You can't really compare players from different eras in Basketball

[theoneneo]

Maybe in the NFL or MLB, but the NBA has changed so much over the decades that it really can't be gauged by stats. It's a fact that players now are more skilled than they were in the past, maybe the game was played better back then but individually players are better.

Lets say you had a time machine and you sent Kobe, Lebron and Durant back to the 80s, they'd dominate those players, Young Jordan included... the game has simply evolved too much. That's not to discredit players from past generations, but compare the two side by side doesn't make sense.

Top 10 list should be a generational thing and when we do compare the greats from different eras it shouldn't be in competition or stats, simply accomplishments....

Ex... Player A won 6 rings and went 6/6 in the finals
Player B won 5 rings and went 5/7, Player C won 2* rings and went 2/5 etc, etc

Just respect all the greats:cheers:

[CavaliersFTW]

It's a fact that the rules are different, it is not a fact that players are any more or less skilled that is just conjecture driven by bias. Player skillsets are plastic to the rules of the game they learned, competed, and practiced playing. Does Lebron James skillfully use armbars and his hands on players waists when defending? No, does that mean he is less skilled as an individual defender than players who played when hand checking was a part of the game that had to learn how to use skills such as that? Players learn how to play the game that the rules allow them to play. And when you are the best or among the best at it on the planet for over a decade, which every era has had a handful of players in that tier, chances are you will maximize your potential and be playing the game at pretty much as high a level as is possible given the rules at that time.

IE a Lebron or Kobe is no more or less skilled a pair of players in this era than an Oscar Robertson or an Elgin Baylor were in theirs... the difference in what skillsets they developed is attributed in large part to the games different rules (also to individual gifts/talents) but the fundamentals are based on what is allowed in the rules. I see Oscar and Elgin do fundamental things Kobe and Lebron don't do, and visa versa. The way a basketball can be handled today vs then is an immediately obvious difference.

[navy]

It's a fact that the rules are different, it is not a fact that players are any more or less skilled that is just conjecture driven by bias. Player skillsets are plastic to the rules of the game they learned, competed, and practiced playing. Does Lebron James skillfully use armbars and his hands on players waists when defending? No, does that mean he is less skilled as an individual defender than players who played when hand checking was a part of the game that had to learn how to use skills such as that? Players learn how to play the game that the rules allow them to play. And when you are the best or among the best at it on the planet for over a decade, which every era has had a handful of players in that tier, chances are you will maximize your potential and be playing the game at pretty much as high a level as is possible given the rules at that time.
This. Except the 60/70s .Weak eras.

[stephanieg]

Sure you can compare. Players play FOREVER in the NBA compared to many other sports. Still have dudes from the '90s playing in 2014.

[SouBeachTalents]

Maybe in the NFL or MLB, but the NBA has changed so much over the decades that it really can't be gauged by stats. It's a fact that players now are more skilled than they were in the past, maybe the game was played better back then but individually players are better.

Lets say you had a time machine and you sent Kobe, Lebron and Durant back to the 80s, they'd dominate those players, Young Jordan included... the game has simply evolved too much. That's not to discredit players from past generations, but compare the two side by side doesn't make sense.

Top 10 list should be a generational thing and when we do compare the greats from different eras it shouldn't be in competition or stats, simply accomplishments....

Ex... Player A won 6 rings and went 6/6 in the finals
Player B won 5 rings and went 5/7, Player C won 2* rings and went 2/5 etc, etc

Just respect all the greats:cheers:

Lol, the NFL is probably the toughest sport to compare eras

[ninephive]

Lol, the NFL is probably the toughest sport to compare eras
It's true...QBs are setting the new yardage record every season now.

[SOD 21]

This is simple, really.

Today's stars would be stars in the 1980s and the stars of the 1980s would be stars today, and to believing otherwise is simply foolish.

So are we supposed to believe that a prime Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Michael Jordan, Abdul-Jabbar, Julius Erving and other stars wouldn't be just as successful today? Magic would immediately be the best point guard in the league, Larry Bird would be battling it out with LeBron and Kevin Durant for best small forward, Abdul-Jabbar would be easily the best center and the league would be falling over themselves with Jordan mania.

[LAClipsFan33]

This is simple, really.

Today's stars would be stars in the 1980s and the stars of the 1980s would be stars today, and to believing otherwise is simply foolish.

So are we supposed to believe that a prime Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Michael Jordan, Abdul-Jabbar, Julius Erving and other stars wouldn't be just as successful today? Magic would immediately be the best point guard in the league, Larry Bird would be battling it out with LeBron and Kevin Durant for best small forward, Abdul-Jabbar would be easily the best center and the league would be falling over themselves with Jordan mania.

:applause:

[Stringer Bell]

The NFL is very tough to compare by stats because of the rule changes.

The Mel Blount rule in the 70s, then nowadays when it's so passer friendly.

Roger Staubach's passer rating of 83 when he retired was the best in history at the time.

Nowadays, 83 isn't anything impressive