.

[sportjames23]

This was your only attempt in the entire thread to make a valid point. Everything else you said on here was ludicrous. I don't blame you for that, really; when it comes to '60s hoops, or really anything to do with the '60s or '70s, you obviously don't know what you are talking about. If you are interested in overcoming your ignorance, you should find out how and why it was not all those famous civil rights advocates of the '60s who overthrew inequality. It was Dwight Eisenhower, in the 1950s, who did that. Everything that came afterward was the easy stuff... consolidating what he did 10 and 20 years earlier. It was Ike that took the hardest decisions. You don't have to believe it; after all, some people don't bother with inquiry, and still believe the earth is flat.

But this post about FTAs looks valid, on first glance...... which makes it more important than the display of ignorance.
Unfortunately, this is also flawed. Interior players today don't play defense, indeed they are warned off from playing defense by the referees. Instead, they just stand vertically, with their arms in the air while the guy drives to the basket. There are fewer fouls today because they all know the league blows the whistle anytime there is a display of defense.... so they don't play defense.

I've said it for years, the circle around the basket is a stupidity, it's bad for the game, and it needs to be thrown out with the rest of the garbage.

As far as the Logo's comment, the NBA has been declining in some ways the past few years, and naturally that is because.... it's stupid to think that boys can play with men.
The 3 or 4 year college rule has it's good points and bad, but it certainly made for better quality basketball players in the NBA. And, it should be brought back, not only because a man's body develops power during those 3 or 4 years, but because his mind does too.
A guy that works out in the gym is doing a great thing for himself.... but the biggest, most powerful muscle is the brain, and that same gym rat will never exercise the most powerful muscle he's got. He builds a great torso but his brain is pure lard. The greatest players, the very best, have all been highly intelligent, well-spoken, articulate.... and they did that by working hard on developing that big muscle.


Everything you said, except the bold. You give Ike too much credit and take credit away from those Civil Rights giants of the 60s (who actually were fighting for Civil Rights well before the 60s--A. Philip Randolph, for one).

Don't get it twisted, man. Ike did some great stuff for Civil Rights with sending the Army to integrate some schools in the South, but there was WAY much more work to be done than just that.

[AlphaWolf24]

go and dig up wilt and lick his bones you crazy idiot who thinks that jordan missed playoffs not once but multiple times.
your comment is a great example why everyone thinks you are biased. i never insult anyone, even the trolls but you come here and write stuff like you are a big basketball expert and only your opinion counts.


Jordan did miss the playoff's multiple times :confusedshrug:

[Darius]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

For me, the league is much better than it has been in the past in recent years.

The pace is faster, the ball movement is better and teams play more cohesively.

[hawksdogsbraves]

Embiid is definitely further along the line than Duncan, Hakeem and Robinson as freshmen and Robinson played against scrubs. And I'm sure Embiids light years better than them in his third year of learning the game. Only Duncan is close in the skills department as Freshmen. And the college game is called incredibly soft.

The thing about Wiggins that surprised me is that I rarely see a game where his athleticism comes into much play, which is where his hype was given. His touch lately (this year) has been great. He has a very good floater and he's hitting three pointers. He is slimmer than I thought and will have to play SG. If you take strength out of the equation, I don't know who I would say is a better athlete than him in the NBA.

I don't know about Hakeem and Robinson, but Embiid is NOT further along than Duncan was as a freshman. Duncan averaged 10/10 with 4bpg, and he did it during a time when he was going up against upperclassmen every night. The fact that Embiid has only played the game for as short a time as he has though is pretty scary though.

Wiggins won't be the best athlete in the league, and you obviously can't take strength out of such an equation as it plays a pretty significant role in 'athleticism'. He really hasn't wowed me as much as you'd expect for a guy who has been heralded as the best prospect since Durant for the past 3 or 4 years.

[navy]

The nba is definitely weak in the east this year, but no era is weaker than the 60s and 70s.

[HurricaneKid]

I was listening to him during the interview and SVP was clearly in awe of interviewing him and let too many statements slide without follow ups.

I think it is evident the league has never been better. The players are bigger and faster than they have ever been. We have lost some enforcers but that it because the league has largely done away with their necessity.

What old timers (whether thats MJ, Magic, even West) seem to continually overlook is the impact of the alteration of defensive rules. When West was an elite talent evaluator the rules were different. Now defenses can give a LOT more help against elite players. They can cheat off other players, have a rim protector helping on the front side (obv tech in the day), etc. There are no players who don't have a useful offensive skill; the penalty is too high to have an extra defender flying around. And its too easy to force a big to the outside defensively and very few bigs can play in space which is why there are only a handful in the league (and why Pop and Vogel took out their elite def bigs in late game situations). The book on Bynum this year was to push pace as he couldn't get back. When he was on the floor opponents scored 19pts/48 in transition. Thats a free 8 points because he couldn't keep up. Isolating weaknesses like this is a newer phenomenon that old guys repeatedly show little understanding of.

[CavaliersFTW]

I was listening to him during the interview and SVP was clearly in awe of interviewing him and let too many statements slide without follow ups.

I think it is evident the league has never been better. The players are bigger and faster than they have ever been. We have lost some enforcers but that it because the league has largely done away with their necessity.

What old timers (whether thats MJ, Magic, even West) seem to continually overlook is the impact of the alteration of defensive rules. When West was an elite talent evaluator the rules were different. Now defenses can give a LOT more help against elite players. They can cheat off other players, have a rim protector helping on the front side (obv tech in the day), etc. There are no players who don't have a useful offensive skill; the penalty is too high to have an extra defender flying around. And its too easy to force a big to the outside defensively and very few bigs can play in space which is why there are only a handful in the league (and why Pop and Vogel took out their elite def bigs in late game situations). The book on Bynum this year was to push pace as he couldn't get back. When he was on the floor opponents scored 19pts/48 in transition. Thats a free 8 points because he couldn't keep up. Isolating weaknesses like this is a newer phenomenon that old guys repeatedly show little understanding of.
Drivel. West knows more than you ever will about basketball, let's not try to act like you know things or see things he doesn't, the opposite is true. His track record speaks for itself, he's still working for the NBA as one of the most successful managers/consultants in league history well past the age of retirement, and it isn't because he needs the money. He was one of the best to ever play just like MJ and Magic were, but obviously he is a hell of a lot better at recognizing and organizing talent objectively than either of those other 'old timers' have proven so that comparison isn't valid.

As for comparing what he knows with what you know, you are typing your unsolicited opinion at home on your computer where as Jerry West is still sought after and paid millions to give it to NBA organizations that are competing for his services. Think about that next time you assume you know more than he does about ANYTHING related to basketball.

[aj1987]

I was listening to him during the interview and SVP was clearly in awe of interviewing him and let too many statements slide without follow ups.

I think it is evident the league has never been better. The players are bigger and faster than they have ever been. We have lost some enforcers but that it because the league has largely done away with their necessity.

What old timers (whether thats MJ, Magic, even West) seem to continually overlook is the impact of the alteration of defensive rules. When West was an elite talent evaluator the rules were different. Now defenses can give a LOT more help against elite players. They can cheat off other players, have a rim protector helping on the front side (obv tech in the day), etc. There are no players who don't have a useful offensive skill; the penalty is too high to have an extra defender flying around. And its too easy to force a big to the outside defensively and very few bigs can play in space which is why there are only a handful in the league (and why Pop and Vogel took out their elite def bigs in late game situations). The book on Bynum this year was to push pace as he couldn't get back. When he was on the floor opponents scored 19pts/48 in transition. Thats a free 8 points because he couldn't keep up. Isolating weaknesses like this is a newer phenomenon that old guys repeatedly show little understanding of.
:applause:


:oldlol: @ all the other idiots, who think that West doesn't have any agenda, when he calls the current league soft. Dude literally played in the weakest era EVER and got the most FT's (per game) than any other guard EVER. Second most total FT's (first is Oscar). Dude got more FT's than MJ and MJ played ~150 more games than him.

[Euroleague]

The NBA has gotten steadily worse just about every year since the late '90s.

[Euroleague]

I got a kick out of watching Doc vs Larry Bird in 1980 on the side panel of your You Tube video. Doc and Bird beasting, but Doc won that match up that day in the ECF in 1980. Thanks!

But really, the game is very different than it was even during the 90's,let alone the 80's or 60's. What's different? a lot.

The 3 point shot,zone allowed under the defensive 3 second rule, and hand checking have changed the nature of the game. This has caused teams to change emphasis on strategies and tactics.

Shoot the three, get in the lane, and don't take long 2's. That's the game today. Scouts and coaches have focused on finding players that can do these things. It's a PG dominated league, and rare is the big man who dominates the paint like the old dinosaurs of the past like Moses, KAJ, Russel, and Wilt. No more.

And please, no more discussions of how diluted the talent is compared to the past. The influx of internationals have proven that a worldwide pool of talent is better than ever.

Defenses are more sophisticated than ever before. Post defense is better than ever with aggressive double teams, sometimes with a blindside defender akin to a qb blitz in the NFL. This is something that didn't even exist in the 80's, as far as I can remember. BTW, I watched a LOT of 80's basketball.

It's not necessarily better, but it is more entertaining, you have to admit.
So let's just enjoy.

WTF are you smoking?

You can't have a zone defense when you have a defensive 3 second rule.

Good god this NBA marketing stuff is unbelievable with the NBA only fan morons.

[ArbitraryWater]

WTF are you smoking?

You can't have a zone defense when you have a defensive 3 second rule.

Good god this NBA marketing stuff is unbelievable with the NBA only fan morons.

Euroleague teaching :applause:

[TheGreatDeraj]

Euroleague teaching :applause:

it's not a true zone but that rule allows for a player to guard an area rather than a player. You couldn't do that in the 80's, it was illegal defense.

[QUOTE=http://www.nba.com/analysis/rules_history.html]
1981-82

[Euroleague]

it's not a true zone but that rule allows for a player to guard an area rather than a player. You couldn't do that in the 80's, it was illegal defense.

He claimed that the defensive 3 seconds was the zone. The defensive 3 seconds is actually what automatically prevents the zone. So yeah, he is smoking crack, as usual.

A true zone defense allows you to plant 3 defenders in the paint if you want to.

Something never ever seen in any NBA game.

[CavaliersFTW]

He claimed that the defensive 3 seconds was the zone. The defensive 3 seconds is actually what automatically prevents the zone. So yeah, he is smoking crack, as usual.

A true zone defense allows you to plant 3 defenders in the paint if you want to.

Something never ever seen in any NBA game.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPa-2czPs1g

[Euroleague]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPa-2czPs1g

Another crackhead that thinks the defensive 3 seconds is a zone defense.....

:facepalm :biggums:

[Pointguard]

I don't know about Hakeem and Robinson, but Embiid is NOT further along than Duncan was as a freshman. Duncan averaged 10/10 with 4bpg, and he did it during a time when he was going up against upperclassmen every night. The fact that Embiid has only played the game for as short a time as he has though is pretty scary though.

Wiggins won't be the best athlete in the league, and you obviously can't take strength out of such an equation as it plays a pretty significant role in 'athleticism'. He really hasn't wowed me as much as you'd expect for a guy who has been heralded as the best prospect since Durant for the past 3 or 4 years.
Duncan just blocked shots better than Embiid and that's largely because he played more and wasn't called for contesting shots like they call the game today. Duncan was stiff as a freshman. Roy Hinson was considered better in his conference. What aspect of the game are you saying he was better than Embiid?

Posting up? Foot movement? Mobility around the basket? Court awareness? Duncan improved a lot his second year but reverse layups, dribbling out of double teams were barely in the second year repertoire.

We've had plenty of discussions here about Rose and Westbrook being among the best athletes in the league so you might want to change your little rule book.
Problem is though few players drive much in today's game so their athleticism outside of fast breaks is rarely seen. The Wig isn't coming in averaging 20 but a couple of years in, he should be alright.

[La Frescobaldi]

Everything you said, except the bold. You give Ike too much credit and take credit away from those Civil Rights giants of the 60s (who actually were fighting for Civil Rights well before the 60s--A. Philip Randolph, for one).

Don't get it twisted, man. Ike did some great stuff for Civil Rights with sending the Army to integrate some schools in the South, but there was WAY much more work to be done than just that.

Absolutely. I don't mean to belittle those guys; I marched with some of them, myself. They were great people and what they did stands to this day. Many of them gave their lives for what they believed in.

You know, Russell gets a lot of credit, within the hoops community, for his efforts in that very area; but he was not the only one. Billy Cunningham was another guy who wouldn't stand for it, and Havlicek went to the floor with his fists and elbows flying a few times over things that were shouted on the court about his teammates. I saw Chamberlain go over the scorer's table one night in Syracuse, headed right up the seats after a guy. I didn't hear what was said but Wilt was the most even tempered guy, so you can imagine it had to be bad enough. Nate Thurmond did a lot of talking with a lot of people after games, so did Walt Bellamy - who was truly a great man imo.

But it remains to be said. The first resistance to a shift in society is always the hardest to overcome... many people, older than me (if you can imagine that!!) talked all their lives about how much pressure Eisenhower was under, not only for calling in the Army as you mention, but for his Civil Rights acts and his support of equality everywhere.... how much strain and hatred he had to endure from the Democrats for what he did. Ike was a Republican, you know, so most of what he did gets little attention from our media today, which leans so far to the left it is always in danger of falling into the Pacific Ocean. But there's little doubt that only a man who had led our armies in the combat of World War II could have withstood the enormous political vitriol he faced in the '50s.

[oh the horror]

I keep seeing people saying the same shit.


Players are bigger, faster, more athletic etc.



Yet, we have more boneheaded players now than I've ever seen.



Where has the midrange game gone to? Players repeatedly fail to make the right passes, right basketball play etc.


Why do you think the Spurs, with aging stars stay on top? Pop has those guys playing sound. You don't see them signing boneheads on that team.



Teams are jacking up threes and high flying. Most of these super athletic guys don't play the right way.

[hawksdogsbraves]

The NBA has gotten steadily worse just about every year since the late '90s.

That doesn't mean it's worse than it was in the 1970's...

[DonDadda59]

:applause:


:oldlol: @ all the other idiots, who think that West doesn't have any agenda, when he calls the current league soft. Dude literally played in the weakest era EVER and got the most FT's (per game) than any other guard EVER. Second most total FT's (first is Oscar). Dude got more FT's than MJ and MJ played ~150 more games than him.

What 'agenda' does West have exactly? :wtf:

The man has proven to be a basketball genius both on and off the court for longer than you've been alive. He still makes millions of dollars TODAY because teams realize there's no one better in the business. The man has forgotten more about the game than anyone here could ever hope to possibly know. Just because his opinion doesn't vibe with yours doesn't mean it's because of some 'agenda' that you haven't even identified.

The man has been involved in the game of basketball since the early 40s in all facets of the game- from the court to the front office. But you, who probably started watching basketball just after the decision, are the authority?

The nerve on some people :facepalm

[hawksdogsbraves]

What 'agenda' does West have exactly? :wtf:

The man has proven to be a basketball genius both on and off the court for longer than you've been alive. He still makes millions of dollars TODAY because teams realize there's no one better in the business. The man has forgotten more about the game than anyone here could ever hope to possibly know. Just because his opinion doesn't vibe with yours doesn't mean it's because of some 'agenda' that you haven't even identified.

The man has been involved in the game of basketball since the early 40s in all facets of the game- from the court to the front office. But you, who probably started watching basketball just after the decision, are the authority?

The nerve on some people :facepalm

That doesn't mean he can't be wrong. David Kahn has way more credentials and basketball knowledge than any poster on ISH could ever dream of having, but that doesn't mean he didn't make some awful decisions and moves.

[DonDadda59]

That doesn't mean he can't be wrong. David Kahn has way more credentials and basketball knowledge than any poster on ISH could ever dream of having, but that doesn't mean he didn't make some awful decisions and moves.

Not even remotely the same thing. Wasn't Kahn a lawyer and writer before becoming head of basketball operations? Did ever play, coach, scout, etc? Seems like he was a businessman with other interests who just happened to get involved in basketball. Not even in the same stratosphere as West in terms of basketball IQ and knowledge. And I'd say he proved that in Minnesota :lol

[hawksdogsbraves]

Not even remotely the same thing. Wasn't Kahn a lawyer and writer before becoming head of basketball operations? Did ever play, coach, scout, etc? Seems like he was a businessman with other interests who just happened to get involved in basketball. Not even in the same stratosphere as West in terms of basketball IQ and knowledge. And I'd say he proved that in Minnesota :lol

Ok how about Joe Dumars? Dude just gave Josh Smith a huge contract when anybody with common sense could tell you that A) You shouldn't give big bucks to a headcase chucker, and B) He's an awful fit for that team with that young frontcourt.

There's a million examples you could come up with, but the fact remains that just because you're a smart person with a great deal of expertise in a certain area, you're not infallible.

Do you think this is the weakest era of NBA basketball since the 1960's?

[DonDadda59]

Ok how about Joe Dumars? Dude just gave Josh Smith a huge contract when anybody with common sense could tell you that A) You shouldn't give big bucks to a headcase chucker, and B) He's an awful fit for that team with that young frontcourt.

There's a million examples you could come up with, but the fact remains that just because you're a smart person with a great deal of expertise in a certain area, you're not infallible.

I'm not saying he's infallible. Just pointing out that the dude started playing basketball in the 1940s and here we are in 2014 and the dude is still getting paid millions of dollars for his knowledge, which Historically has proven to be genius level. The man just knows the game and has more or less seen its entire modern History up close. He's evaluated some of the greatest players ever personally and has put together championship squads.

So it's a little ridiculous that some random player stans who've seen maybe 1/10,000th of the amount of basketball he's seen would dismiss his evaluation as an 'agenda' of some sort. Why would he have an 'agenda' against basketball today? The dude is still making money from the game. Makes absolutely no sense.


Do you think this is the weakest era of NBA basketball since the 1960's?

From what I've seen (early 90s-present) it is, easily. Beyond that I can't really comment because I have no knowledge beyond the rare game tape and highlight reels. But Jerry has seen it all.

[aj1987]

What 'agenda' does West have exactly? :wtf:

The man has proven to be a basketball genius both on and off the court for longer than you've been alive. He still makes millions of dollars TODAY because teams realize there's no one better in the business. The man has forgotten more about the game than anyone here could ever hope to possibly know. Just because his opinion doesn't vibe with yours doesn't mean it's because of some 'agenda' that you haven't even identified.

The man has been involved in the game of basketball since the early 40s in all facets of the game- from the court to the front office. But you, who probably started watching basketball just after the decision, are the authority?

The nerve on some people :facepalm
What would you say, if Wade says "the '60's and the '70's were the weakest ever in basketball history. The players then ('60's) averaged more FT's than another player ever."? Wade would get properly blasted for his comments and nobody would respect him. **** that. Even if Kobe or LeBron or KD or anyone else says that, they're gonna feel the heat. Remember Russell having a mini meltdown, just 'cause Bron didn't have him on his Mt. Rushmore?

If you read through the thread, I never disregarded his ranking or his talent evaluation.

The guy played in the weakest era of basketball EVER and he wants to talk shit about the current league? **** that. Derizen would take him to school and shit on his soul. I still do believe that he has had a better career than Wade, but saying that today's league is weak totally asinine. **** that shit. D

[Legends66NBA7]

Derizen would take him to school and shit on his soul.

Who ?

[CavaliersFTW]

What would you say, if Wade says "the '60's and the '70's were the weakest ever in basketball history. The players then ('60's) averaged more FT's than another player ever."? Wade would get properly blasted for his comments and nobody would respect him. **** that. Even if Kobe or LeBron or KD or anyone else says that, they're gonna feel the heat. Remember Russell having a mini meltdown, just 'cause Bron didn't have him on his Mt. Rushmore?

If you read through the thread, I never disregarded his ranking or his talent evaluation.

The guy played in the weakest era of basketball EVER and he wants to talk shit about the current league? **** that. Derizen would take him to school and shit on his soul. I still do believe that he has had a better career than Wade, but saying that today's league is weak totally asinine. **** that shit. D
3 to make 2
2 to make 1

Dumbass. Learn the rules of the game and how they've changed and shit might make more sense to you.

Jerry West's bball knowledge >>> any little snarky remark your pea brain can muster up.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

What would you say, if Wade says "the '60's and the '70's were the weakest ever in basketball history. The players then ('60's) averaged more FT's than another player ever."? Wade would get properly blasted for his comments and nobody would respect him. **** that. Even if Kobe or LeBron or KD or anyone else says that, they're gonna feel the heat. Remember Russell having a mini meltdown, just 'cause Bron didn't have him on his Mt. Rushmore?

If you read through the thread, I never disregarded his ranking or his talent evaluation.

The guy played in the weakest era of basketball EVER and he wants to talk shit about the current league? **** that. Derizen would take him to school and shit on his soul. I still do believe that he has had a better career than Wade, but saying that today's league is weak totally asinine. **** that shit. D

God damn, you're an idiot.

[SHAQisGOAT]

What 'agenda' does West have exactly? :wtf:

The man has proven to be a basketball genius both on and off the court for longer than you've been alive. He still makes millions of dollars TODAY because teams realize there's no one better in the business. The man has forgotten more about the game than anyone here could ever hope to possibly know. Just because his opinion doesn't vibe with yours doesn't mean it's because of some 'agenda' that you haven't even identified.

The man has been involved in the game of basketball since the early 40s in all facets of the game- from the court to the front office. But you, who probably started watching basketball just after the decision, are the authority?

The nerve on some people :facepalm

:applause:

To put it simply, that dude's a ****ing idiot and he continues to post dumb shit :facepalm

[SHAQisGOAT]

The players then ('60's) averaged more FT's than another player ever.

:biggums:

So you keep on with that bogus shit even if the clear facts and many examples "show" that today's stars go to the line more, when you consider everything and look at things in perspective? What an ignorant tool... Different rules, higher pace and you can't compare a role player to a superstar (so looking at the league as a whole). Clear facts are there to see, plus watch the ****ing tape, stars today go to the line "easier" then back in day, superstar treatment is way higher.
Just keep on with the same stupid stuff.

[ImKobe]

Jerry West in today's league would be Goran Dragic on steroids.

[Rose'sACL]

:biggums:

So you keep on with that bogus shit even if the clear facts and many examples "show" that today's stars go to the line more, when you consider everything and look at things in perspective? What an ignorant tool... Different rules, higher pace and you can't compare a role player to a superstar (so looking at the league as a whole). Clear facts are there to see, plus watch the ****ing tape, stars today go to the line "easier" then back in day, superstar treatment is way higher.
Just keep on with the same stupid stuff.
you and cavsftw should have babies together. pace only applies when you like it and doesn't matter when you don't like it.

[SHAQisGOAT]

you and cavsftw should have babies together. pace only applies when you like it and doesn't matter when you don't like it.

So funny man, keep it going :rolleyes: If you say so :rolleyes: Show me an example, please, then. Ignorant kids such as yourself missing the whole point though, actually funny :lol

[DatAsh]

I actually think the league is stronger right now than it's been in quite some time.

He is right about the free throws though. It's much easier to get to the line now than it was even just 15 years ago. That's one thing I hope the league eventually addresses, though I doubt they will.

[MichaelCorleone]

Jerry West in today's league would be Goran Dragic on steroids.
Don't disrespect Dragic.:facepalm

Jerry West is at best a Kirk Hinrich tier player in today's league.

[PsychoBe]

i believe at this point in time officiating is the only thing that's holding the league back. back in the day you somewhat knew what you were going to get in each game, now even as a fan you scratch your head on about every call which is almost game-stopping most of the time. sometimes refs have to send a message if there is too much physicality and i get that, but nowadays they don't allow much of any, especially for the big guys down low.

you shouldn't call ticky-tacky fouls if you are fighting for position. what's the defender supposed to do, let their man do what they want and hope they miss? you fight them off their spot but with the ways things are going now it's almost impossible to play true defense because you never know what you're going to get.

we have more great players now then we did in the early 00's and the talent pool is filling up, but unfortunately it's very hard to make use of this talent when the refs have so much control over the game. nowadays we have great players, but not enough great teams. it used to be the opposite back in the day.

[La Frescobaldi]

That doesn't mean he can't be wrong. David Kahn has way more credentials and basketball knowledge than any poster on ISH could ever dream of having, but that doesn't mean he didn't make some awful decisions and moves.

Comparing David Kahn to Jerry West? That's like comparing a Ugo to a Ferrari man, come on!!

You miss the whole fact of Jerry West. The guy has been actively successful at the NBA Finals level since 1962. He's been involved in some of the greatest trades in history, brought the Lakers to the top of the game in the '60s, the '80s, and the 00s. He's been a General Manager for decades, all of them successful. He's seen thousands of players come and go, styles, teams, owners, rules - for 50 years. He knows basketball at every level right down to the ground and STILL teaches moves to NBA players that they never saw before. Entire NBA eras have risen and faded into dusty memory and he's still running shop at the very top.

More than any other man, the NBA is Jerry West's domain and it has been since it was a national sport.

david kahn lulz

[Psileas]

What would you say, if Wade says "the '60's and the '70's were the weakest ever in basketball history. The players then ('60's) averaged more FT's than another player ever."? Wade would get properly blasted for his comments and nobody would respect him. **** that. Even if Kobe or LeBron or KD or anyone else says that, they're gonna feel the heat. Remember Russell having a mini meltdown, just 'cause Bron didn't have him on his Mt. Rushmore?

If you read through the thread, I never disregarded his ranking or his talent evaluation.

The guy played in the weakest era of basketball EVER and he wants to talk shit about the current league? **** that. Derizen would take him to school and shit on his soul. I still do believe that he has had a better career than Wade, but saying that today's league is weak totally asinine. **** that shit. D

1) Lots of ignoramuses would applaud Wade if he ever were to make such comments. I'm pretty sure you'd applaud him, as well. The reason he (and others) have never made such comments is because he's never been asked such questions in the first place (go on, find me some cases of a player being asked to compare eras). West has claimed so for this era, because this era makes today's news and that's the era young NBA fans care to hear about. Most people don't care about the past, so not many comments and discussions are going to be centered around the past, hence, less disrespectful talk as well. It's a matter of quantity, not quality/actual respect.

2a) Funny how you talk about West's "agendas", yet you're bold enough to claim that he played "in the worst era", "Derizen (DeRozan?) would "sh!t" on him", which are fully agenda-driven posts, with which I'm sure lots of similarly "angered" fans agree and which I'm sure you'd believe even if West never made such a claim - so, it's not as if it's just a provocative post.

2b)Heck, with these stupid "weak era" trends that go on among young fans, even if West was nothing more than an ignorant, young man himself, his comment would still seem like a breath of fresh air, compared to the recycled garbage we're exposed to all the time. It wouldn't be necessarily be correct, but it would definitely look a lot more interesting than what we've been, kind of, "reading" all these years.

[LAZERUSS]

Comparing David Kahn to Jerry West? That's like comparing a Ugo to a Ferrari man, come on!!

You miss the whole fact of Jerry West. The guy has been actively successful at the NBA Finals level since 1962. He's been involved in some of the greatest trades in history, brought the Lakers to the top of the game in the '60s, the '80s, and the 00s. He's been a General Manager for decades, all of them successful. He's seen thousands of players come and go, styles, teams, owners, rules - for 50 years. He knows basketball at every level right down to the ground and STILL teaches moves to NBA players that they never saw before. Entire NBA eras have risen and faded into dusty memory and he's still running shop at the very top.

More than any other man, the NBA is Jerry West's domain and it has been since it was a national sport.

david kahn lulz

A brilliant post.

:applause: :applause: :applause:

[aj1987]

3 to make 2
2 to make 1

Dumbass. Learn the rules of the game and how they've changed and shit might make more sense to you.

Jerry West's bball knowledge >>> any little snarky remark your pea brain can muster up.
The average number of fouls in the league in the '60 was 2100+ and it's in the 1700's now. So yeah, **** you.



1) Lots of ignoramuses would applaud Wade if he ever were to make such comments. I'm pretty sure you'd applaud him, as well. The reason he (and others) have never made such comments is because he's never been asked such questions in the first place (go on, find me some cases of a player being asked to compare eras). West has claimed so for this era, because this era makes today's news and that's the era young NBA fans care to hear about. Most people don't care about the past, so not many comments and discussions are going to be centered around the past, hence, less disrespectful talk as well. It's a matter of quantity, not quality/actual respect.

2a) Funny how you talk about West's "agendas", yet you're bold enough to claim that he played "in the worst era", "Derizen (DeRozan?) would "sh!t" on him", which are fully agenda-driven posts, with which I'm sure lots of similarly "angered" fans agree and which I'm sure you'd believe even if West never made such a claim - so, it's not as if it's just a provocative post.

2b)Heck, with these stupid "weak era" trends that go on among young fans, even if West was nothing more than an ignorant, young man himself, his comment would still seem like a breath of fresh air, compared to the recycled garbage we're exposed to all the time. It wouldn't be necessarily be correct, but it would definitely look a lot more interesting than what we've been, kind of, "reading" all these years.
The thing is, it's actually quite annoying when these players from the '60's and '70's come out and claim that their era is the best ever and the league today is extremely weak. I stilly rank players from that era quite highly. I have 3 players from then in the top 5, whenever I rank the top 10 players (not that anybody gives a shit about my lists).



you and cavsftw should have babies together. pace only applies when you like it and doesn't matter when you don't like it.
This.

@ SHAQisGOAT, STFU, retard. The league averaged 2100+ fouls in the '60's compared to 1700+ today. Even if you want to "adjust" for pace, both eras averaged pretty much the same amount of fouls.

[Rooster]

Comparing David Kahn to Jerry West? That's like comparing a Ugo to a Ferrari man, come on!!

You miss the whole fact of Jerry West. The guy has been actively successful at the NBA Finals level since 1962. He's been involved in some of the greatest trades in history, brought the Lakers to the top of the game in the '60s, the '80s, and the 00s. He's been a General Manager for decades, all of them successful. He's seen thousands of players come and go, styles, teams, owners, rules - for 50 years. He knows basketball at every level right down to the ground and STILL teaches moves to NBA players that they never saw before. Entire NBA eras have risen and faded into dusty memory and he's still running shop at the very top.

More than any other man, the NBA is Jerry West's domain and it has been since it was a national sport.

david kahn lulz

:applause: :applause: :applause:

Just like what Shaq said in his book, the very presence of Jerry West in their locker room made everyone quiet especially when West is talking.

[Psileas]

The thing is, it's actually quite annoying when these players from the '60's and '70's come out and claim that their era is the best ever and the league today is extremely weak. I stilly rank players from that era quite highly. I have 3 players from then in the top 5, whenever I rank the top 10 players (not that anybody gives a shit about my lists).

It's still wrong to make generalizations as if these older players are conspiring in some way, although they have the same bias that every era's players have: They believe they played in the greatest era. But like I said, others have implied so, as well. Didn't Jordan claim that he could score 100 if he played today? Didn't Bird joke that the only reason a today's Team USA could beat the Dream Team would be because the Dream-teamers are 50-year olds today?

As for your list, I similarly remind you that the same Jerry West has called Kobe the GOAT Laker, and that's a statement with which even lots of modern NBA fans disagree.

[LAZERUSS]

The average number of fouls in the league in the '60 was 2100+ and it's in the 1700's now. So yeah, **** you.



The thing is, it's actually quite annoying when these players from the '60's and '70's come out and claim that their era is the best ever and the league today is extremely weak. I stilly rank players from that era quite highly. I have 3 players from then in the top 5, whenever I rank the top 10 players (not that anybody gives a shit about my lists).



This.

@ SHAQisGOAT, STFU, retard. The league averaged 2100+ fouls in the '60's compared to 1700+ today. Even if you want to "adjust" for pace, both eras averaged pretty much the same amount of fouls.

But there is no PROOF that today's NBA is any better than it was 50 years ago, either. I have said it before, but find me the exact year in which the league suddenly became much greater than the season before. You can't. Again, I have read those that would claim that the arrival of Magic and Bird "suddenly" became the modern era. Hmmm...then how do they explain that in the first half of the decade of the 80's, that it was players from the 70's (and even the 60's if you count KAJ) that were winning MVPs, scoring titles, FG% titles, and rebounding titles? My gawd old men like KAJ and Gilmore were just CRUSHING the likes of Hakeem even beyond the mid-80's.

And the game hasn't really "slowly evolved" either. The game of basketball was invented in the 1890's, and by the late 1890's colleges were playing it. There were professional teams as far back as the 1920's. The NBA was formed in 1946. And aside from the shot-clock, in 1955, and the 3pt shot (in 1979...and actually in the ABA in the 60's)...and some other minor rule changes, the game has been played the same way since it's inception. The same size court, the same size ball, the same size hoop, and the same number of players. There is only so much you can do in the game. Shoot, dribble, pass, rebound, and play defense...and all of that was being done well over 100 years ago.

[cos88]

Don't disrespect Dragic.:facepalm

Jerry West is at best a Kirk Hinrich tier player in today's league.


clowns like you is what makes this forum a troll land. reported

[diamenz]

I keep seeing people saying the same shit.


Players are bigger, faster, more athletic etc.



Yet, we have more boneheaded players now than I've ever seen.



Where has the midrange game gone to? Players repeatedly fail to make the right passes, right basketball play etc.


Why do you think the Spurs, with aging stars stay on top? Pop has those guys playing sound. You don't see them signing boneheads on that team.



Teams are jacking up threes and high flying. Most of these super athletic guys don't play the right way.

agreed. the only thing 'better' about today's league is that it's more athletic. and to me, that hasn't necessarily been a good thing. everything else about the game has gone downhill - it doesn't keep you guessing.

[CavaliersFTW]

agreed. the only thing 'better' about today's league is that it's more athletic. and to me, that hasn't necessarily been a good thing. everything else about the game has gone downhill - it doesn't keep you guessing.
I think age, athleticism and the typical knowledge of the game and teamwork of players are all tied together.

I think in the past, when there was a higher average age of the league (23 year old rookies sat on the bench and had to 'prove themselves' for 2 years before they even started) there was a predictably lower athleticism as most of the legs on the floor on any given night were San Antonio Spurs status, 25-30+ years old. But like the Spurs, the older players had more experience, and better decision making and IQ. The Spurs of today represent what oldschool basketball was like both in athleticism and general decision making, there's just more passing and more tightly played fundamental basketball. That's not the way the majority of the league is today though, the Spurs format used to be the majority but now it is the minority, now teams are young, they start their young rookies and sophomores immediately, there's a lot of teams made up of 20-25 year olds and those much younger legs are much more athletic... but don't have the experience so they'll jump over top of players etc and make a dramatic ESPN worthy highlight, but ultimately it isn't the most fundamentally sound basketball you're going to see. The older less athletic players that can't jump over guys anymore even if they'd wanted to tend to make the smartest plays. It's always been that way, the league is just younger now, so it looks more athletic.

[Euroleague]

NBA is almost unwatchable most of the time these days.

[CavaliersFTW]

NBA is almost unwatchable most of the time these days.
Well lucky for you V-Span got cut from the NBA so you don't have to worry about watching it.

[Kiddlovesnets]

Jerry West in today's league would be Goran Dragic on steroids.

Nah, Jerry West is the 2nd greatest SG of all time and will clearly dominate in today's league.

[Euroleague]

Well lucky for you V-Span got cut from the NBA so you don't have to worry about watching it.

He quit the NBA. He refused to play for 2 NBA teams that wanted him. He refused to play for the Rockets, then he refused to play for the Spurs after they got him.

He went to play in the best league in the world, the Euroleague.

The NBA is a joke these days.

It's so so so much worse than it was about 15-16 years ago.

[bizil]

It kills me when people say guys from the 60's couldn't play today. Which is RIDICULOUS. U gotta realize that those same guys would have the benefit of the today's medicine, training, rules, travel, skillset, etc. So what u do is try to equate what the guy did well and assume he could it most of that today. U THEN compare it to the guys of today and how they matchup. For example I don't think West would be the top SG today. But I could him being in the top 4 with a healthy Kobe, Wade, and Harden. I think Big O would be the best PG today, but he wouldn't average 10 or 11 rebounds a game. Elgin Baylor wouldn't be the best SF like he was back in the day, but he would be in the top 4-5. Wilt would clearly be the best center today, but he wouldn't average 50 a night.

U have to give guys the benefit and realize many of those guys would have adapted to today's skillset and thrived. It's just that they wouldn't be as dominant in as many aspects. That's the RESPECT they should get and command. We will never know anyway because West's generation is too far removed. The only thing I can assume is looking at West's size, that he wouldn't be the premier SG in the world like used to. But what if West moved to PG and battled it out with CP3 for who's the best PG in the L!

[Euroleague]

It kills me when people say guys from the 60's couldn't play today. Which is RIDICULOUS. U gotta realize that those same guys would have the benefit of the today's medicine, training, rules, travel, skillset, etc. So what u do is try to equate what the guy did well and assume he could it most of that today. U THEN compare it to the guys of today and how they matchup. For example I don't think West would be the top SG today. But I could him being in the top 4 with a healthy Kobe, Wade, and Harden. I think Big O would be the best PG today, but he wouldn't average 10 or 11 rebounds a game. Elgin Baylor wouldn't be the best SF like he was back in the day, but he would be in the top 4-5. Wilt would clearly be the best center today, but he wouldn't average 50 a night.

U have to give guys the benefit and realize many of those guys would have adapted to today's skillset and thrived. It's just that they wouldn't be as dominant in as many aspects. That's the RESPECT they should get and command. We will never know anyway because West's generation is too far removed. The only thing I can assume is looking at West's size, that he wouldn't be the premier SG in the world like used to. But what if West moved to PG and battled it out with CP3 for who's the best PG in the L!

And that would make them worse. So what is your point?

[diamenz]

I think age, athleticism and the typical knowledge of the game and teamwork of players are all tied together.

I think in the past, when there was a higher average age of the league (23 year old rookies sat on the bench and had to 'prove themselves' for 2 years before they even started) there was a predictably lower athleticism as most of the legs on the floor on any given night were San Antonio Spurs status, 25-30+ years old. But like the Spurs, the older players had more experience, and better decision making and IQ. The Spurs of today represent what oldschool basketball was like both in athleticism and general decision making, there's just more passing and more tightly played fundamental basketball. That's not the way the majority of the league is today though, the Spurs format used to be the majority but now it is the minority, now teams are young, they start their young rookies and sophomores immediately, there's a lot of teams made up of 20-25 year olds and those much younger legs are much more athletic... but don't have the experience so they'll jump over top of players etc and make a dramatic ESPN worthy highlight, but ultimately it isn't the most fundamentally sound basketball you're going to see. The older less athletic players that can't jump over guys anymore even if they'd wanted to tend to make the smartest plays. It's always been that way, the league is just younger now, so it looks more athletic.

yup... it makes you wonder where the nba will be in 10-15 years - kinda hard to imagine. i do love watching the spurs, and also like the pacers due to their inside presence... i just wish they would utilize it more and hibbert become more a of a threat, though i guess he's prob at his offensive ceiling. i would just love to see more off ball play and midrange game. and post game, fo course.

[bizil]

And that would make them worse. So what is your point?

My point is the guy's from the 60's would be able to take advantage of today's evolution in medical factors. The Big O himself said the medical advances were 100 times better than they were back in the day. He also mentioned how the travel conditions were also way better too. My point was the premier guys from the 60's would be great players today as well due to those factors. Many people think those guys would be average or even scrubs. But they don't realize that those guys would be conditioned to today's skillsets if they played in this era. The only difference is they wouldn't be as dominant in certain elements. My post was simply saying the guys from the 60's would be able to have the same elements of today's era. My post was earlier was straight and to the point, I don't see what u were confused about.

[CavaliersFTW]

My point is the guy's from the 60's would be able to take advantage of today's evolution in medical factors. The Big O himself said the medical advances were 100 times better than they were back in the day. He also mentioned how the travel conditions were also way better too. My point was the premier guys from the 60's would be great players today as well due to those factors. Many people think those guys would be average or even scrubs. But they don't realize that those guys would be conditioned to today's skillsets if they played in this era. The only difference is they wouldn't be as dominant in certain elements. My post was simply saying the guys from the 60's would be able to have the same elements of today's era. My post was earlier was straight and to the point, I don't see what u were confused about.
Relatively speaking why wouldn't they? I think at their peak, Baylor, Robertson, West, Wilt, Russell, etc would potentially all be capable of being the 'best' players in the league at any given time. You can argue different numbers, but I think their impact in relation to the competitors around them would remain basically the same as in, Elgin was the best rebounding forward in his era by ____ margin... I don't see why he wouldn't potentially have a similar margin of separation in most any other era. I don't see them being any 'less' dominant just because the competition changes, the competition they played against (namely, each other) was up there with the best competition of any other era, only the rules/trends/styles of play etc (and as a result some of the #'s) vary. Their dominance at their peaks however, would still remain a constant IMO.

[LAZERUSS]

I'm not claiming that the players of the 60's and 70's were better athletes, but just watch footage of an average NBA game back then. The players were flying up-and-down the court. What has happened to the NBA in that last 20 years? Teams WALK the ball up the court, pass the ball around (and pass up open looks) for 20 seconds, and then go into their "offense" which ultimately results in a player taking a 20+ foot shot, while being draped by two defenders.

[Dr.J4ever]

Relatively speaking why wouldn't they? I think at their peak, Baylor, Robertson, West, Wilt, Russell, etc would potentially all be capable of being the 'best' players in the league at any given time. You can argue different numbers, but I think their impact in relation to the competitors around them would remain basically the same as in, Elgin was the best rebounding forward in his era by ____ margin... I don't see why he wouldn't potentially have a similar margin of separation in most any other era. I don't see them being any 'less' dominant just because the competition changes, the competition they played against (namely, each other) was up there with the best competition of any other era, only the rules/trends/styles of play etc (and as a result some of the #'s) vary. Their dominance at their peaks however, would still remain a constant IMO.
100% correct!:applause:

[Dr.J4ever]

But there is no PROOF that today's NBA is any better than it was 50 years ago, either. I have said it before, but find me the exact year in which the league suddenly became much greater than the season before. You can't. Again, I have read those that would claim that the arrival of Magic and Bird "suddenly" became the modern era. Hmmm...then how do they explain that in the first half of the decade of the 80's, that it was players from the 70's (and even the 60's if you count KAJ) that were winning MVPs, scoring titles, FG% titles, and rebounding titles? My gawd old men like KAJ and Gilmore were just CRUSHING the likes of Hakeem even beyond the mid-80's.

And the game hasn't really "slowly evolved" either. The game of basketball was invented in the 1890's, and by the late 1890's colleges were playing it. There were professional teams as far back as the 1920's. The NBA was formed in 1946. And aside from the shot-clock, in 1955, and the 3pt shot (in 1979...and actually in the ABA in the 60's)...and some other minor rule changes, the game has been played the same way since it's inception. The same size court, the same size ball, the same size hoop, and the same number of players. There is only so much you can do in the game. Shoot, dribble, pass, rebound, and play defense...and all of that was being done well over 100 years ago.
There is a kernel of truth in your main points, but I just have to disagree overall. I don't know how old you are, but I myself saw lots of 80s basketball, and the game today, for me, is very different. The game during the 80s was closer to the game of the 60's, not a whole lot different. But c'mon, today's game is really different. Defenses play differently, and offenses play differently. Today's game is not necessarily better, although it is arguably better, but IT IS DIFFERENT.

[LAZERUSS]

There is a kernel of truth in your main points, but I just have to disagree overall. I don't know how old you are, but I myself saw lots of 80s basketball, and the game today, for me, is very different. The game during the 80s was closer to the game of the 60's, not a whole lot different. But c'mon, today's game is really different. Defenses play differently, and offenses play differently. Today's game is not necessarily better, although it is arguably better, but IT IS DIFFERENT.

Yes, and no. For whatever reason, the pace is considerably slower today. And the floor is more spread out, mainly because of the 3pt shot.

And believe it, or not, I think MANY of the players of today, would have been great in the 60's and 70's. Players like Lebron, Kobe, Dirk, KG, Duncan, KD, Love, etc. It works both ways.

FWIW, here is my all-time ranking...

Tier 1: MJ, Magic, Russell, Wilt

Tier 2: KAJ

Tier 3: Shaq, Duncan

Tier 4: Lebron, Kobe, Bird,

Tier 5: Moses, Hakeem, Oscar, Dr. J, and West.


EVERY era is represented (except the pre-60's, of which I did not see.)

[Dr.J4ever]

Yes, and no. For whatever reason, the pace is considerably slower today. And the floor is more spread out, mainly because of the 3pt shot.

And believe it, or not, I think MANY of the players of today, would have been great in the 60's and 70's. Players like Lebron, Kobe, Dirk, KG, Duncan, KD, Love, etc. It works both ways.

FWIW, here is my all-time ranking...

Tier 1: MJ, Magic, Russell, Wilt

Tier 2: KAJ

Tier 3: Shaq, Duncan

Tier 4: Lebron, Kobe, Bird,

Tier 5: Moses, Hakeem, Oscar, Dr. J, and West.


EVERY era is represented (except the pre-60's, of which I did not see.)
Yeah, I generally agree with your tiers. I would put KAJ in tier 1, and you know I have a soft spot for the Doc. I would like the Doc in tier 4, but it's debatable. I just think his ABA numbers and titles have to be given more historical weight. If they are taken as seriously as NBA numbers, Doc is every bit as great as Kobe, Lebron, or Bird.

A little off topic, but I recently found out and made thread about it that the ABA DOMINATED the NBA in H2Hs in the last 3 years before the merger. To those that may have doubts, games were highly competitive.

Imagine a scenario where the supposedly "superior' league keeps losing at a 70% clip in exhibitions, would NBA teams be told to play harder? The answer to me is obvious.

I also documented many ABA-NBA watchers like Peter Vecsey, Bob Ryan, and a few more who claimed ABA teams were always among the top 5 teams in basketball in the last few years before the merger. After the merger, Denver proved it was 1 game off having the best record in the NBA regular season. The Spurs won their division.

I never saw 70s ball, so that's a big caveat there, but 70s Doc was a beast, and he wouldn't have to take a back seat to any SF ever, in my humble opinion.

[-23-]

Yes, and no. For whatever reason, the pace is considerably slower today. And the floor is more spread out, mainly because of the 3pt shot.

And believe it, or not, I think MANY of the players of today, would have been great in the 60's and 70's. Players like Lebron, Kobe, Dirk, KG, Duncan, KD, Love, etc. It works both ways.

FWIW, here is my all-time ranking...

Tier 1: MJ, Magic, Russell, Wilt

Tier 2: KAJ

Tier 3: Shaq, Duncan

Tier 4: Lebron, Kobe, Bird,

Tier 5: Moses, Hakeem, Oscar, Dr. J, and West.


EVERY era is represented (except the pre-60's, of which I did not see.)


Lol @ KLOVE being on that list.

[aj1987]

It's still wrong to make generalizations as if these older players are conspiring in some way, although they have the same bias that every era's players have: They believe they played in the greatest era. But like I said, others have implied so, as well. Didn't Jordan claim that he could score 100 if he played today? Didn't Bird joke that the only reason a today's Team USA could beat the Dream Team would be because the Dream-teamers are 50-year olds today?
I never said that they were "conspiring". My entire point was that West said that this era is "weak", which it isn't. I only consider the '60's to be weak because of their guards. I never said one bad thing about Russell and although I troll a bit when it comes to Wilt, the only problem I have with him is his subpar playoff performances. I do honestly believe that they would be top tier players in ANY era.

Do you actually believe that Adrian Smith, Sloan, Arsdale, LaRusso, Hagan, etc. etc. would be All-Star level Guards today?



As for your list, I similarly remind you that the same Jerry West has called Kobe the GOAT Laker, and that's a statement with which even lots of modern NBA fans disagree.
What does that have anything to do with me having Russell, KAJ, and Wilt (I do keep taking him out of my top 5 nowadays though) in my top 5 though?



But there is no PROOF that today's NBA is any better than it was 50 years ago, either.
Where is the proof that the '60's is better than todays era? You're an idiot, BTW. You ranked Magic and Wilt two tiers higher than Shaq??? Bird (although I don't like him too much) is NOT 3 tiers below ****ing Magic. Also, you included KD and Love, but now Wade? Wade would make West quit his job in the NBA if they went head to head in their primes or even West in his prime vs '13 playoffs Wade.

[CavaliersFTW]

I never said that they were "conspiring". My entire point was that West said that this era is "weak", which it isn't. I only consider the '60's to be weak because of their guards. I never said one bad thing about Russell and although I troll a bit when it comes to Wilt, the only problem I have with him is his subpar playoff performances. I do honestly believe that they would be top tier players in ANY era.

Do you actually believe that Adrian Smith, Sloan, Arsdale, LaRusso, Hagan, etc. etc. would be All-Star level Guards today?



What does that have anything to do with me having Russell, KAJ, and Wilt (I do keep taking him out of my top 5 nowadays though) in my top 5 though?



Where is the proof that the '60's is better than todays era? You're an idiot, BTW. You ranked Magic and Wilt two tiers higher than Shaq??? Bird (although I don't like him too much) is NOT 3 tiers below ****ing Magic.
LaRusso and Hagan weren't guards dipshit :facepalm

And yes those guys were good. Today all star players are 'voted' in by fans however... it's a popularity contest. So who knows who would or wouldn't make it unless they were at the very obvious top of the league in terms of all around abilities and talents ala a Jerry West or Oscar Robertson class of player which none of those guys were even in their own time. Those guys are the in the same tier as today's Demarcus Cousin's... only lucky for them, 'fan voting' didn't snub them through lack of popularity.

[aj1987]

LaRusso and Hagan weren't guards dipshit :facepalm

And yes those guys were good. Today all star players are 'voted' in by fans however... it's a popularity contest. So who knows who would or wouldn't make it unless they were at the very obvious top of the league in terms of all around abilities and talents ala a Jerry West or Oscar Robertson class of player which none of those guys were even in their own time. Those guys are the in the same tier as today's Demarcus Cousin's... only lucky for them, 'fan voting' didn't snub them through lack of popularity.
True, they weren't. My bad. Forgot to include forwards. Should've been Guards/Forwards.

Anways, you're an absolutely retarded person, if you actually believe that they would be All-Star Level Guards (notice that I said All-Star LEVEL and not All-Star, ****ing retard). These (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3sWy7yaJac) scrubs wouldn't even be in the NBA. Go watch a D-Leage game. You'll find players, who are more talented then most of those players.


3 to make 2
2 to make 1

Dumbass. Learn the rules of the game and how they've changed and shit might make more sense to you.


The average number of fouls in the league in the '60 was 2100+ and it's in the 1700's now. So yeah, **** you.


Was each foul = 1.5 of today's fouls?

You need to stick to editing (speeding up) those '60's footages to make the players look better than they actually were. That's literally the only thing you're good at.

[La Frescobaldi]

True, they weren't. My bad. Forgot to include forwards. Should've been Guards/Forwards.

Anways, you're an absolutely retarded person, if you actually believe that they would be All-Star Level Guards (notice that I said All-Star LEVEL and not All-Star, ****ing retard). These (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3sWy7yaJac) scrubs wouldn't even be in the NBA. Go watch a D-Leage game. You'll find players, who are more talented then most of those players.

Was each foul = 1.5 of today's fouls?

You need to stick to editing (speeding up) those '60's footages to make the players look better than they actually were. That's literally the only thing you're good at.

Very nearly, yes.

1981-82 NBA Guide with rules, two major changes were made that season. The "three-to-make-two" and "two-to-make-one" situations in the penalty were eliminated.

http://www.nba.com/analysis/rules_history.html


You need to stick to talking about the last season or two bro, you literally don't know anything at all about NBA basketball history.

[Psileas]

I never said that they were "conspiring". My entire point was that West said that this era is "weak", which it isn't. I only consider the '60's to be weak because of their guards. I never said one bad thing about Russell and although I troll a bit when it comes to Wilt, the only problem I have with him is his subpar playoff performances. I do honestly believe that they would be top tier players in ANY era.

West, correctly or not, has his own reasons to call this era weak. It's not as if it hasn't been criticized by others, younger than West. What if someone values big men instead? What if someone believes that the game is too much "player" and too little "coach" oriented? What if someone points out the guard-friendly rules? If someone wants to rip holes in an era, he can do so easily. Instead, I'd rather enjoy and respect all of these eras. So did, e.g, the stars of the 80's, which many consider a "Golden Era" - pretty ironical, since
a) a lot of the 80's players, including multiple star players, were still playing in the 70's, which are disrespected by mainstream fans.
b) practically all of them were influenced by 60's-70's players, eras that are disrespected by mainstream fans.


Do you actually believe that Adrian Smith, Sloan, Arsdale, LaRusso, Hagan, etc. etc. would be All-Star level Guards today?

All those guys were marginal all-star level of players, and sometimes even less so. It's like asking if I could imagine Jrue Holiday or Jamaal Magloire or A.C Green being all-star level players.


What does that have anything to do with me having Russell, KAJ, and Wilt (I do keep taking him out of my top 5 nowadays though) in my top 5 though?

If you use the high placement of Wilt-Russell in your all-time list as an argument that you're not a certain era hater, I can do the same for West, remind you how much he admires Kobe, to point out he's not an era hater, either.

[LAZERUSS]

I never said that they were "conspiring". My entire point was that West said that this era is "weak", which it isn't. I only consider the '60's to be weak because of their guards. I never said one bad thing about Russell and although I troll a bit when it comes to Wilt, the only problem I have with him is his subpar playoff performances. I do honestly believe that they would be top tier players in ANY era.

Do you actually believe that Adrian Smith, Sloan, Arsdale, LaRusso, Hagan, etc. etc. would be All-Star level Guards today?



What does that have anything to do with me having Russell, KAJ, and Wilt (I do keep taking him out of my top 5 nowadays though) in my top 5 though?



Where is the proof that the '60's is better than todays era? You're an idiot, BTW. You ranked Magic and Wilt two tiers higher than Shaq??? Bird (although I don't like him too much) is NOT 3 tiers below ****ing Magic. Also, you included KD and Love, but now Wade? Wade would make West quit his job in the NBA if they went head to head in their primes or even West in his prime vs '13 playoffs Wade.

I have already explained my "proof" several times here before. Take any year you would like. And I will show you players from just the year before, who were just as dominant, and who would be dominant in that same year, and even beyond.

I have used 1980 as an example before, because I have read those who have claimed that that was when the "modern era" was born. And yes, Magic and Bird would go on to be two of the all-time greatest ever. BUT, in the first FIVE years of the decade of the 80's, the MVPs, the scoring leaders, the rebounding leaders, and the FG% leaders, were all players from the 70's (and using KAJ, even from the 60's.) The BEST players in the first half of the decade of the 80's, were ALL players who played in the 70's.

And, the players of today are no more taller, on average, than they were in the 60's. Especially if you consider the fact that today's measurements have become distorted to laughable extremes.

And think about this...watch this video...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NkzRjMC1ZpI

That is the 6-6 230 lb Gus Johnson. In that footage, you will see a player who is displaying excellent shooting skills, among his many talents. His range and touch were pretty damned good.

Furthermore, he likely had a vertical at least the equal of MJ. Now, here was a truly remarkable physical specimen, with quality basketball skills. And, from all of that, and playing in a league that was supposedly made up of short white nerds, you would probably think he was routinely hanging up 30-20 seasons, right?

Well, he did go on to have a HOF career, but sorry to say, it was not made up of 30-20 seasons. He was a career 16-12 .440 player who had ONE 20 ppg season (20.7 to be exact), and one 17 rpg season (with his next best season at 14 rpg.)

How come? How could such a physically gifted and highly skilled player, playing against supposedly such "weak" competition, not just blow the NBA away?

[aj1987]

Very nearly, yes.

1981-82 NBA Guide with rules, two major changes were made that season. The "three-to-make-two" and "two-to-make-one" situations in the penalty were eliminated.

http://www.nba.com/analysis/rules_history.html


You need to stick to talking about the last season or two bro, you literally don't know anything at all about NBA basketball history.
The number of fouls (nearly + 400)...Not FT's...:facepalm Ignore FT's. Each team averaged around 2100 FT's during the '60's. Now, teams are averaging around 1700 for the season.

[LAZERUSS]

The number of fouls (nearly + 400)...Not FT's...:facepalm Ignore FT's. Each team averaged around 2100 FT's during the '60's. Now, teams are averaging around 1700 for the season.

Which is 80%, and about the difference in "pace" as well. Teams today are scoring at about 85% of the points that they were in the early 60's. FTAs are at about an equal level.

[aj1987]

Which is 80%, and about the difference in "pace" as well. Teams today are scoring at about 85% of the points that they were in the early 60's. FTAs are at about an equal level.
My point exactly! Thank you.

[LAZERUSS]

My point exactly! Thank you.

Which still doesn't mean that West isn't right.

It has already been pointed out that there were more FTAs back then because of the rules that were in place. 3-to-make-2's, 2-to-make-1's, and even single shot fouls (yes, if you were fouled in a non-shooting act, and before the fouyl limit, you only received one FTA, and if you made it, it was a change of possession.)

So, FTAs, per "pace" were actually probably lower.

[aj1987]

Which still doesn't mean that West isn't right.

It has already been pointed out that there were more FTAs back then because of the rules that were in place. 3-to-make-2's, 2-to-make-1's, and even single shot fouls (yes, if you were fouled in a non-shooting act, and before the fouyl limit, you only received one FTA, and if you made it, it was a change of possession.)

So, FTAs, per "pace" were actually probably lower.
Then how do you explain the difference in FOULS?! On average, there are about 400 fewer fouls per team, per season today. I'm just repeating myself here now.

[La Frescobaldi]

My point exactly! Thank you.
That wasn't your point. Quit crawfishing.

[aj1987]

That wasn't your point. Quit crawfishing.
Who's crawfishing? West said that more fouls are called today, which isn't the case and I proved my point.