Seeing what's happening really makes me appreciate how MJ 3-peated TWICE

[Derivative]

3 peat is considered the ultimate sign for domination and dynasty, yet it's also one of the hardest to achieve.

Magic couldn't do it
Kareem couldn't do it
Bird couldn't do it
Duncan couldn't do it
Wilt couldn't do it
Hakeem couldn't do it
Kobe couldn't do it as the best player
Russell did it but in a weak era with 8 teams while he had the most stacked team
Lebron looks like he's gonna fall short

The only players that carried their teams to a 3-peat are MJ and Shaq. And Shaq only did it because he had the refs to rig 2002 playoffs for him.


And MJ was able to do it TWICE, the second time was when he was out of his prime. Wow.

[pegasus]

3 peat is considered the ultimate sign for domination and dynasty, yet it's also one of the hardest to achieve.
Does this idiot even know what "yet" means?

[jbryan1984]

And that is why he is the GOAT

[Derivative]

Does this idiot even know what "yet" means?

are you a fakkit?

[Roundball_Rock]

Russell did it but in a weak era with 8 teams while he had the most stacked team

Oh the irony...

[AlphaWolf24]

What about an 8 peat like Russell?

oh didn't read...



next

[hateraid]

What about an 8 peat like Russell?

oh didn't read...



next
Weak era according to OP

[theoneneo]

Why credit Shaq for a three peat but not Kobe?

Kobe's numbers as a second option are on par with Lebrons first option numbers

[TheMan]

Why credit Shaq for a three peat but not Kobe?

Kobe's numbers as a second option are on par with Lebrons first option numbers
Agree, Kobe should get credit, Shaq wasn't going at it 1 v 5

[robert_shaww]

3 peat is considered the ultimate sign for domination and dynasty, yet it's also one of the hardest to achieve.

Magic couldn't do it
Kareem couldn't do it
Bird couldn't do it
Duncan couldn't do it
Wilt couldn't do it
Hakeem couldn't do it
Kobe couldn't do it on his own
Russell did it but in a weak era with 8 teams while he had the most stacked team
Lebron looks like he's gonna fall short

The only players that carried their teams to a 3-peat are MJ and Shaq. And Shaq only did it because he had the refs to rig 2002 playoffs for him.


And MJ was able to do it TWICE, the second time was when he was out of his prime. Wow.

:facepalm

[AirTupac]

If you include Jordan and Shaq, then Kobe is in there :oldlol:

We can all agree that these 3 players are on another tier than Le2/5

[Rocketswin2013]

If you include Jordan and Shaq, then Kobe is in there :oldlol:

We can all agree that these 3 players are on another tier than Le2/5
**** no.


Kobe was a damn sidekick.


SO we include Pippen too?

[AlphaWolf24]

Weak era according to OP


oh that's right...Russell's teams wouldn't stand a chance against 5'9" Mark Price's Cavs with the defensive stopper greatness of Craig Ehlo :lol

Not sure if Russell and Sam Jones could hang with Greg Ostertag and John Stockton :lol

Russell having to play against Wilt wouldn't know what to do against 6'4" Charles Barkley and CBL scrub Richard Dumas ( who was guarding MJ):lol

Elgin Baylor and Wilt were scrubs compared to Vlade Divac and Tony smith...even Kevin Duckworth and Clyde " can't dribble with my head up" Drexler would be too much for Russell's Celtics!:lol


psst ...next

[Roundball_Rock]

**** no.


Kobe was a damn sidekick.


SO we include Pippen too?

Pippen averaged 19/8/6/2/1 in the Finals along with great defense, leadership and other intangibles.

AlphaWolf, you know the deal: avoid a clear, consistent criteria and engage in various contortions to inflate MJ. The real record is 8 straight but ignore Russell because he had a stacked team ( :lol ) to give MJ another manufactured record (many people think the record for rings is 6 and the record for MVP's is 5).

[nightprowler10]

I've got MJ and Russell 1 and 2. Anybody who disregards that era is doing themselves and basketball history a great disservice.

[AlphaWolf24]

**** no.


Kobe was a damn sidekick.


SO we include Pippen too?


Sidekicks 01' title run was better then Wade's 06' title run...:lol

no wonder he kicked Shaq to the curb and replaced him with a soft Euro....

because it was Snaq who left...not Kobe!!:D

Lakers had 2 so so years then it was right back to where we left off.

[b0bab0i]

You are giving MJ too much damn credit. Without Pippen, he would have maybe 1 or 2 rings.

[Take Your Lumps]

And MJ was able to do it TWICE, the second time was when he was out of his prime. Wow.

He really was on a whole other planet...I'd love to see his face when he's sitting in his house alone watching ESPN and he hears these ridiculous commentators comparing LBJ to him. It's comical.

[Rocketswin2013]

Sidekicks 01' title run was better then Wade's 06' title run...:lol

no wonder he kicked Shaq to the curb and replaced him with a soft Euro....

because it was Snaq who left...not Kobe!!:D

Lakers had 2 so so years then it was right back to where we left off.
'01 Kobe had his only case for being better than Shaq in the playoffs throughout. Wasn't better in the Finals though.

[jlip]

I've got MJ and Russell 1 and 2. Anybody who disregards that era is doing themselves and basketball history a great disservice.

:applause:

[AlphaWolf24]

Pippen averaged 19/8/6/2/1 in the Finals along with great defense, leadership and other intangibles.

AlphaWolf, you know the deal: avoid a clear, consistent criteria and engage in various contortions to inflate MJ. The real record is 8 straight but ignore Russell because he had a stacked team ( :lol ) to give MJ another manufactured record (many people think the record for rings is 6 and the record for MVP's is 5).


that's right..."weak era"...only 8 teams...maybe even 14 teams....Russell's teams were stacked.

Totally needed more teams...because that means better games....like in the 90's with all the Washington Bullets and the Rony Seikley led Heat...ooohhhhh.....Not sure how Russell would have stopped Rony seikley!!! and Sherman Douglas!

[TheMan]

Pippen averaged 19/8/6/2/1 in the Finals along with great defense, leadership and other intangibles.

AlphaWolf, you know the deal: avoid a clear, consistent criteria and engage in various contortions to inflate MJ. The real record is 8 straight but ignore Russell because he had a stacked team ( :lol ) to give MJ another manufactured record (many people think the record for rings is 6 and the record for MVP's is 5).
Jumped off the Bran bandwagon so quick, huh? Lol

[AlphaWolf24]

01' Kobe had his only case for being better than Shaq in the playoffs throughout. Wasn't better in the Finals though.


Kobe was better in crunchtime...Kobe gaurded AI.....Kobe ran the offense...Shaq dominated Mutumbo 3' from the hoop...

Kobe was the best player against the Spurs....and frankly that's all that mattered.

Kobe's 01 run was great Shaq and Phil both said he was the best player in the NBA that year.

[Soundwave]

I've got MJ and Russell 1 and 2. Anybody who disregards that era is doing themselves and basketball history a great disservice.

I don't disregard the 60s entirely, but lets look at some facts here

- The NBA was NINE TEAM league in the 60s.

- There were like four to five 7 footers in the league *total* for many of those years. Guys who were 6'5 and 6'6 were routinely averaging over 10 rpg.

- Russell was sometimes as low as the 4TH scoring option on some of those Celtic teams. His Celtic teams were also far more stacked than the other 8 teams.

- Basketball development was at a laughable state back then, the NBA was pretty much a bush league in those days. The civil rights movement hadn't even come and gone yet, meaning most NCAA Div I colleges weren't even integrated. There's probably tons of good players that never got to the NBA because the opportunities back then for black males were harshly limited and mired in extreme poverty.

[juju151111]

Pippen averaged 19/8/6/2/1 in the Finals along with great defense, leadership and other intangibles.

AlphaWolf, you know the deal: avoid a clear, consistent criteria and engage in various contortions to inflate MJ. The real record is 8 straight but ignore Russell because he had a stacked team ( :lol ) to give MJ another manufactured record (many people think the record for rings is 6 and the record for MVP's is 5).
People ignore Russell cause he was offensive ly inept and played in a era with 8 teams. They didn't even have a 3 pt line. Russell isn't winning 11 chips in the modern era. Name another Goat candidate with 6 chips has the best player.

[played0ut]

People ignore Russell cause he was offensive ly inept and played in a era with 8 teams. They didn't even have a 3 pt line. Russell isn't winning 11 chips in the modern era. Name another Goat candidate with 6 chips has the best player.

He wasn't offensively inept. He consciously made a decision to focus on being the defensive anchor, seeing as his team already had offensive players.

[NumberSix]

3 peat is considered the ultimate sign for domination and dynasty, yet it's also one of the hardest to achieve.

Magic couldn't do it
Kareem couldn't do it
Bird couldn't do it
Duncan couldn't do it
Wilt couldn't do it
Hakeem couldn't do it
Kobe couldn't do it as the best player
Russell did it but in a weak era with 8 teams while he had the most stacked team
Lebron looks like he's gonna fall short

The only players that carried their teams to a 3-peat are MJ and Shaq. And Shaq only did it because he had the refs to rig 2002 playoffs for him.


And MJ was able to do it TWICE, the second time was when he was out of his prime. Wow.
No, the 8-peat is.

[Soundwave]

People ignore Russell cause he was offensive ly inept and played in a era with 8 teams. They didn't even have a 3 pt line. Russell isn't winning 11 chips in the modern era. Name another Goat candidate with 6 chips has the best player.

Russell's offensive production was pretty mediocre to be honest.

He never averaged over 19 ppg in season and routinely shot under 45% from the field which for a big man in that era is pretty nuts. 15 ppg was a pretty standard year for him ... this is on a Celtics team that often average over 110 ppg.

He would be a 8-10 ppg/10-12 rpg in the 90s IMO.

Wilt was always better he was just stuck on crappier teams.

[Carbine]

Russell's offensive production was pretty mediocre to be honest.

He never averaged over 19 ppg in season and routinely shot under 45% from the field which for a big man in that era is pretty nuts. 15 ppg was a pretty standard year for him ... this is on a Celtics team that often average over 110 ppg.

He would be a 8-10 ppg/10-12 rpg in the 90s IMO.

Wilt was always better he was just stuck on crappier teams.

This makes me sad that someone would think this.

[juju151111]

He wasn't offensively inept. He consciously made a decision to focus on being the defensive anchor, seeing as his team already had offensive players.
So he missed shots n purpose:facepalm

[juju151111]

This makes me sad that someone would think this.
He is not averaging 25 rebounds in the 90s.

[Bernkastel]

3-peating is pretty special and the Heat front office deserve congrats for putting together a team that castrated the rest of the East and won twice against the West.

[Ne 1]

Kobe couldn't do it as the best player Irrelevant, look at his production. His level of play was in par with or better than than some rings won as the "best player" and the gap between Kobe and the best player on the team was miniscule for the last two titles, the gap
was a lot larger for the first title, but even they won as pretty much a two man team so it's not really a big deal. Also, let's be honest, any guard/perimeter player in the history wouldn't have been the best player on a team with peak Shaq.

[Soundwave]

This makes me sad that someone would think this.

Look at his actual production in the 60s dude.

14-16 ppg was a fairly normal year for him, and that was on a Celtics team scoring 110+ ppg most seasons.

[Carbine]

He is not averaging 25 rebounds in the 90s.

Of course not. But Russell deserves a certain amount of respect.

Simply saying he would only be a 8-10ppg/10-12rpg player in the 90's shows a lack of respect for the type of player Russell was. His impact went far beyond those two categories.

Popeye Jones was a 8-10ppg/10-12rpg player in the 90's. Tyrone Hill.

[Soundwave]

Of course not. But Russell deserves a certain amount of respect.

Simply saying he would only be a 8-10ppg/10-12rpg player in the 90's shows a lack of respect for the type of player Russell was. His impact went far beyond those two categories.

Popeye Jones was a 8-10ppg/10-12rpg player in the 90's. Tyrone Hill.

I'd say 10-12 ppg and 12-13 rpg is about right for Russell in more modern context.

The Celtics averaged 120 ppg in some of his seasons, lol, at a reduced scoring rate it's not unreasonable to assume his scoring comes down, and 20+ rpg ain't happening either.

[jlip]

Russell's offensive production was pretty mediocre to be honest.

He never averaged over 19 ppg in season and routinely shot under 45% from the field which for a big man in that era is pretty nuts. 15 ppg was a pretty standard year for him ... this is on a Celtics team that often average over 110 ppg.

He would be a 8-10 ppg/10-12 rpg in the 90s IMO.

Wilt was always better he was just stuck on crappier teams.

Translation:
You know next to nothing about "that" era. Over the 13 seasons Russell played (

[Roundball_Rock]

Russell was top 10 in assists 4-5 times and I think he was as high as 5th. That is offensively inept?


His level of play was in par with or better than than some rings won as the "best player"

Great point. Players like Tony Parker and Chauncey Billups have won "rings as the man" yet that trumps superstars who happened to be paired with a better superstar? :lol "Rings as the man" is the most artificial metric there is in sports. No one discounts Jerry Rice's rings because Joe Montana was "the man."


Also, let's be honest, any guard/perimeter player in the history wouldn't have been the best player on a team with peak Shaq.

True.

[jlip]

He is not averaging 25 rebounds in the 90s.

What would stop him from outrebounding Rodman who reached ~19rpg in the 90's?

[juju151111]

Russell was top 10 in assists 4-5 times and I think he was as high as 5th. That is offensively inept?



Great point. Players like Tony Parker and Chauncey Billups have won "rings as the man" yet that trumps superstars who happened to be paired with a better superstar? :lol "Rings as the man" is the most artificial metric there is in sports. No one discounts Jerry Rice's rings because Joe Montana was "the man."



True.
Mj would be right their with Shaw and stole some finals MVP. Especially with the defense concentrating on Shaq.

[LoneyROY7]

F*ck MJ.

[juju151111]

What would stop him from outrebounding Rodman who reached ~19rpg in the 90's?
Rodman is goat rebounder if not the best ever. Lol at what would stop him. You think 19 rbg is easy in the modern era.:lol You had small fowards averaging 12+ rbg back then stop the nonsense. Go sit down with that overrated ass Russell http://skepticalsports.com/?p=331

[fpliii]

ITT: Posters disrespecting Russell for their agendas. :facepalm

He's not going away.

[Eye Test]

Magic couldn't do it
Kareem couldn't do it
Bird couldn't do it
Duncan couldn't do it
Wilt couldn't do it
Hakeem couldn't do it
Kobe couldn't do it as the best player
Russell did it but in a weak era with 8 teams while he had the most stacked team
Lebron looks like he's gonna fall short



ban this guy

[Soundwave]

Rodman was just a freak, I dunno.

No one in the NBA since 1980 has averaged more than 15 rpg other than Dennis I think and maybe Moses Malone for like 1 year.

From that article this was interesting:

[QUOTE]t is true that, barring some dramatic change in the way the game is played, Chamberlain

[Soundwave]

When Wilt entered the NBA in 1960 there were *four* (four!) players in the league *total* taller than 6'8 with Wilt and Russell being two of them. I mean ... c'mon.

[juju151111]

Rodman was just a freak, I dunno.

No one in the NBA since 1980 has averaged more than 15 rpg other than Dennis I think and maybe Moses Malone for like 1 year.

From that article this was interesting:
Exactly the article I posted tells you all you need to know about Rodman and Rpg

[Soundwave]

Russell's numbers adjusted for the modern game would be 10 ppg and about 13 rpg, that's without factoring having to play against bigger/taller guys.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/441840-bill-russell-an-overrated-nba-legend

[Ne 1]

Great point. Players like Tony Parker and Chauncey Billups have won "rings as the man" yet that trumps superstars who happened to be paired with a better superstar? :lol "Rings as the man" is the most artificial metric there is in sports. No one discounts Jerry Rice's rings because Joe Montana was "the man."

Great point, and nobody seems to care that Magic won his first few titles with another player who was superior to him at the time. I say rings should just be judged on a case by case basis. Kobe was a top 3 player in 2001/2002, why does it matter so much that he was playing with a guy who was better at the time? Especially considering that the Lakers weren't very talented outside of their duo.

[Hey Yo]

Does this idiot even know what "yet" means?
Says the idiot who thinks Wade is worth max money.

[Soundwave]

Great point, and nobody seems to care that Magic won his first few titles other a player who was superior to him at the time. I say rings should just be judged on a case by case basis. Kobe was a top 3 player in 2001/2002, why does it matter so much that he was playing with a guy who was better at the time? Especially considering that the Lakers weren't very talented outside of their duo.

Shaq and Kobe could've been the greatest duo in NBA history, they are the only top 10 players to play together for an extended period of time both in their 20s.

It's too bad they let petty bulls*it get in the way.

[fpliii]

Russell's numbers adjusted for the modern game would be 10 ppg and about 13 rpg, that's without factoring having to play against bigger/taller guys.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/441840-bill-russell-an-overrated-nba-legend
Bleacher Report? lmao

Where's the proof that numbers scale linearly with pace and minutes played? Makes little sense to assume there aren't declining returns due to fatigue.

Also, be sure to compare players on the basis of height consistently...either all with shoes or all without.

Russell isn't going away. He'll always be a strong GOAT candidate. No reason to be insecure, because MJ is one as well.

[Soundwave]

Bleacher Report? lmao

Where's the proof that numbers scale linearly with pace and minutes played? Makes little sense to assume there aren't declining returns due to fatigue.

Also, be sure to compare players on the basis of height consistently...either all with shoes or all without.

Russell isn't going away. He'll always be a strong GOAT candidate. No reason to be insecure, because MJ is one as well.

The article is fairly well written, and while there might be some declining returns due to fatigue I don't think it would be as extreme as you make it out be.

Not to mention often times in those days teams only played 3 playoff rounds (getting a by).

I'm sorry but I just don't buy that the 1960s game is equivalent to what the NBA became post ABA merger in 1976, I just don't. Not only for the obvious reasons, but also the social-political climate of the early 50s (where a player would have to develop if he were to be a star in the 60s) and harsh nature of segregation is a pretty huge factor too.

I don't think even half of the players in the 60s would make the NBA by 1985 period.

[fpliii]

The article is fairly well written, and while there might be some declining returns due to fatigue I don't think it would be as extreme as you make it out be.

Not to mention often times in those days teams only played 3 playoff rounds (getting a by).

I'm sorry but I just don't buy that the 1960s game is equivalent to what the NBA became post ABA merger in 1976, I just don't. Not only for the obvious reasons, but also the social-political climate of the early 50s (where a player would have to develop if he were to be a star in the 60s) and harsh nature of segregation is a pretty huge factor too.
1) That's fair, I guess we'd need to produce a dataset and do analysis based on TRB% vs MPG and team pace.

2) This was the case from 75-83 as well for top teams. Expansion didn't improve top-level talent. Regardless of era, you have to play at least two legitimate teams in your conference finals and the NBA Finals.

3) You don't have to, but it's not a given. The 50s also aren't the same as the late 60s and early 70s, during which time the majority of the league was black, and after which teams had adjusted to guys like Russell, Wilt, Oscar who changed the game.

[jlip]

Rodman is goat rebounder if not the best ever. Lol at what would stop him.


It's amazing how you MJ worshippers want to claim that he's a better scorer than Wilt based upon the fact that Wilt's numbers decreased from the regular season to the postseason, but when Rodman's rebounding decreased in the playoffs he's still GOAT rebounder.:facepalm



You think 19 rbg is easy in the modern era.:lol


You think that averaging 24rpg which Russell did a few times was easy in that era. Only Wilt and Russell ever did that.:lol



You had small fowards averaging 12+ rbg back then stop the nonsense.

Only Elgin Baylor as far as I can think of. Everyone knows that there were more rebounds in the 60's, but everyone was not putting up Russell's peak numbers. Only Wilt, that's it.



Go sit down with that overrated ass Russell http://skepticalsports.com/?p=331
:facepalm

Trust me. I've seen that link and every other possible site attempting to adjust numbers claiming Rodman to be the GOAT rebounder before, including the '96 Sports Illustrated article. The simple thing they do not take into consideration is that no one rebounds, scores, or shoots against imaginary numbers and %'s that will exist 30-40 years into the future. They play against the people in front of them, and considering the fact that Russell won rebounding titles against Wilt who was as stat obsessed as anyone, there is no argument whatsoever to suggest he would not outrebound Rodman if he played against him.

[Soundwave]

3) You don't have to, but it's not a given. The 50s also aren't the same as the late 60s and early 70s, during which time the majority of the league was black, and after which teams had adjusted to guys like Russell, Wilt, Oscar who changed the game.

I agree with that, but that by extension also basically implies that Russell/Wilt/Oscar played the majority of their primes in an era that was undeniably smaller, less athletic, and more exclusionary (read: less black).

I give Russell/Wilt/Oscar credit for setting the foundation of the modern NBA though, that for sure they deserve (and that is no small honor), but the fact is the league in the 60s was nothing like we are used to in a modern post ABA-merger context.

Player development for one was light years better by the time the 70s rolled around. A more stable, "middle class America" upbringing became more attainable for more black families post civil rights movement too.

[riseagainst]

lol... I like how OP specifically states "Kobe couldn't do it on his own". Like there was anyone who could do it on his own. Dat insecurity.

[jlip]

For those arguing what Russell would not be able to do in the modern era:


I could easily say that MJ would not be considered a GOAT if he played during Russell's era. Guards rarely ever got MVPs during the 60's. He would have to compete with Wilt for scoring titles. There was no such thing as a Finals MVP until Russell's last season. There was no DPOY award. There were no all defensive teams until Russell's final season. He's likely not winning a title unless he's on the Celtics. Basically half or more of his career achievements are gone if he played most of his career in the 60's.

Couple that with the fact that he would have played in that allegedly "weak era", most people born after 1970 would probably discredit anything he did anyways. The same thing is already happening to MJ by fans who started watching after 1998.

[fpliii]

I agree with that, but that by extension also basically implies that Russell/Wilt/Oscar played the majority of their primes in an era that was undeniably smaller, less athletic, and more exclusionary (read: less black).

I give Russell/Wilt/Oscar credit for setting the foundation of the modern NBA though, that for sure they deserve (and that is no small honor), but the fact is the league in the 60s was nothing like we are used to in a modern post ABA-merger context.

Player development for one was light years better by the time the 70s rolled around. A more stable, "middle class America" upbringing became more attainable for more black families post civil rights movement too.
1) Has detailed research been done on heights? Again, there are inconsistencies based on measurements with/without shoes over eras.

2) With regards to less athletic/less black, there's a huge overlap. The league first hit the 50% black point in the mid-60s:


Year bTotal nTotal Total Total%
1949-50 0 223 223 0%
1950-51 4 131 135 3%
1951-52 6 110 116 5%
1952-53 7 117 124 6%
1953-54 7 103 110 6%
1954-55 10 95 105 10%
1955-56 12 80 92 13%
1956-57 16 83 99 16%
1957-58 15 84 99 15%
1958-59 19 73 92 21%
1959-60 25 74 99 25%
1960-61 28 65 93 30%
1961-62 37 76 113 33%
1962-63 48 69 117 41%
1963-64 43 68 111 39%
1964-65 56 58 114 49%
1965-66 55 56 111 50%
1966-67 62 61 123 50%
1967-68N 80 71 151 53%
1968-69N 92 76 168 55%
1969-70N 93 78 171 54%
1970-71N 126 91 217 58%
1971-72N 137 79 216 63%
1972-73N 139 76 215 65%
1973-74N 139 83 222 63%
1974-75N 153 82 235 65%
1975-76N 155 83 238 65%
1976-77 202 93 295 68%
1977-78 201 84 285 71%
1978-79 200 80 280 71%
1979-80 204 83 287 71%
1980-81 223 81 304 73%
1981-82 226 90 316 72%
1982-83 227 89 316 72%
1983-84 226 84 310 73%
1984-85 238 82 320 74%
1985-86 242 83 325 74%
1986-87 248 87 335 74%
1987-88 244 88 332 73%
1988-89 254 99 353 72%
1989-90 75%
1990-91 72%
1991-92 75%
1992-93 77%
1993-94 79%
1994-95 82%
1995-96 80%
1996-97 79%
1997-98 77%
1998-99 78%
1999-00 78%
2000-01 78%
2001-02 78%
2002-03 78%
2003-04 76%
2004-05 73%
2005-06 73%
2006-07 75%
2007-08 76%
2008-09 77%
2009-10 77%
2010-11 78%
2011-12 78%
2012-13 76%

Much closer to the modern league than the 50s. I think

3) I do think the merger was the big turnover point in terms of black players and athleticism, but it's not the only such cutoff. The league wasn't saturated with international players until a decade ago:


Year iTotal nTotal Total Total%
1949-50 2 221 223 1%
1950-51 1 134 135 1%
1951-52 1 115 116 1%
1952-53 1 123 124 1%
1953-54 2 108 110 2%
1954-55 1 104 105 1%
1955-56 3 89 92 3%
1956-57 1 98 99 1%
1957-58 1 98 99 1%
1958-59 0 92 92 0%
1959-60 0 99 99 0%
1960-61 0 93 93 0%
1961-62 1 112 113 1%
1962-63 1 116 117 1%
1963-64 1 110 111 1%
1964-65 1 113 114 1%
1965-66 1 110 111 1%
1966-67 1 122 123 1%
1967-68N 1 150 151 1%
1968-69N 1 167 168 1%
1969-70N 1 170 171 1%
1970-71N 1 216 217 0%
1971-72N 0 216 216 0%
1972-73N 0 215 215 0%
1973-74N 2 220 222 1%
1974-75N 2 233 235 1%
1975-76N 2 236 238 1%
1976-77 4 291 295 1%
1977-78 5 280 285 2%
1978-79 6 274 280 2%
1979-80 4 283 287 1%
1980-81 5 299 304 2%
1981-82 7 309 316 2%
1982-83 8 308 316 3%
1983-84 10 300 310 3%
1984-85 13 307 320 4%
1985-86 19 306 325 6%
1986-87 16 319 335 5%
1987-88 17 315 332 5%
1988-89 23 330 353 7%
1989-90 28 353 381 7%
1990-91 24 363 387 6%
1991-92 26 360 386 7%
1992-93 26 364 390 7%
1993-94 28 375 403 7%
1994-95 29 378 407 7%
1995-96 29 400 429 7%
1996-97 33 408 441 7%
1997-98 31 408 439 7%
1998-99 41 399 440 9%
1999-00 39 400 439 9%
2000-01 49 392 441 11%
2001-02 54 386 440 12%
2002-03 67 361 428 16%
2003-04 70 372 442 16%
2004-05 84 380 464 18%
2005-06 84 374 458 18%
2006-07 87 371 458 19%
2007-08 82 369 451 18%
2008-09 83 362 445 19%
2009-10 85 357 442 19%
2010-11 91 361 452 20%
2011-12 89 389 478 19%
2012-13 91 378 469 19%

Rule changes have changed the composition of the league. Only in the past few years have teams fully utilized the three point line and 2.9-era zone defense.

I agree that we can't compare players or teams across eras without context. The further back we go, the more considerations have to be made (hell, the league today is much different than the 90s, or 80s, let alone 70s and 60s). But stars will always be stars. Their impact may change based on league climate and the rules in place, but man hasn't evolved (though skills development has). I have absolutely zero concern about the ability of top level players playing in today's league from the mid-60s on, at which point I feel I can safely say the league was fully integrated.

[Soundwave]

For those arguing what Russell would not be able to do in the modern era:



Couple that with the fact that he would have played in that allegedly "weak era", most people born after 1970 would probably discredit anything he did anyways. The same thing is already happening to MJ by fans who started watching after 1998.

Basketball hasn't changed that much from the 1990s, so that's the difference.

The game in the 1960 is virtually unrecognizable to 1990, there were 9 teams, four players total taller than 6'8, the majority of the league was white, there was no real NCAA div 1 college development system. Hell you couldn't even drink out of the water fountain if you were black on most big college campuses in the 50s, let alone work out in the gym or get top end coaching.

[Psileas]

I have the OP on ignore, but I quote from another poster:


Russell did it but in a weak era with 8 teams while he had the most stacked team

:facepalm
Yeah, after all, he only had to beat the following "scrubs":

Schayes
Pettit
Schayes
Baylor
Chamberlain
Pettit
Schayes
Pettit
Chamberlain
Baylor+West
Robertson
Baylor+West
Robertson
Chamberlain
Chamberlain
West+Baylor
Robertson
Chamberlain
West+Baylor
Bing
Chamberlain
West+Baylor
Cunningham
Reed
West+Baylor+Chamberlain

and that's only mentioning the #1 stars/elite HOFers of those teams. What an easy route...Oh, wait, I forgot, Jordan's Bulls had more rounds to get to their titles, all those 1st rounds against Rice's Heat or Van Horn's Nets really raised the bar...

[juju151111]

It's amazing how you MJ worshippers want to claim that he's a better scorer than Wilt based upon the fact that Wilt's numbers decreased from the regular season to the postseason, but when Rodman's rebounding decreased in the playoffs he's still GOAT rebounder.:facepalm



You think that averaging 24rpg which Russell did a few times was easy in that era. Only Wilt and Russell ever did that.:lol


Only Elgin Baylor as far as I can think of. Everyone knows that there were more rebounds in the 60's, but everyone was not putting up Russell's peak numbers. Only Wilt, that's it.


:facepalm

Trust me. I've seen that link and every other possible site attempting to adjust numbers claiming Rodman to be the GOAT rebounder before, including the '96 Sports Illustrated article. The simple thing they do not take into consideration is that no one rebounds, scores, or shoots against imaginary numbers and %'s that will exist 30-40 years into the future. They play against the people in front of them, and considering the fact that Russell won rebounding titles against Wilt who was as stat obsessed as anyone, there is no argument whatsoever to suggest he would not outrebound Rodman if he played against him.
Except the fact that Rodman number s are better. Their barley anyone over 6-8 when Wilt and Russell entered the league. Russell numbers do not add up comparable to Rodman.

[fpliii]

Except the fact that Rodman number s are better. Their barley anyone over 6-8 when Wilt and Russell entered the league. Russell numbers do not add up comparable to Rodman.
1) Where's the source/analysis of heights? Remember, fewer teams means they faced the same guys more often (so you have to look at it in terms of % of guys faced as opposed to totals), and also remember that back then, players were measured without shoes.

2) In terms of raw TRB%, right, but Russell played more minutes at a higher pace, and even though I haven't done a detailed study yet, you'd assume there are declining returns as pace and minutes increase. Russell's TRB% also increased during the playoffs, while Rodman's decrease.

[juju151111]

1) Where's the source/analysis of heights? Remember, fewer teams means they faced the same guys more often (so you have to look at it in terms of % of guys faced as opposed to totals), and also remember that back then, players were measured without shoes.

2) In terms of raw TRB%, right, but Russell played more minutes at a higher pace, and even though I haven't done a detailed study yet, you'd assume there are declining returns as pace and minutes increase. Russell's TRB% also increased during the playoffs, while Rodman's decrease.
They were way more Rebounds available is the point and Rodman played at a slower pace and still put up those numbers. Russell would be great player today, but I doubt anything special.10 ppg 14 Rpg player. He not a Goat candidate imo, but every one got their categorys. I would take Hakeem over him in a draft anytime.

[Psileas]

1) Where's the source/analysis of heights? Remember, fewer teams means they faced the same guys more often (so you have to look at it in terms of % of guys faced as opposed to totals), and also remember that back then, players were measured without shoes.

2) In terms of raw TRB%, right, but Russell played more minutes at a higher pace, and even though I haven't done a detailed study yet, you'd assume there are declining returns as pace and minutes increase. Russell's TRB% also increased during the playoffs, while Rodman's decrease.

Also:

3) Russell (like Wilt) was an elite shot blocker, and that's not even mentioning the shots that he contested without necessarily blocking them. Rodman very rarely contested any shots. Not only because he wasn't great at it, but he also knew that this hurt his rebounding opportunities.

[fpliii]

They were way more Rebounds available is the point and Rodman played at a slower pace and still put up those numbers. Russell would be great player today, but I doubt anything special.10 ppg 14 Rpg player. He not a Goat candidate imo, but every one got their categorys. I would take Hakeem over him in a draft anytime.
But that's the thing...if you're playing more possessions, and more minutes, you certainly won't grab rebounds at the same pace. Again, his rebounding improved during the playoffs, while the same wasn't the case with Rodman (who also did it in fewer minutes/possessions, which is skewing his TRB%).

I'd probably take Hakeem over Russell, but I'd take him over Jordan as well. It doesn't mean he's a greater player than either guy, two way centers are just that hard to come by.

If you want to call him a 10/14 player that's fine, but defense is unquestionably half the game, and he was as good on that end as anybody based on the advanced metrics.

[SamuraiSWISH]

Three-Peat is all about heart, mental toughness, will power, skill, and determination. So yea, absolutely it makes me appreciate MJ even more. The 3x greatest perimeter players since he left: Kobe, LeBron teamed with Wade might not even do it once. MJ did it twice. Second time well past his prime / peak.

[juju151111]

But that's the thing...if you're playing more possessions, and more minutes, you certainly won't grab rebounds at the same pace. Again, his rebounding improved during the playoffs, while the same wasn't the case with Rodman (who also did it in fewer minutes/possessions, which is skewing his TRB%).

I'd probably take Hakeem over Russell, but I'd take him over Jordan as well. It doesn't mean he's a greater player than either guy, two way centers are just that hard to come by.

If you want to call him a 10/14 player that's fine, but defense is unquestionably half the game, and he was as good on that end as anybody based on the advanced metrics.
I never said he wasn't a great defender( Even tho I don't believe his competition was top notch from the start especially in the late 50s early 60s.). Ben Wallace was a great defender too which is what I see him has. A slightly better Ben Wallace.(Go look at Ben Wallce prime stats before you curse me out)

[fpliii]

I never said he wasn't a great defender( Even tho I don't believe his competition was top notch from the start especially in the late 50s early 60s.). Ben Wallace was a great defender too which is what I see him has. A slightly better Ben Wallace.(Go look at Ben Wallce prime stats before you curse me out)
I watched Ben Wallace live, I don't need to look at the numbers.

Russell was a completely different type of player though. Much better leaper and better in the open court, and not as strong as Ben Wallace. Better passer and ball-handler, and better defending the perimeter.

In terms of results though, by the advanced stats, Russell's defenses were consistently as good as Big Ben's championship teams', throughout his career. So if you're going in terms of impact defensively (and not necessarily stylistically), it's a fair comparison.

I agree about the competition, but his teams in the mid-late 60s were great defensively as well.

[SamuraiSWISH]

Russell was a completely different type of player though. Much better leaper and better in the open court, and not as strong as Ben Wallace. Better passer and ball-handler, and better defending the perimeter.
Stop, you never watched Russell play. All you jockers of dudes from before the 70's are lying through your teeth about their abilities and how it may or may not translate to the modern era post merger.

[ArbitraryWater]

Three-Peat is all about heart, mental toughness, will power, skill, and determination. So yea, absolutely it makes me appreciate MJ even more. The 3x greatest perimeter players since he left: Kobe, LeBron teamed with Wade might not even do it once. MJ did it twice. Second time well past his prime / peak.

:oldlol:

[DirkLegend41]

**** no.


Kobe was a damn sidekick.


SO we include Pippen too?
A guy who averaged about 25 PPG 5 RPG 5 APG is a sidekick? More like 1 A 1 B to me. Pippen was a sidekick and so is D-Wade.

[fpliii]

Stop, you never watched Russell play. All you jockers of dudes from before the 70's are lying through your teeth about their abilities and how it may or may not translate to the modern era post merger.
We have some tape, so we know about his skills and athletic ability. The advanced metrics back up his impact.

All of the articles on his games are available from the Boston Globe, and there are plenty of books with first-hand accounts.

I'm not a jocker of any era (only started watching in the early 90s), I just don't think man has evolved, and think the best players from any era post-integration will be among the best in any other era.

[juju151111]

I watched Ben Wallace live, I don't need to look at the numbers.

Russell was a completely different type of player though. Much better leaper and better in the open court, and not as strong as Ben Wallace. Better passer and ball-handler, and better defending the perimeter.

In terms of results though, by the advanced stats, Russell's defenses were consistently as good as Big Ben's championship teams', throughout his career. So if you're going in terms of impact defensively (and not necessarily stylistically), it's a fair comparison.

I agree about the competition, but his teams in the mid-late 60s were great defensively as well.
I watched a lot of Russell footage and what you say is pretty accurate. He was a great sprinter and leaper. I don't know about defending the perimeter through. Russell never went against guys has fast has Iverson, Westbrook Mj,Rose, Kobe etc... Players were more mechanical with their dribble penetration back then from the footage I watched. Russell would be a great athlete even today. He was jumping out the gym.

[97 bulls]

Also:

3) Russell (like Wilt) was an elite shot blocker, and that's not even mentioning the shots that he contested without necessarily blocking them. Rodman very rarely contested any shots. Not only because he wasn't great at it, but he also knew that this hurt his rebounding opportunities.
Rodman didnt block shots, but he drew a lot of charges. And while I've never seen Wilt or Russell play because I wasnt born yet, I have watched the clips of their blocks. A LARGE PORTION of their blocks would be goal tendind today. Not to mention, it seems as if players just threw it up there for them. No pump fakes, tear drops/floaters/giant killers.

[fpliii]

I watched a lot of Russell footage and what you say is pretty accurate. He was a great sprinter and leaper. I don't know about defending the perimeter through. Russell never went against guys has fast has Iverson, Westbrook Mj,Rose, Kobe etc... Players were more mechanical with their dribble penetration back then from the footage I watched. Russell would be a great athlete even today. He was jumping out the gym.
I agree with the bolded, that's why we can't just say he'd be the same player today. The further back you go from the current era (probably 08-present, since that's when the 3 was finally utilized and Thibs' brought some of the current defensive schemes into the league), the more you have to adjust. You don't have to do as much with the 90s, but as you go back to the 80s, 70s, 60s, etc., you have to look at the context more. Two things:

1) I think comparing individual players over eras is much easier than comparing teams. Stylistically so much has changed, and the rosters would need to change based on trends/rules to stay competitive.

2) I don't think we can compare players from before the mid 60s, since the league wasn't integrated. With Russell/Wilt/Oscar and others, we have to take this into consideration, and see how playing with more black players changed their games in terms of impact and style.

Here are some quotes on his perimeter play (we have limited footage obviously, but he switched onto Oscar, Baylor and West some):

[QUOTE]Just an update, I asked ThaRegul8r for some quotes on the matter from his extensive database, and he was able to provide the following:

[quote]"With Russell," said Hayes "you never know what to expect. He has such great lateral movement. He's always got an angle on you. He told me that he can take just two steps and block a shot from any position on the court. I remember the first time I was matched up against him. I was out in the corner and he was under the basket. I figured it was safe to shoot. But as I went up, there he was, tipping the shot.
(Pat Putnam,

[fpliii]

Rodman didnt block shots, but he drew a lot of charges. And while I've never seen Wilt or Russell play because I wasnt born yet, I have watched the clips of their blocks. A LARGE PORTION of their blocks would be goal tendind today. Not to mention, it seems as if players just threw it up there for them. No pump fakes, tear drops/floaters/giant killers.
With regards to Wilt this might be true, but Russell blocked shots on the way up:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zod87fjoyv0

Anyhow, I don't need to defend Russell, I'm a fan of every era. I just tend to have his back since he gets a ton of flack because of when he played.

If you read some other threads, I defend MJ a ton (see the MJ is overrated thread today for instance). Loved watching him as a player. Same with Shaq (my favorite all-time), and a ton of others. Great players are great, always have been, and always will be.

[Psileas]

Rodman didnt block shots, but he drew a lot of charges. And while I've never seen Wilt or Russell play because I wasnt born yet, I have watched the clips of their blocks. A LARGE PORTION of their blocks would be goal tendind today. Not to mention, it seems as if players just threw it up there for them. No pump fakes, tear drops/floaters/giant killers.

Charges don't matter in this discussion, they don't blow away rebounding opportunities. As for their shot blocking, it would be more limited nowadays, but all these decreased opportunities would enhance their rebounding %'s.
Wilt wasn't easily falling for pump fakes. I've seen people trying to fake the shot and they'd fail having him jump in vain. Same with Russell. There's a video of Willis Reed trying to use his fakes on old Russell and in the end he's still blocked.

[97 bulls]

Charges don't matter in this discussion, they don't blow away rebounding opportunities. As for their shot blocking, it would be more limited nowadays, but all these decreased opportunities would enhance their rebounding %'s.
Wilt wasn't easily falling for pump fakes. I've seen people trying to fake the shot and they'd fail having him jump in vain. Same with Russell. There's a video of Willis Reed trying to use his fakes on old Russell and in the end he's still blocked.
Im not saying pump fakes and/tear drops is the end all to be all, but these guy literally didnt do it.

And the decreased opportunities would force them to have to be in the vicinity of their man. In many of the clips I've seen, Wilt is just standing at the basket waiting for the jumshooter.

Both Wilt and Russell were excellent players but their stats must be put into context. And the era along with the way the game was played must be acknowledged.

[JellyBean]

Why credit Shaq for a three peat but not Kobe?

Kobe's numbers as a second option are on par with Lebrons first option numbers


Thank you. There is no 3-peat for LA without Kobe.

[97 bulls]

With regards to Wilt this might be true, but Russell blocked shots on the way up:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zod87fjoyv0

Anyhow, I don't need to defend Russell, I'm a fan of every era. I just tend to have his back since he gets a ton of flack because of when he played.

If you read some other threads, I defend MJ a ton (see the MJ is overrated thread today for instance). Loved watching him as a player. Same with Shaq (my favorite all-time), and a ton of others. Great players are great, always have been, and always will be.
I get a chuckle watching the vid you posted. Not one of those jumpshooters gave any form of respect to Russell shot blocking ability. They just hoisted it up. They should've just gave him the ball. That wouldn't happen today.

Saying that. Im not implying that Wilt and Russell weren't great. Just that the gane was different. There's nothing that I've seen from the clips available to me, that would lead me to believe that Rodman wouldn't be able to dominate back then as well.

[DatAsh]

I've got MJ and Russell 1 and 2. Anybody who disregards that era is doing themselves and basketball history a great disservice.

:cheers:

[Soundwave]

I don't disregard the 50s/60s, but I think it's fairly obvious it was radically different era.

American as a country wasn't even really post-segration until the 1970s, but basketball in its development as a mainstream sport was far different back then.

We owe a lot to Wilt/Russell/Oscar/West for developing the NBA into what it is today, but they were basically like the higher end players of today, but they stood out so much more back then because the average player in the NBA in the 60s was simply no where near as good and they couldn't possibly be.

[DatAsh]

ITT: Posters disrespecting Russell for their agendas. :facepalm

He's not going away.

Not sure if it's agendas or just lack of knowledge. I haven't kept up with these boards enough to know all faces.

[juju151111]

With regards to Wilt this might be true, but Russell blocked shots on the way up:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zod87fjoyv0

Anyhow, I don't need to defend Russell, I'm a fan of every era. I just tend to have his back since he gets a ton of flack because of when he played.

If you read some other threads, I defend MJ a ton (see the MJ is overrated thread today for instance). Loved watching him as a player. Same with Shaq (my favorite all-time), and a ton of others. Great players are great, always have been, and always will be.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVwA3VOKV4U 4:30 watch coach Nick get perplexed at the dribbling and the perimeter defense. Also earlier in the video he talks about Jerry west can't dribble left at all. Perimeter players back then we're not has athletic and dribbled like tools. They went right and the defenders did not hound them on that end. They dribbled with the ball right in front of them. Why they didn't play them to their right hand is crazy and didn't just play pressure defense and stl the ball.

[Psileas]

Im not saying pump fakes and/tear drops is the end all to be all, but these guy literally didnt do it.

And the decreased opportunities would force them to have to be in the vicinity of their man. In many of the clips I've seen, Wilt is just standing at the basket waiting for the jumshooter.

Both Wilt and Russell were excellent players but their stats must be put into context. And the era along with the way the game was played must be acknowledged.

On players who didn't fake, etc:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0v9_aiXvoSc&t=17m47s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hepObDB6zEs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCfLNVvWgZo&t=53s

Reduced shot blocks for a big man generally means more rebounding opportunities and better rebounding %'s. Meaning that overall, they wouldn't necessarily make their stats less dominant. If their stats are to be put into context, it's equally necessary that some points like the ones I mentioned be raised as well. Not to mention that the 80's or early 90's, with the widely reduced use of the 3 point lane, also presented more chances of shot blockers to pad their numbers. This had especially been the case in international basketball, where, not only is the 3 more widely used than ever, but all offenses are based on coach tactics (unlike older decades), leaving very little room to great shot blockers to thrive.

[Soundwave]

Not sure if it's agendas or just lack of knowledge. I haven't kept up with these boards enough to know all faces.

It's disrespectful to say that he wouldn't average 20 rpg and win 8 titles in a row in any other decade pre-1976?

[Psileas]

I get a chuckle watching the vid you posted. Not one of those jumpshooters gave any form of respect to Russell shot blocking ability. They just hoisted it up. They should've just gave him the ball. That wouldn't happen today.

Saying that. Im not implying that Wilt and Russell weren't great. Just that the gane was different. There's nothing that I've seen from the clips available to me, that would lead me to believe that Rodman wouldn't be able to dominate back then as well.

That wouldn't happen today? Watch modern great shot blocking performances, all these games are still littered with easy to block/ill-advised shots.

[Roundball_Rock]

Three-Peat is all about heart, mental toughness, will power, skill, and determination.

That basically is true. The problem, though, is acting as if only MJ possessed those traits. If his team collapsed like LeBron's did this year there would have been no threepeat. Jordan and Pippen had a legendary focus--that was something that marveled Malone when he played with them in 92'--and hated to lose and that kept them fully motivated year after year. Other players also had the correct mentality, as did of course the coach. In 96' the Bulls did not even lose 2 in a row during the entire season because they would get so mad about losing and would come out with a vengeance the next game! This is why 72-10 probably will not be beaten. Other teams may have the ability to do it but the motivation and focus to achieve that level of success over a season is something we likely will never see again.

[Soundwave]

That wouldn't happen today? Watch modern great shot blocking performances, all these games are still littered with easy to block/ill-advised shots.

Eh, that video you posted doesn't really do much to dissuade the stereotype that the 60s had an awful lot of 6'3 white guys with sub-par verticals who'd throw up floaters in the lane constantly.

[jzek]

Reason number 218,678,974,248,684 why MJ is the GOAT.

[Soundwave]

That basically is true. The problem, though, is acting as if only MJ possessed those traits. If his team collapsed like LeBron's did this year there would have been no threepeat. Jordan and Pippen had a legendary focus--that was something that marveled Malone when he played with them in 92'--and hated to lose and that kept them fully motivated year after year. Other players also had the correct mentality, as did of course the coach. In 96' the Bulls did not even lose 2 in a row during the entire season because they would get so mad about losing and would come out with a vengeance the next game! This is why 72-10 probably will not be beaten. Other teams may have the ability to do it but the motivation and focus to achieve that level of success over a season is something we likely will never see again.

It's fair to say Jordan was the linchpin of that though.

Scottie had Barkley and Olajuwon while still in his relative prime and he couldn't win one playoff game with them, yet with Jordan he can win 72 games and six titles.

Yes, it's established that Jordan couldn't win titles on his own, but we never got to see any other context where he got to play on other relatively talented teams (Pip had several after Chicago, and many of those teams crumbled in embarrassing fashion).

The star/lead player's job is not just to "put up stats" and call it a day (the LeBron excuse), it's his job to make sure his TEAM follows behind his focus. It's his job to understand what makes his team tick, not to just phone in 30 points and say "well I did my job".

[97 bulls]

On players who didn't fake, etc:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0v9_aiXvoSc&t=17m47s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hepObDB6zEs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCfLNVvWgZo&t=53s

Reduced shot blocks for a big man generally means more rebounding opportunities and better rebounding %'s. Meaning that overall, they wouldn't necessarily make their stats less dominant. If their stats are to be put into context, it's equally necessary that some points like the ones I mentioned be raised as well. Not to mention that the 80's or early 90's, with the widely reduced use of the 3 point lane, also presented more chances of shot blockers to pad their numbers. This had especially been the case in international basketball, where, not only is the 3 more widely used than ever, but all offenses are based on coach tactics (unlike older decades), leaving very little room to great shot blockers to thrive.
In the vids you posted where guys did use a pump fake, they worked. Its just proving my point.

My point is that it was a different era. The game was played totally different from now. In the second clip where the player threw a pump fake at Wilt, he still had a live dribble. He should've went for the dunk.

[juju151111]

Eh, that video you posted doesn't really do much to dissuade the stereotype that the 60s had an awful lot of 6'3 white guys with sub-par verticals who'd throw up floaters in the lane constantly.
Nobody can tell me later 50s and early 60s peemiter players are better then modern ones. They had no left hand and dribbled in front which would lead to a stl in today's era. They were not has athletic and the defenders played on them made no sense. They just looked at the guy in front of them dribbling slow and mechanical.

[Psileas]

Eh, that video you posted doesn't really do much to dissuade the stereotype that the 60s had an awful lot of 6'3 white guys with sub-par verticals who'd throw up floaters in the lane constantly.

Are you kidding me? :oldlol: Not a single guy I showcased in my videos is white and none is 6'3 with "sub-bar verticals" either. Willis Reed, Sam Jones and Nate Thurmond are the players. If you really see these guys as 6'3 white guys, you'd better ask for medical help.

[Soundwave]

Are you kidding me? :oldlol: Not a single guy I showcased in my videos is white and none is 6'3 with "sub-bar verticals" either. Willis Reed, Sam Jones and Nate Thurmond are the players. If you really see these guys as 6'3 white guys, you'd better ask for medical help.

I think I quoted the wrong person, I was referring to this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zod87fjoyv0

8 blocks, but really like 7 of those are gimmes.

Not just the players but I think coaching has come light years since the 60s too ... you would get your ass stapled to the bench for throwing up some of that soft sh*t in the modern game.

[97 bulls]

That wouldn't happen today? Watch modern great shot blocking performances, all these games are still littered with easy to block/ill-advised shots.
Im not really talking about the shots around the rim. Its the Jumpshots. Those were just jurrasic. No fadeaway, no (or limited) pumpfaking, not trying to dribble around players. I wish we could watch some of these vids together in person.

[Psileas]

In the vids you posted where guys did use a pump fake, they worked. Its just proving my point.

Wtf are you guys seeing? None of these fakes worked. Jones was blocked, as Wilt realized quickly he'd fake the shot. Thurmond made the shot, but his fake still had zero effect, Wilt didn't even flinch. Only Reed somewhat managed to fool Russell once, but he tried too hard and got burned in the end, too.

[JUDGE WITNESS]

these guys were playing in an era that very little to no concept of technique. its fair to say they wouldnt be good players if u also accept the possiblity that they very well can be.

[Psileas]

I think I quoted the wrong person, I was referring to this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zod87fjoyv0

8 blocks, but really like 7 of those are gimmes.

If anything, it's impressive that Russell even manages to do the stuff that he does in some of these plays. Since when is it a given (and a "gimme") that a freakin' center will move to the perimeter and block a SG taking a perimeter shot, twice? And that he's going to do the same thing to a bigger guy later on?

Trust me, it's typical bias against something you didn't watch live. If the exact same plays happened today, you'd be going :bowdown: at the defender.

[Soundwave]

I kind of think of basketball as sport in these terms of development as we know it today:

1940s-50s - Infancy/childhood

1960s - Puberty

1970s - College Years

1980s-today - Adulthood

The game was simply far different in its overall development in the 50s/60s.

[Soundwave]

If anything, it's impressive that Russell even manages to do the stuff that he does in some of these plays. Since when is it a given (and a "gimme") that a freakin' center will move to the perimeter and block a SG taking a perimeter shot, twice? And that he's going to do the same thing to a bigger guy later on?

Trust me, it's typical bias against something you didn't watch live. If the exact same plays happened today, you'd be going :bowdown: at the defender.

If Steve Nash was getting his shot blocked like that 5 times in a game, I'd be yelling at the coach to get his ass out of the game.

[Psileas]

these guys were playing in an era that very little to no concept of technique. its fair to say they wouldnt be good players if u also accept the possiblity that they very well can be.

West had as good a technique as anyone and he still couldn't fool Russell. So did Oscar, at 6'6+ (with shoes on), who was shooting at ridiculously high angles and was incredibly hard to block, and Russell occasionally got him too.

[97 bulls]

It's fair to say Jordan was the linchpin of that though.

Scottie had Barkley and Olajuwon while still in his relative prime and he couldn't win one playoff game with them, yet with Jordan he can win 72 games and six titles.

Yes, it's established that Jordan couldn't win titles on his own, but we never got to see any other context where he got to play on other relatively talented teams (Pip had several after Chicago, and many of those teams crumbled in embarrassing fashion).

The star/lead player's job is not just to "put up stats" and call it a day (the LeBron excuse), it's his job to make sure his TEAM follows behind his focus. It's his job to understand what makes his team tick, not to just phone in 30 points and say "well I did my job".
God if you were in front of me id scream this at you.....PIPPEN WAS AN OLD MAN WITH A BAD BACK. WHY DO YOU KEEP PERPETRAING THIS NONSENSE?

So what if Jordan at 33 was able to lead the Bulls to that record. He hadn't played in almost two years. His body hadnt taken that pounding and was able to recuperate. Pippen stayed and still mad deep playoff runs, and joined the Olympics. Like they say its not the age but the mileage. Rodman mayve been in his 30s but he was a freak of nature. Phil Jackson called Rodman the best athlete hed ever seen. And he played in the days of Wilt and Russell, Dr. J saw prime Jordan and Pippen. Jordan joined what was basically a 60 win team (replacing Grant for Rodman). The Bulls had a guy comming off the bench in Kukoc that would've been an all-star had he played on another team.

This is why people say Jordan is overrated.

[Psileas]

I kind of think of basketball as sport in these terms of development as we know it today:

1940s-50s - Infancy/childhood

1960s - Puberty

1970s - College Years

1980s-today - Adulthood

The game was simply far different in its overall development in the 50s/60s.

Wrong again. 1940s-50s basketball was 50-60 year old and completely different from "basketball at its infancy", as you call it. Even pro leagues weren't at their infancy, they existed before the 40's as well.

[97 bulls]

Wtf are you guys seeing? None of these fakes worked. Jones was blocked, as Wilt realized quickly he'd fake the shot. Thurmond made the shot, but his fake still had zero effect, Wilt didn't even flinch. Only Reed somewhat managed to fool Russell once, but he tried too hard and got burned in the end, too.
Lol wait, Wilt didn't bite at all? Come on bro.

[Roundball_Rock]

Scottie had Barkley and Olajuwon while still in his relative prime and he couldn't win one playoff game with them, yet with Jordan he can win 72 games and six titles.

His prime ended with his 98' Finals back injury. He was 33 by 1999 and post-injury simply did not have the same athleticism. He did fine in his prime without MJ in 94' and 95'. Jordan was the better player; that does not mean he was the better leader. Pippen had as much if not a greater leadership role with the team, which is what would go to things like focus, motivation, and a culture where losing was not tolerated.


The star/lead player's job is not just to "put up stats" and call it a day (the LeBron excuse), it's his job to make sure his TEAM follows behind his focus. It's his job to understand what makes his team tick, not to just phone in 30 points and say "well I did my job".

It helps if they are that way but scoring ability does not equate to leadership ability. For all we know on many teams there could be a bench player who is the locker room leader.

Small note on the 99' Rockets: they did in fact win one playoff game where Pippen had 37/13.

[Psileas]

If Steve Nash was getting his shot blocked like that 5 times in a game, I'd be yelling at the coach to get his ass out of the game.

See, that's the difference. You'd yell to get him out, you wouldn't try to discredit a whole generation of players, nor would suddenly Nash turn into a scrub, either objectively or before your eyes. Yet, for some reason, these guys can't have the same benefit of the doubt (as if West was getting blocked that often every time)...

[Soundwave]

God if you were in front of me id scream this at you.....PIPPEN WAS AN OLD MAN WITH A BAD BACK. WHY DO YOU KEEP PERPETRAING THIS NONSENSE?

So what if Jordan at 33 was able to lead the Bulls to that record. He hadn't played in almost two years. His body hadnt taken that pounding and was able to recuperate. Pippen stayed and still mad deep playoff runs, and joined the Olympics. Like they say its not the age but the mileage. Rodman mayve been in his 30s but he was a freak of nature. Phil Jackson called Rodman the best athlete hed ever seen. And he played in the days of Wilt and Russell, Dr. J saw prime Jordan and Pippen. Jordan joined what was basically a 60 win team (replacing Grant for Rodman). The Bulls had a guy comming off the bench in Kukoc that would've been an all-star had he played on another team.

This is why people say Jordan is overrated.

No this is why you guys have irrational overreactions over a perfectly reasonable statement (Jordan was the emotional linch pin for the Bulls that set the tone for the team). And then you turn around and spin that into "see! He said Jordan did it all and never needed any help!", which actually isn't what I said at all.

This isn't girl scouts where everyone needs to be given a participation ribbon and we can't have a 1st/2nd/3rd place either. Some pieces are more important than others.

Many star players are still effective at age 33 by the way. Jordan, Malone, Stockton, David Robinson, Shaq, Garnett, Allen, Pierce, Kobe Bryant. It's hardly only Rodman.

[Psileas]

Lol wait, Wilt didn't bite at all? Come on bro.

Watch the video, bro.

[97 bulls]

If Steve Nash was getting his shot blocked like that 5 times in a game, I'd be yelling at the coach to get his ass out of the game.
If any guard got his shot blocked like that more than once by a center on the perimeter? He'd be working at Walmart.

[juju151111]

See, that's the difference. You'd yell to get him out, you wouldn't try to discredit a whole generation of players, nor would suddenly Nash turn into a scrub, either objectively or before your eyes. Yet, for some reason, these guys can't have the same benefit of the doubt (as if West was getting blocked that often every time)...
Jerry west could barley dribble and would get his shit taken from him a lot if he tried that today. They dribble like complete fools and the defense allowed it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVwA3VOKV4U 4:30

[Soundwave]

Wrong again. 1940s-50s basketball was 50-60 year old and completely different from "basketball at its infancy", as you call it. Even pro leagues weren't at their infancy, they existed before the 40's as well.

Yeah but what was the state of those "pro leagues" in the 1940s? You can't tell me a straight face it's even remotely comparable to the NCAA college developmental system that took off in the 1970s.

Not to mention what state the majority of the black community in the US must've been living in at that time.

[Psileas]

If any guard got his shot blocked like that more than once by a center on the perimeter? He'd be working at Walmart.

Reggie Lewis may not have been a center, but he was a career 0.9 bpg player.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ni7t4swtdYw

How did Jordan's work at Walmart go?

[Soundwave]

Jerry west could barley dribble and would get his shit taken from him a lot if he tried that today. They dribble like complete fools and the defense allowed it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVwA3VOKV4U 4:30

Not to mention virtually no one even tries to shoot from the outside. Everything is a close shot, which plays right into the hands of a big man.

[juju151111]

Reggie Lewis may not have been a center, but he was a career 0.9 bpg player.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ni7t4swtdYw

How did Jordan's work at Walmart go?
Reggie Lewis isn't a center:facepalm Mj routinely lit him up btw including that Gm u posted.

[97 bulls]

No this is why you guys have irrational overreactions over a perfectly reasonable statement (Jordan was the emotional linch pin for the Bulls that set the tone for the team). And then you turn around and spin that into "see! He said Jordan did it all and never needed any help!", which actually isn't what I said at all.

This isn't girl scouts where everyone needs to be given a participation ribbon and we can't have a 1st/2nd/3rd place either. Some pieces are more important than others.

Many star players are still effective at age 33 by the way. Jordan, Malone, Stockton, David Robinson, Shaq, Garnett, Allen, Pierce, Kobe Bryant. It's hardly only Rodman.
It's not irrational. We've had thus conversation before. You discredit the Bulls 91 championship by saying the Pistons in particular Isaiah Thomas was old and injured. The man was 29. And just fine by the time the ECF rolled around. Why does Thomas get a pass but not Pippen?

Or another thing. Bird in 91. Why didn't he lead the Celtics (a 56 win team mind you) to the ECF to play the Bulls? The excuse is he was old (he was 34 same age as Pippen with Portland) and had BACK PROBLEMS like Pippen. And he had two hall of famers with him and another damn good player in Reggie Lewis.


Or Charles Barkley. He Joined the Rocket before Pippen with a YOUNGER Olajuwan and Clyde Drexler. Two players that im sure you feel are better than Pippen. Why didn't they win?

[juju151111]

Not to mention virtually no one even tries to shoot from the outside. Everything is a close shot, which plays right into the hands of a big man.
Exactly from all the footage I have watched I come to the conclusion Centers/big man were closer to modern era bigs then perimeter players were to today's perimeter players. Most of them couldn't go left for shit and were not has athletic. They also don't seem to use pressure defense.

[Psileas]

Yeah but what was the state of those "pro leagues" in the 1940s? You can't tell me a straight face it's even remotely comparable to the NCAA college developmental system that took off in the 1970s.

The state was what would be naturally expected. Different from the 50's, 60's, etc.
Second point of yours, I won't even tell you that the 70's were similar to the 90's or the 90's with the 2010's. But the game evolves all the time. The notion that in the 80's it reached some mythical stratosphere and from then on it remained at the same level (or even regressed, according to some) or is played in the same way is the epitome of hypocrisy and bias. I appreciate all eras, I don't believe in strong eras that quickly, almost suddenly evolved from weak ones. So, if you think the 80's were strong, but the 70's were weak, there's a lot of evidence you're going to need to convince me.

[juju151111]

The state was what would be naturally expected. Different from the 50's, 60's, etc.
Second point of yours, I won't even tell you that the 70's were similar to the 90's or the 90's with the 2010's. But the game evolves all the time. The notion that in the 80's it reached some mythical stratosphere and from then on it remained at the same level (or even regressed, according to some) or is played in the same way is the epitome of hypocrisy and bias. I appreciate all eras, I don't believe in strong eras that quickly, almost suddenly evolved from weak ones. So, if you think the 80's were strong, but the 70's were weak, there's a lot of evidence you're going to need to convince me.
The 70s were full of crack heads fighting every game. 70s were hot garbage except for a few players.

[97 bulls]

Reggie Lewis may not have been a center, but he was a career 0.9 bpg player.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ni7t4swtdYw

How did Jordan's work at Walmart go?
Just fine. He bought it.

Anyway, notice I said "like that" that means a set jumpshot. They just stood there. Never drbbled, or faded.

I will say those blocks were more Jordans fault. He seemed to be showing his hang time instead of releasing at the top.

[97 bulls]

The 70s were full of crack heads fighting every game. 70s were hot garbage except for a few players.
Lol

[Soundwave]

It's not irrational. We've had thus conversation before. You discredit the Bulls 91 championship by saying the Pistons in particular Isaiah Thomas was old and injured. The man was 29. And just fine by the time the ECF rolled around. Why does Thomas get a pass but not Pippen?

Or another thing. Bird in 91. Why didn't he lead the Celtics (a 56 win team mind you) to the ECF to play the Bulls? The excuse is he was old (he was 34 same age as Pippen with Portland) and had BACK PROBLEMS like Pippen. And he had two hall of famers with him and another damn good player in Reggie Lewis.


Or Charles Barkley. He Joined the Rocket before Pippen with a YOUNGER Olajuwan and Clyde Drexler. Two players that im sure you feel are better than Pippen. Why didn't they win?

When did I say that about the Pistons? The Bulls whupped them and deserve full credit, the Pistons were not even that old in '91. Same thing with Magic, he was still relatively in his peak then.

I didn't expect the Rockets to win an automatic title or anything, but did they even win ONE playoff game? C'mon, that's pretty sad.

For a guy with a dehabilatating back Scottie also managed to play in all 50 games that year and played the most minutes on the team and then managed to play another four full seasons after that, whereas Bird couldn't even walk properly after 1991.

[Psileas]

Not to mention virtually no one even tries to shoot from the outside. Everything is a close shot, which plays right into the hands of a big man.

Ahh, the feeling of defeat urges you to repeat the same arguments that have just been debunked. How smart. :rolleyes:
Video shows Russell blocking West at the perimeter. Soundwave's conclusion: No one shoots from the outside.
Wilt doesn't buy opponent fakes. 97 bulls' conclusion: All the fakes worked.
I won't even classify juju151111.
Just don't forget next time to remind us that Reed and Thurmond were 6'3 white guys...

[Soundwave]

Ahh, the feeling of defeat urges you to repeat the same arguments that have just been debunked. How smart. :rolleyes:
Video shows Russell blocking West at the perimeter. Soundwave's conclusion: No one shoots from the outside.
Wilt doesn't buy opponent fakes. 97 bulls' conclusion: All the fakes worked.
I won't even classify juju151111.
Just don't forget next time to remind us that Reed and Thurmond were 6'3 white guys...

I'm talking like way outside ... a shot from a few feet back from the elbow of the key (and I believe the key was even thinner back then) wouldn't be considered a total outside shot.

I'm just making note of how different the game is from today. 80%+ of the shot attempts are like within 15 feet, most are actually from below the free throw line.

[97 bulls]

When did I say that about the Pistons? The Bulls whupped them and deserve full credit, the Pistons were not even that old in '91. Same thing with Magic, he was still relatively in his peak then.

I didn't expect the Rockets to win an automatic title or anything, but did they even win ONE playoff game? C'mon, that's pretty sad.

For a guy with a dehabilatating back Scottie also managed to play in all 50 games that year and played the most minutes on the team and then managed to play another four full seasons after that, whereas Bird couldn't even walk properly after 1991.
Ok but he (Bird) walked and ran properly IN 91. And he appeared in 75 games. Im just saying be consistent.

[DonDadda59]

GOAT gonna GOAT.

http://media.giphy.com/media/10RgsJNJvC0avm/giphy.gif

[juju151111]

Ahh, the feeling of defeat urges you to repeat the same arguments that have just been debunked. How smart. :rolleyes:
Video shows Russell blocking West at the perimeter. Soundwave's conclusion: No one shoots from the outside.
Wilt doesn't buy opponent fakes. 97 bulls' conclusion: All the fakes worked.
I won't even classify juju151111.
Just don't forget next time to remind us that Reed and Thurmond were 6'3 white guys...
I never said anything about Reed or Thurmond. I said Perimeter players have evolved since then.

[Psileas]

Anyway, notice I said "like that" that means a set jumpshot. They just stood there. Never drbbled, or faded.

The vast majority of shots like the ones of West have not been able to be blocked at any era. The vast majority of shots are taken without the shooter fading or fancy dribbling. They were just great defensive plays and all you do is whine how West wasn't doing this or doing that. Tyrone Bogues made pretty much any personal opposing guard look like a C next to him and still was rarely blocked. Steve Nash isn't fading (plus, he's like 65) and he's still unblockable. Similarly West wasn't blocked 3-4 times a game and there's no reason he would be at any era.

[Soundwave]

The vast majority of shots like the ones of West have not been able to be blocked at any era. The vast majority of shots are taken without the shooter fading or fancy dribbling. They were just great defensive plays and all you do is whine how West wasn't doing this or doing that. Tyrone Bogues made pretty much any personal opposing guard look like a C next to him and still was rarely blocked. Steve Nash isn't fading (plus, he's like 65) and he's still unblockable. Similarly West wasn't blocked 3-4 times a game and there's no reason he would be at any era.

How do we know he wouldn't be blocked 3-4 times in the modern era? Some of the sh*t he was throwing up was weak as hell, he would have to adjust very quickly or he'd get benched.

There's not just one 6'9 guy to worry about, he'd have to watch out for 3 or more some times.

[97 bulls]

Actually Silas, you're right Chamberlain didn't move. My bad. The punk fake froze him.

[Psileas]

I'm talking like way outside ... a shot from a few feet back from the elbow of the key (and I believe the key was even thinner back then) wouldn't be considered a total outside shot.

I'm just making note of how different the game is from today. 80%+ of the shot attempts are like within 15 feet, most are actually from below the free throw line.

Trying multiple shots from way outside is pretty meaningless if there's no 3-pointer. Even in the 80's, very few shots came from way outside. Most were close or mid-range shots. Are you going to similarly point out this same difference from today's game, as well?

[Soundwave]

Trying multiple shots from way outside is pretty meaningless if there's no 3-pointer. Even in the 80's, very few shots came from way outside. Most were close or mid-range shots. Are you going to similarly point out this same difference from today's game, as well?

What's your argument anyway? That the 60s is equivalent to modern basketball and we should consider it as such without any consideration?

I'm sorry but I don't and these videos aren't helping the case. It's not out of "hate", I'm just looking at factually where basketball was at the time.

The league was majority white for much of the 1960s. The country was segregated and blacks weren't even allowed on many NCAA school campuses, let alone train and be coached on them. There were *four* players taller than 6'8 in the entire NBA when Bill Russell was 25 years old (in his athletic peak). There were 8-9 teams in the league total.

The game was at a very, very raw point in its development at that time.

I'm sorry but I can't just overlook all these things.

The 80s to 90s to 2000s isn't nearly as much of a leap, the modern NBA cements itself basically with the ABA merger in 1976 and develops rapidly after that and sort of levels off by the late 80s into basically the same game we know now.

[Psileas]

How do we know he wouldn't be blocked 3-4 times in the modern era? Some of the sh*t he was throwing up was weak as hell, he would have to adjust very quickly or he'd get benched.

There's not just one 6'9 guy to worry about, he'd have to watch out for 3 or more some times.

Some of the sh*t Iverson was throwing up was also weak as hell and he still wasn't blocked nearly as often. Some of the sh*t players with a slower release and with worse shooting form than West is even weaker and they're not blocked nearly as often. What would West have to adjust? I don't see anything problematic here. Do you realize how embarrassingly bad you have to be in order to be a perimeter player and be blocked 3-4 times a game?

[Soundwave]

I would also add to the social/economic changes that happened in the 60s, no sport was as impacted as much by television as basketball.

If you grew up playing ball in the 1940s ... what the f*ck would you know about a cross over or a fade away or a 360 dunk? Depending on where you came from you may not have seen anything like that before or would question the effectiveness of it.

Televised games had a monstrous impact on the development of basketball, unfortunately the NBA was really behind the times on this, which is why we don't even have very much footage from the 1960s.

Once games became televised regularly on one of the big three networks ... things changed very quickly after that IMO. Successive generations started to copy and build upon the previous generation much more quickly.

[Psileas]

What's your argument anyway? That the 60s is equivalent to modern basketball and we should consider it as such without any consideration?

I'm sorry but I don't and these videos aren't helping the case. It's not out of "hate", I'm just looking at factually where basketball was at the time.

The league was majority white for much of the 1960s. The country was segregated and blacks weren't even allowed on many NCAA school campuses, let alone train and be coached on them. There were *four* players taller than 6'8 in the entire NBA when Bill Russell was 25 years old (in his athletic peak). There were 8-9 teams in the league total.

The game was at a very, very raw point in its development at that time.

I'm sorry but I can't just overlook all these things.

The 80s to 90s to 2000s isn't nearly as much of a leap, the modern NBA cements itself basically with the ABA merger in 1976 and develops rapidly after that and sort of levels off by the late 80s into basically the same game we know now.

You think 60's basketball is row, because there's not enough footage from even older eras. If you think 60's basketball is row, just watch 30's basketball, 60's players look like aliens compared to them. Like I said, the game evolves all the time.
Why does the modern NBA cement itself with the merger? It just adds 4 more teams and some more talent. The same NBA players who were elite before the merger remained elite after this, and many still went on to dominate at least a part of the 80's. I don't see any type of quantum leap there.
As for segregation, blacks and TV influence, I can similarly point out how underdeveloped the international game had been in the 80's or even the 90's compared to now (not to mention the internet's advent) and how I can't ignore such facts either - thus only declaring the 2000's the "modern NBA".

[Soundwave]

You think 60's basketball is row, because there's not enough footage from even older eras. If you think 60's basketball is row, just watch 30's basketball, 60's players look like aliens compared to them. Like I said, the game evolves all the time.
Why does the modern NBA cement itself with the merger? It just adds 4 more teams and some more talent. The same NBA players who were elite before the merger remained elite after this, and many still went on to dominate at least a part of the 80's. I don't see any type of quantum leap there.
As for segregation and blacks, I can similarly point out how underdeveloped the international game had been in the 80's or even the 90's compared to now and how I can't ignore such facts.

The 70s is a cross section of many factors coming into play ... the post civil rights movement allowed more blacks to find relative quality education and that leads to what we know as the modern NCAA Division 1 basketball development system (which in turn impacts high school development).

The NBA getting on television with more regularity impacted the sport and development greatly allowing younger generations to watch/idolize their favorite players on a regular basis.

The NBA is still a style of play largely defined by the black community. Sure Europeans have made an impact, but NBA ball is not Euro ball (even if the Spurs win it this year, it doesn't change the Heat/Lakers/Bulls/Pistons winning it the previous 90% of the time) and the best players are overwhelming American.

The last real "revolution" in basketball as a sport IMO was not the Bulls (actually) but the Bad Boy Pistons. They really pioneered the modern concept of defence winning championships. The Bulls and then the 90s Knicks just aped that concept, which the Spurs have continued on and the Heat kinda flirt with.

Jordan while a great player, may have had a net negative impact on the sport because none of the younger kids want to take the time to learn to play as a post/interior player. Everyone wants to play the sexier wing positions and I think that's caused a detriment to the quality of the sport.

[Psileas]

The 70s is a cross section of many factors coming into play ... the post civil rights movement allowed more blacks to find relative quality education and that leads to what we know as the modern NCAA Division 1 basketball development system (which in turn impacts high school development).

The NBA getting on television with more regularity impacted the sport and development greatly allowing younger generations to watch/idolize their favorite players on a regular basis.

The NBA is still a style of play largely defined by the black community. Sure Europeans have made an impact, but NBA ball is not Euro ball (even if the Spurs win it this year, it doesn't change the Heat/Lakers/Bulls/Pistons winning it the previous 90% of the time) and the best players are overwhelming American.

It can be argued that the level that good foreign players have added to the NBA is not any smaller than the level that the ABA merger brought. The numbers have already been posted: Nowadays, the NBA is almost 20% international. In the 80's-90's it was like 5-8% international, and even this margin may become even bigger if you consider the internationals that get decent/impactful roles and playing time. Similarly, after the merger, the vast majority of the best NBA players were players that already played in the NBA. It can also be argued that the majority of the best NBA players after the American media explosion would still be NBA players regardless of this (I doubt that many players who were really talented at basketball hadn't been exposed to it, with or without TV - let's not forget, e.g, that streetball was popular before the 80's), although we need research to know the extent of this change.


The last real "revolution" in basketball as a sport IMO was not the Bulls (actually) but the Bad Boy Pistons. They really pioneered the modern concept of defence winning championships. The Bulls and then the 90s Knicks just aped that concept, which the Spurs have continued on and the Heat kinda flirt with.

I don't know what I would call the last revolution in basketball, but I can say that the overall perimeter passing of certain teams today, esp. the Spurs (partially influenced by Euros), has probably no peer historically. If the NBA ever calls full blown zones into effect, we may see some new developments.

[Roundball_Rock]

Why is the international point ignored? The NBA that we know today where the league is 1/5 international did not exist until the 21st century. The talent pool teams draw on is larger than ever now. Just look at recent champions. The Spurs have key players from Argentina, the Virgin Islands (technically American in his portion but still...), and two French players. So other than Leonard and Green all their major players are international.

Regarding age, people fail to factor in injuries in players' declines. Look at Wade. He declined and is still declining faster than normal due to the toll injuries took. There were guys who were 20-25 ppg scorers who became scrubs in their 20's due to injuries (Ralph Sampson and Penny are good examples). Wade is 32 but should be fairly close to the Wade circa 2011 and 2012 but clearly is not. So you can't just look at players ages and ignore their histories.

[juju151111]

Why is the international point ignored? The NBA that we know today where the league is 1/5 international did not exist until the 21st century. The talent pool teams draw on is larger than ever now. Just look at recent champions. The Spurs have key players from Argentina, the Virgin Islands (technically American in his portion but still...), and two French players. So other than Leonard and Green all their major players are international.

Regarding age, people fail to factor in injuries in players' declines. Look at Wade. He declined and is still declining faster than normal due to the toll injuries took. There were guys who were 20-25 ppg scorers who became scrubs in their 20's due to injuries (Ralph Sampson and Penny are good examples). Wade is 32 but should be fairly close to the Wade circa 2011 and 2012 but clearly is not. So you can't just look at players ages and ignore their histories.
The Spurs team he facing isn't even that great.

[Straight_Ballin]

Pippen averaged 19/8/6/2/1 in the Finals along with great defense, leadership and other intangibles.

AlphaWolf, you know the deal: avoid a clear, consistent criteria and engage in various contortions to inflate MJ. The real record is 8 straight but ignore Russell because he had a stacked team ( :lol ) to give MJ another manufactured record (many people think the record for rings is 6 and the record for MVP's is 5).

Did Russell LEAVE the game of basketball and then come back and repeat what he did (in this case a 3 peat)

No, he just won 8 straight. Not nearly as impressive.

[J Shuttlesworth]

It's interesting... I started watching basketball as a 7 year old kid in 93 and seeing Jordan 3 peat was my first real memory of basketball. After that, I saw Jordan's next 3 peat. Then a few years, another 3 peat by Shaq and Kobe. It never seemed to be something so hard to achieve in my perspective just because it was basically all I ever saw when I started watching. Now that I'm older and see the game in a different way, I realize a 3 peat is an insane achievement that's hard to pull off watching the Heat attempt it. I was hoping they'd be able to pull it off but not looking good now

[KOBE143]

OP is a bipolar fakkit

Before he was riding Bran nuts all the time and saying he is better than MJ.. Now that Bran is getting buttraped by ancient Duncan Spurs, OP is back on sucking MJ small dick again..

[Soundwave]

Why is the international point ignored? The NBA that we know today where the league is 1/5 international did not exist until the 21st century. The talent pool teams draw on is larger than ever now. Just look at recent champions. The Spurs have key players from Argentina, the Virgin Islands (technically American in his portion but still...), and two French players. So other than Leonard and Green all their major players are international.

Regarding age, people fail to factor in injuries in players' declines. Look at Wade. He declined and is still declining faster than normal due to the toll injuries took. There were guys who were 20-25 ppg scorers who became scrubs in their 20's due to injuries (Ralph Sampson and Penny are good examples). Wade is 32 but should be fairly close to the Wade circa 2011 and 2012 but clearly is not. So you can't just look at players ages and ignore their histories.

Because upwards of 80% of the best players in the game are still black and come through the American developmental system of high school + NCAA Div 1.

The civil rights movement and the integration of the school system that allowed far more black men to get basketball scholarships to big money schools that gave them access to top flight coaching and allowed them to focus on basketball full time. This caused the talent pool for basketball to explode past the 40s and 50s where Russell and Wilt developed.

How many of the dominant players in the league today are from Europe? Dirk and ... ? The European style of basketball hasn't impacted the NBA *that* drastically.

I think for a variety of factors it exploded in leaps in bounds after the 60s and that is actually a compliment to Wilt/Russell/Oscar/West ... because they raised the quality of the game so much so that the product in subsequent decades was far better.

But the flipside to that is that the actual era in which they played in was really a product of the 1940s/50s development ... and that was just light years behind what basketball would become in 70s and especially the 80s.

At some point there was going to be levelling off period anyway, once basketball became a relatively big money sport in the 80s, teams started to become much more sophisticated with scouting, coaching, player development, etc. So the advances in the game have levelled off considerably, the last real "revolution" in the game was the Bad Boys Pistons philosophy of defence first and beating people's ass in the paint :lol . This has led to defensive first championship squads ever since and the rise of the perimeter shooting player who can score from further away from the basket if need be.

Like I don't watch a game from like 1994 and go "ohmygawd no one crossed over back then or dribbled left and no one shot from the outside". Aside from the bagginess in the shorts its mostly the same game just more physical. Whereas if you watch a game from 1965 and compared to 1985, I think it's a more startling difference.

As for Wade, he is not as bad of a player as he's showing now (neither is Bosh) ... they just don't play well with LeBron's ball domination style offence. I've said it many times before, the Heat are a great talent as a group, but they don't play *great* together ... the Bulls, Pistons, even the Lakers when Shaq/Kobe could keep their egos in check meshed much better.

[kureyşi-gospurs]

Valid

[SamuraiSWISH]

That basically is true. The problem, though, is acting as if only MJ possessed those traits. If his team collapsed like LeBron's did this year there would have been no threepeat. Jordan and Pippen had a legendary focus
Where did I say MJ had it alone? Pippen had the focus. Absolutely. Emboldened by playing a long side Mike. Those two together could rile each other up and shut someone down. As they did Kukoc in the '92 Olympics.

But let's not kid ourselves MJ clearly between those two had the most heart, will power, and mental toughness. He empowered Pippen and everyone else on those teams through his sheer force of will, and mental toughness. Playing alongside Jordan they all felt they could overcome anything. MJ wouldn't allow failure. Pippen played good cop to his teammates. And that's why they three peated TWICE. Through Jordan's lead, and Pippen as his wingman.

MJ didn't need midol for headaches in important games. No crying on the bench, or pouting because coach wants to use him as a decoy in order to win a game.

[NZStreetBaller]

lets face it jordan would.ve 8 peated too if he never had a break...... three peat either side?? definately would've taken the middle as hell. he's already the goat with his 2 year break imagine if he did 8 peat. then not even russell or kareem would be in the convo

[EwingMan]

Does this idiot even know what "yet" means?

lol

op either doesn't know how use conjunctions correctly, or can use them, but is posting in a weak era

[EwingMan]

lets face it jordan would.ve 8 peated too if he never had a break...... three peat either side?? definately would've taken the middle as hell. he's already the goat with his 2 year break imagine if he did 8 peat. then not even russell or kareem would be in the convo

http://images.ezgif.com/tmp/gif_gifsicle_140_gif_600x600_9af121.gif

let's face it, you'd be a good poster if we just ignore all your asinine posts like this one.

[GimmeThat]

I don't know if I would value a 4-peat over 6 rings
I think at 5-peat, we are having a legitimate conversation.

I haven't taken the international competition into consideration yet.

but that mentality.

to face your opponents and just tell them, hey, I'm just playing ball.

I don't know what happens to your opponents mental state of mind if you befriend them, or even if you make them your enemies.

[La Frescobaldi]

I don't disregard the 60s entirely, but lets look at some facts here

- The NBA was NINE TEAM league in the 60s.

- There were like four to five 7 footers in the league *total* for many of those years. Guys who were 6'5 and 6'6 were routinely averaging over 10 rpg.
you are a good old ISH guy so this is a real surprising post to see from the pen of Soundwave. Not to go all jlauber on you but ............. really?

How many 7 foot players are in today's 30 team league?
Dirk Nowitzki
Adnrwe Binam
Greg Oden
Roy Hibbert
Guys like Andrew Bogut or Brook Lopez who are routinely called 7 foot... aren't 7 foot. They're like Nate Thurmond size.
So in a 30 team NBA there's like 4 or 5 7 footers. Must make today a weak era, right?

I've seen many posters on here saying 6'9" Kevin Durant is 7 feet tall... and then they complain when somebody tells the true size.
Does that mean 6'10" Bill Russell was really 7'1" ?

As far as rebounders....... Dwight Howard is 6'9" and Kevin Love is 6'7.


- Russell was sometimes as low as the 4TH scoring option on some of those Celtic teams. His Celtic teams were also far more stacked than the other 8 teams.
Who is the 4th scoring option on the 2014 Spurs? Is that a stacked team? Do they win without Tim Duncan?



- Basketball development was at a laughable state back then, the NBA was pretty much a bush league in those days. The civil rights movement hadn't even come and gone yet, meaning most NCAA Div I colleges weren't even integrated. There's probably tons of good players that never got to the NBA because the opportunities back then for black males were harshly limited and mired in extreme poverty.
There are tons of good players that never get to the NBA in every single year, for any number of reasons. As far as black males, there are more than 400 basketball leagues all over Africa. How come they aren't producing hundreds or thousands of great players? Or even one? By and large the NBA has the best players in the world and that hasn't ever changed.

[La Frescobaldi]

The Spurs team he facing isn't even that great.

yes it is.

[Purch]

11 out of the 15 wins the spurs have had in this post season have been by 15+ .... Think about that for a second. This spurs team is an all time great team

[jlip]

In regards to players' height comparison across eras, I felt this post was quite telling.


:roll:

Official list heights today (and since ~1980's) have been complete media-hype BS, where as in his era they were generally much closer to the players "in stockings" height. In 1/4 inch thick shoes there really was no such thing "in shoes" height bc there would be no point anyways. Some guys were rounded down (6'9.5 Bill Russell became 6'9, 7'1 1/16th Wilt Chamberlain became 7'1), Jerry west is between 6'2.5-6'2.75 barefoot but for the first half of his career he was listed 6'2 until they bumped him to 6'3... some guys were rounded up (7'1 5/8 KAJ and 7'1 5/16th Artis Gilmore both listed to 7'2). But no guys were like Dwight ****ing Howard (6'9 barefoot, 6'10.25 in shoes, 6'11 official listed height) or any of the rest of the clowns in today's league who are no-where near their actual height.

D. Howard, #1 center in the league today. 6'9... How come 7'1.25" Hasheem Thabeet isn't tearing up the ****in record books today!?

Don't answer that because you'll just say something retarded. Instead just read every single one of these player heights from that NBA 1961-1962 season, when Wilt scored 50.4ppg. It's complete from starters down to the last bench player. Then go right ahead and compared them with all the calculated NBA barefoot measurements displayed on Draft Express from 1989-present as per this tool: http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-pre-draft-measurements/?page=avepos&year=All&source=All&draft=100&sort=...

Pure Guards (Let's call them the Point Guards:
Bob Cousy G 6-1
K.C. Jones G 6-1
Gary Phillips G 6-3
Al Attles G 6-0
York Larese G 6-4
Guy Rodgers G 6-0
Al Bianchi G 6-3
Larry Costello G 6-1
Paul Neumann G 6-1
George Blaney G 6-1
Donnie Butcher G 6-2
Al Butler G 6-2
Richie Guerin G 6-4
Whitey Martin G 6-2
Sam Stith G 6-2
Hot Rod Hundley G 6-4
Bob McNeill G 6-1
Bobby Smith G 6-4
Jerry West G 6-2
Bucky Bockhorn G 6-4
Adrian Smith G 6-1
Dave Zeller G 6-1
Johnny Egan G 5-11
Willie Jones G 6-3
Chuck Noble G 6-4
Don Ohl G 6-3
Gene Shue G 6-2
Jimmy Darrow G 5-10
Dick Eichhorst G 6-3
Vern Hatton G 6-3
Cleo Hill G 6-1
Johnny McCarthy G 6-1
Lenny Wilkens G 6-1
Howie Carl G 5-9
Ralph Davis G 6-4
York Larese G 6-4
Slick Leonard G 6-3
1961-62 Season, 37 active, avg = 6-1.89"
1989-2011 NBA draft (sample size avail, 93) avg = 6-1.02"
(Point guards of that season averaged over 3/4 of an inch taller than modern point guards of 1989-present)

Guard/Forward swingmen (Let's call them the Shooting Guards):
Carl Braun G-F 6-5
Sam Jones G-F 6-4
Frank Ramsey F-G 6-3
Paul Arizin F-G 6-4
Ed Conlin F-G 6-5
Tom Gola G-F 6-6
Hal Greer G-F 6-2
Bill Smith G-F 6-5
Frank Selvy G-F 6-3
Oscar Robertson G-F 6-5
Jack Twyman F-G 6-6
George Lee F-G 6-4
Jackie Moreland F-G 6-7
Al Ferrari G-F 6-4
Si Green G-F 6-2
Cliff Hagan F-G 6-4
Fred LaCour G-F 6-5
Bob Sims G-F 6-5
Andy Johnson F-G 6-5
Jack Turner G-F 6-5
1961-62 Season, 20 active, avg = 6-4.45"
1989-2011 NBA draft (sample size avail, 90) avg = 6-3.76"
(Shooting guards of that season average over half an inch taller than shooting guards of 1989-present)

Pure Forwards (Let's call them the Small Forwards):
Gene Guarilia F 6-5
Jim Loscutoff F 6-5
Tom Sanders F 6-6
Ted Luckenbill F 6-6
Tom Meschery F 6-6
Frank Radovich F 6-8
Dave Gambee F 6-6
Joe Roberts F 6-6
Chuck Osborne F 6-6
Lee Shaffer F 6-7
Dave Budd F 6-6
Ed Burton F 6-6
Doug Kistler F 6-9
Elgin Baylor F 6-5
Tom Hawkins F 6-5
Bob Boozer F 6-8
Joe Buckhalter F 6-7
Bob Wiesenhahn F 6-4
Bailey Howell F 6-7
Shellie McMillon F 6-5
S. Arceneaux F 6-4
Horace Walker F 6-3
Barney Cable F 6-7
Ron Horn F 6-7
George Bon S. F 6-8
1961-62 Season, 25 active, avg = 6-6.08"
1989-2011 NBA draft (sample size avail, 91) avg = 6-6.40"
(The average small forward height of that season is only 1/3rd of an inch less than the average small forwards drafted between 1989-present)

Forward/Centers (Let's call them the Power Forwards):
Tom Heinsohn F-C 6-7
Joe Ruklick F-C 6-9
Joe Graboski F-C 6-7
Red Kerr C-F 6-9
Dolph Schayes F-C 6-7
C. Buckner F-C 6-9
Johnny Green F-C 6-5
Phil Jordon C-F 6-10
Willie Naulls F-C 6-6
Howie Jolliff F-C 6-7
Jim Krebs C-F 6-8
Rudy LaRusso F-C 6-7
Wayne Embry C-F 6-8
Hub Reed C-F 6-9
Bob Ferry C-F 6-8
Ray Scott F-C 6-9
Larry Foust C-F 6-9
Clyde Lovellette C-F 6-9
Bob Pettit F-C 6-9
W. Sauldsberry F-C 6-7
Archie Dees F-C 6-8
Joe Graboski F-C 6-7
Dave Piontek F-C 6-6
Charlie Tyra C-F 6-8
1961-62 Season, 24 active, avg = 6-7.83"
1989-2011 NBA draft (sample size avail, 127) avg = 6-7.95"
(The power forwards average height that season is negligible in comparison with all modern power forwards from 1989-present... less than 1/8th of an inch)

Players strictly listed as Centers:
Bill Russell C 6-9 (1/2)
Wilt Chamberlain C 7-1 (1/16)
Swede Halbrook C 7-3
Darrall Imhoff C 6-10
Ray Felix C 6-11
Wayne Yates C 6-8
Bevo Nordmann C 6-10
Walter Dukes C 7-0
Walt Bellamy C 6-11
1961-1962 Season, 9 active, avg = 6-11.06" (6-10.81" excluding Wilt)
1989-2011 NBA draft (sample size avail, 67) avg = 6-10.44"
(Centers of that season averaged over 1/4 of an inch taller than modern centers, and that is if we exclude Wilt - the difference is more than 1/2 an inch if we included him)

Players get divided this way because in 61-62 there were only 3 recognized positions. G, F, C - and guys that would swing between basically had identical team roles to "SG, PF". www.basketball-reference.com has done an excellent job at indicating the players that were pulling double-duties between 2 positions.

Where's the "short league" evidence!? That looks like a tall year in the G, SG, and Center spots... Tell me Millwad, has your brain ever thought "hey... maybe I should look this shit up first..."? Or are you just a blind sheep that likes to ejaculate hear-say slander and myth about Wilt's era. :hammerhead:


P.S. about the "skillsets"... :roll: GTFO kid, what the hell do you know about skillsets from that time. Name 5 guys that came off the bench from 1961-62 season, then explain to me from your expert scouting perspective, some of the strengths and weaknesses in their game...

:confusedshrug: Help us out bro your the expert

[Euroleague]

If you are going to call Shaq out for how the refs rigged the 2002 WCF (which they definitely did rig), how the hell are you not going to mention all the times the refs rigged series to help Jordan and the Bulls win?

As incredible as Jordan was, let's not PRETEND he didn't get MEGA help from the refs.

BECAUSE HE DID.

Try to stay at least somewhat objective when you make all-time comparison threads like these and start using ref help as an argument.

[tontoz]

Does this idiot even know what "yet" means?


No

[Kukoc]

And people thought 3 peating was easy

[riseagainst]

And people thought 3 peating was easy

lebron: "dis gon be ez."

[poeticism707]

Wrong.

A 3 peat is only special because it contains 3 championships.

In the index of a Basic Math 101 textbook,

you will find this gem:

3=1+1+1


Stop letting Stu Scott, the fakest brotha ever,

hype your head up with nonesense.

[ILLsmak]

Of course not. But Russell deserves a certain amount of respect.

Simply saying he would only be a 8-10ppg/10-12rpg player in the 90's shows a lack of respect for the type of player Russell was. His impact went far beyond those two categories.

Popeye Jones was a 8-10ppg/10-12rpg player in the 90's. Tyrone Hill.

Yea but you can get 10 and 10 or 10 and 14 (rodman) and have more impact than someone else who does. I think Russell would not get great stats. He'd get blocks, good rebounds, and dpoys, but let's not act like he'd be setting all time records for rebounding.

Take Robert Horry, too, and look at his impact on the game. He could shoot better than Russell, but you can expect a lot of the same things (amplified by the fact that Russell is an all-time talent) out of Bill, I think. Good D, the right passes, scores when he has to, and generally leading his team to paint/rebound control. You can average 10 pts, 12 rebounds, 4 assists, 2 blocks, 2 steals and get that type of impact.

-Smak