Guy Rodgers shatters myth about 60s players not being able to play in todays NBA

[L.Kizzle]

http://warriors.blog.chatsports.com/files/2014/02/guy-rodgers.jpg


Guy Rodgers, a point guard drafted in 1958 and who was just elected to the Hall of Fame this year, was doing moves back then that some guards don't even pull of today.



Guy Rodgers Career Retrospective (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmZuxGdhKx0)


Guy Rodgers Career Highlights (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnUgD4JmFRE)

[ralph_i_el]

:roll: :roll: :roll:

This was supposed to be a joke right?

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

I'd rather watch this 17 minute Nate Wolters highlight vid

[Im so nba'd out]

http://oi33.tinypic.com/25q817l.jpg .......

[L.Kizzle]

http://oi33.tinypic.com/25q817l.jpg .......
https://38.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_meaulpk2up1rk2ko6o1_400.gif

Joe Johnson crossed Pierce the same was Cousy did his opponents. 60 yeas later, not much has changed.

[Warfan]

Unless you're joking, none of that was really impressive to me...

Can people just agree that the greats of that time (west, oscar, wilt, russell, baylor etc) would probably be great today. However, the average nba player then just wasnt as good as the ones you see playing today.

Is that a fair statement?

[LAZERUSS]

Unless you're joking, none of that was really impressive to me...

Can people just agree that the greats of that time (west, oscar, wilt, russell, baylor etc) would probably be great today. However, the average nba player then just wasnt as good as the ones you see playing today.

Is that a fair statement?

Kareem played in the NBA in the 60's.
Pistol Pete played in college in the 60's.
Dr. J played in college in the 60's.
Wilt was a top-4 MVP candidate in his LAST TWO seasons in the NBA...in the early 70's.

Now, I would ask you...

Would Kevin Love be leading the NBA in rebounding in the 60's?
Would a 37 year old Steve Nash, playing 33 mpg, be leading the NBA in apg in the 60's?
Would an unathletic, and injury-prone 6-11 Andrew Bogut be leading the NBA in bpg in the 60's?
And who would you take in a one-on-one battle...Ricky Rubio or Maravich?

[Lebronxrings]

Get a grip, those times were weak eras. Plain and simple. The average player today would be called the Goat back then. Wilt was a poor man's Dwight Howard who looked great against 5.7 guys then. Rodgers wouldn't make the NBA today, probably a summer league roster.

[Lebronxrings]

https://38.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_meaulpk2up1rk2ko6o1_400.gif

Joe Johnson crossed Pierce the same was Cousy did his opponents. 60 yeas later, not much has changed.
If you think not much has changed, you're either delusional or terribly informed.

[LAZERUSS]

Get a grip, those times were weak eras. Plain and simple. The average player today would be called the Goat back then. Wilt was a poor man's Dwight Howard who looked great against 5.7 guys then. Rodgers wouldn't make the NBA today, probably a summer league roster.

Look at these clowns of the 60's...

http://www.chicagonow.com/chicago-bulls-confidential/files/2014/01/KevinLove.jpg

http://ballislife.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Steve-Nash-cant-hear-you-reporters.-Hes-somewhere-far-away.-Photo-via-@mcten.jpg

http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2010/0405/nba_a_bogut_300.jpg

http://photos.famouswiki.com/r/ricky-rubio-34097/gallery/ricky-rubi-287225.jpg

[Warfan]

Kareem played in the NBA in the 60's.
Pistol Pete played in college in the 60's.
Dr. J played in college in the 60's.
Wilt was a top-4 MVP candidate in his LAST TWO seasons in the NBA...in the early 70's.

Now, I would ask you...

Would Kevin Love be leading the NBA in rebounding in the 60's?
Would a 37 year old Steve Nash, playing 33 mpg, be leading the NBA in apg in the 60's?
Would an unathletic, and injury-prone 6-11 Andrew Bogut be leading the NBA in bpg in the 60's?
And who would you take in a one-on-one battle...Ricky Rubio or Maravich?

:facepalm I said the greats would be great today. And then you go and mention wilt, dr j, kareem, pistol pete to try and prove that the average player back then was as good as the ones you see today. I'm not one of those people that say the greats wouldn't be great today, re read what I posted...

And Rubio is garbage, are you trying to say that pistol pete would be like Rubio today? Wow, the disrespect...

[ralph_i_el]

Kareem played in the NBA in the 60's.
Pistol Pete played in college in the 60's.
Dr. J played in college in the 60's.
Wilt was a top-4 MVP candidate in his LAST TWO seasons in the NBA...in the early 70's.

Now, I would ask you...

Would Kevin Love be leading the NBA in rebounding in the 60's?
Would a 37 year old Steve Nash, playing 33 mpg, be leading the NBA in apg in the 60's?
Would an unathletic, and injury-prone 6-11 Andrew Bogut be leading the NBA in bpg in the 60's?
And who would you take in a one-on-one battle...Ricky Rubio or Maravich?
yes
yes-although why compare Nash to an era with no 3-point line? :confusedshrug:
yes
Why would you compare Rubio and Maravich head to head? Rubio can't shoot. He'd suck on O in any era

[LAZERUSS]

:facepalm I said the greats would be great today. And then you go and mention wilt, dr j, kareem, pistol pete to try and prove that the average player back then was as good as the ones you see today. I'm not one of those people that say the greats wouldn't be great today, re read what I posted...

And Rubio is garbage, are you trying to say that pistol pete would be like Rubio today? Wow, the disrespect...

In Wilt's prime, in the mid-60's, he played in league's with 9-10 teams, and with Willis Reed, Zelmo Beaty (look him up), Walt Bellamy, Nate Thurmond, and Bill Russell. And he went H2H with each in 9-10 games, too...or about HALF of his games against either very good, or absolutely great players. And he just CRUSHED them all.

Ask Kareem about Nate. A PEAK Kareem was outplayed by an aging Thurmond in the '72 playoffs. In fact, a PEAK Kareem faced a fulltime Thurmond in nearly 40 H2H games, and had FIVE games of 30+ points, with a high game of 34. Oh, and in those career H2H's, KAJ shot.... .447 against Nate.

A mid-60's Wilt battled a PEAK Thurmond in a course of 13 straight games from the end of the '65 season thru their first H2H in the '67 season...and in that span, hung SIX games of 30+, including beatdowns by margins of 38-15 and an unfathomable 45-13.

A way past his prime Wilt, and on a surgically repaired knee, was finishing 3rd and 4th in the MVP voting in his last two seasons, in leagues that had Elvin Hayes, Wes Unseld, Bob McAdoo, Willis Reed ('73 FMVP), Walt Bellamy (still good enough for 19 ppg on .545 shooting in '72), Bob Lanier (Wilt averaged 24 ppg on .784 shooting against Lanier in their 11 H2H's in those two seasons), Nate Thurmond (see above...outplaying a PEAK Kareem), Dave Cowens ('73 MVP), and Kareem. And, by most accounts, a 35 year old Wilt outplayed a young 7-2 Gilmore in the NBA-ABA all-star game in '72.

Now, do you seriously want to compare the clowns that man the center position in today's era...against what Chamberlain was routinely outplaying, or downright dominating, in his career?

[Fire Colangelo]

Wilt is great, doesn't mean his competition outside of Russell wasn't shit.

Point guards couldn't throw the ball in the post correctly back in the 60s for ****s sakes. 37 years old healthy Steve Nash would be the best point guard in the league.

[LAZERUSS]

yes
yes-although why compare Nash to an era with no 3-point line? :confusedshrug:
yes
Why would you compare Rubio and Maravich head to head? Rubio can't shoot. He'd suck on O in any era

If the 6-8 Jerry Lucas couldn't outrebound Wilt, there is simply no way that a 6-8 Kevin Love would either.

A 37 year old Nash, playing 33 mpg, is going to win apg titles in the 60's, when a prime Oscar, scoring 30 ppg, was averaging 10-11 apg, and in an era when assists were harder to come by?

And Bogut leading the NBA in blocked shots in Wilt and Russell's era? :roll: :roll: :roll: That clown wouldn't have made UCLA's basktball teams in the late 60's or 70's, much less the NBA.

In supposedly the golden age of PGs, we have Rubio as a starting PG in TODAY's NBA. How is that possible?

[Marchesk]

If you think not much has changed, you're either delusional or terribly informed.

You do realize there's a chance that 50 years from now, the crossover on Pierce is going to be used as evidence for how weak this era is.

[GrapeApe]

You do realize there's a chance that 50 years from now, the crossover on Pierce is going to be used as evidence for how weak this era is.

This, and there's countless clips that are for more embarassing, yet that single Cousy clip somehow represents an entire era. :rolleyes:

[Soundwave]

The 60s was a weaker era, if it wasn't then Wilt should literally be able to average 50 ppg + 22 rpg in the modern NBA, but I think everyone knows he wouldn't come close to that.

If he could only put up numbers like that in the 60s, then that basically confirms that it was a weaker era.

If you transplant a Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, or Michael Jordan circa 1989 into the modern game though, their numbers IMO would more or less be the same or perhaps even better.

[CavaliersFTW]

Unless you're joking, none of that was really impressive to me...

Can people just agree that the greats of that time (west, oscar, wilt, russell, baylor etc) would probably be great today. However, the average nba player then just wasnt as good as the ones you see playing today.

Is that a fair statement?
The the hell kind of lazy logic drives someone to even default themselves to assume that? What evidence do you have that the great ones were great but the "average" ones weren't as good as "average" ones today :biggums:

Think about it for a second... and keep in mind "average" players back then were still scoring 15-20 points a game and getting 5-10 rebounds while West and Baylor type players were putting up their usual 25-30 a piece. Think how stupid that sounds to call those "average" guys worse than today's "average" guys. Shouldn't the "Great" ones of that time (assuming they'd still be great today) have been head and shoulders above them? Cause they aren't... They aren't any greater relative to them than today's great ones are relative to today's "average" ones. Think before you speak.

[CavaliersFTW]

Wilt is great, doesn't mean his competition outside of Russell wasn't shit.

Point guards couldn't throw the ball in the post correctly back in the 60s for ****s sakes. 37 years old healthy Steve Nash would be the best point guard in the league.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8IXS49q1DE

what the **** were you babbling on about again?

[fpliii]

The 60s was a weaker era, if it wasn't then Wilt should literally be able to average 50 ppg + 22 rpg in the modern NBA, but I think everyone knows he wouldn't come close to that.

If he could only put up numbers like that in the 60s, then that basically confirms that it was a weaker era.

If you transplant a Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, or Michael Jordan circa 1989 into the modern game though, their numbers IMO would more or less be the same or perhaps even better.
Stop trying to exaggerate the differences between the late 60s and 80s and minimize the differences between the 80s and the present. Your agenda is transparent as hell dude. :facepalm

[wally_world]

:roll: :roll: :roll:

This was supposed to be a joke right?

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

I'd rather watch this 17 minute Nate Wolters highlight vid

Holyshit there IS a 17min Nate Wolters highlight vid :lol

[Psileas]

The 60s was a weaker era, if it wasn't then Wilt should literally be able to average 50 ppg + 22 rpg in the modern NBA, but I think everyone knows he wouldn't come close to that.

If he could only put up numbers like that in the 60s, then that basically confirms that it was a weaker era.

If you transplant a Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, or Michael Jordan circa 1989 into the modern game though, their numbers IMO would more or less be the same or perhaps even better.

Yeah, between the 60s and the 80s the NBA took such a quantum leap that now, 3 decades after the 80s, it has become worse...:rolleyes:
Only Stockton being able to average so many assists in the 80's (and in so few minutes), Jordan being able to average 35 ppg on 53% as a guard and Rodman being able to grab 18 rpg as a 6'8 wiry forward similarly indicate that the 80's were a weak league...

[Roundball_Rock]

Yeah, between the 60s and the 80s the NBA took such a quantum leap that now, 3 decades after the 80s, it has become worse...:rolleyes:

:lol it is odd and amusing to see some argue the 60's and 70's were weak (the years where KAJ, Wilt and Russell played/were in their primes) while the 80's and 90's represent the pinnacle of basketball--only for the game to slide backwards for the next 15-20 years. The fact is today's game is more different than the 80's than comparing the 80's to the 60's. The ubiquity of the 3 pointer has changed how teams play today in a way nothing from the 60's to the 80's did. You also had the international revolution. One-fifth of the league has been international in the 21st century. You have a team like the Spurs' whose rotation is majority international (in 1994 and 1984 the Spurs had 0 foreign players). Yet these major changes are ignored by the "80's and 90's" crowd.

He mentioned Wilt scoring 50 ppg but no one else scored more than 35 ppg in that year. Meanwhile, when MJ was scoring 37 or Kobe 35 there were other 32-33 ppg scorers around during those periods. Wilt's 50 ppg says more about him than his era.

[ralph_i_el]

Holyshit there IS a 17min Nate Wolters highlight vid :lol
I thought it was funny too.

Throw wolters in a time machine and he'd kick some serious ass.

[Warfan]

The the hell kind of lazy logic drives someone to even default themselves to assume that? What evidence do you have that the great ones were great but the "average" ones weren't as good as "average" ones today :biggums:

Think about it for a second... and keep in mind "average" players back then were still scoring 15-20 points a game and getting 5-10 rebounds while West and Baylor type players were putting up their usual 25-30 a piece. Think how stupid that sounds to call those "average" guys worse than today's "average" guys. Shouldn't the "Great" ones of that time (assuming they'd still be great today) have been head and shoulders above them? Cause they aren't... They aren't any greater relative to them than today's great ones are relative to today's "average" ones. Think before you speak.

What i mean is just that the game has evolved and so has the talent and skill level. I don't know how you can watch a full game from say 1962 and come to the conclusion that those players overall are as good as the players we see today. That the offensive and defensive systems are as 'complex' as we see today. The game today is clearly played at a higher level. I'm not saying that the era was necessarily weak or anything, just that the game has improved over time. I don't know how u can deny that...

Oscar was averaging a trip dub for half his career while putting up 30 a night. Elgin was having seasons of 38-19 at 6-5 for god's sake. I don't even need to bring up wilts gaudy numbers. I dont know how you think those arent 'head and shoulders above' the average nba players stats back then.

This is just my opinion...

[kshutts1]

The the hell kind of lazy logic drives someone to even default themselves to assume that? What evidence do you have that the great ones were great but the "average" ones weren't as good as "average" ones today :biggums:

Think about it for a second... and keep in mind "average" players back then were still scoring 15-20 points a game and getting 5-10 rebounds while West and Baylor type players were putting up their usual 25-30 a piece. Think how stupid that sounds to call those "average" guys worse than today's "average" guys. Shouldn't the "Great" ones of that time (assuming they'd still be great today) have been head and shoulders above them? Cause they aren't... They aren't any greater relative to them than today's great ones are relative to today's "average" ones. Think before you speak.

I think it's a fair point to make. The talent pool is much larger today. In theory, the average player today SHOULD be better than the average player back then. Not sure if that's really the case, but it's logical to make that assumption.

[BoutPractice]

http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/z%20Funny%20NBA%20Photos/0%20Players/Lebron%20James/--vs--6.gif
http://nsa27.casimages.com/img/2011/09/08/110908041029190258.gif

We need a grainy black & white version of this.

[riseagainst]

http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/z%20Funny%20NBA%20Photos/0%20Players/Lebron%20James/--vs--6.gif
http://nsa27.casimages.com/img/2011/09/08/110908041029190258.gif

We need a grainy black & white version of this.

:roll:

[MavsSuperFan]

The 60s was a weaker era, if it wasn't then Wilt should literally be able to average 50 ppg + 22 rpg in the modern NBA, but I think everyone knows he wouldn't come close to that.

If he could only put up numbers like that in the 60s, then that basically confirms that it was a weaker era.

If you transplant a Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, or Michael Jordan circa 1989 into the modern game though, their numbers IMO would more or less be the same or perhaps even better.
**** you man wilt was the god of basketball:cry: :cry: :cry:
Why did i never get a chance to suck wilt off :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:
1960s nba was the peak of the nba

[MavsSuperFan]

http://warriors.blog.chatsports.com/files/2014/02/guy-rodgers.jpg


Guy Rodgers, a point guard drafted in 1958 and who was just elected to the Hall of Fame this year, was doing moves back then that some guards don't even pull of today.



Guy Rodgers Career Retrospective (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmZuxGdhKx0)


Guy Rodgers Career Highlights (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnUgD4JmFRE)
Nothing in those videos is extraordinary by modern NBA standards.

[ralph_i_el]

My grandad said players used to shoot with both hands from the chest and didn't jump. He said that back in the 40's players were taught to not jump on defense.

Is that era as good as today's basketball also?

^this all came from a guy watched Bill Russell a bunch in college.

[CavaliersFTW]

Nothing in those videos is extraordinary by modern NBA standards.
should they be considering less than a random half a percent of his career exists on film?

would less than half a random percent of Paul Pierce's career look extraordinary by "modern" NBA standards? :oldlol:

[ralph_i_el]

should they be considering less than a random half a percent of his career exists on film?

would less than half a random percent of Paul Pierce's career look extraordinary by "modern" NBA standards? :oldlol:
Then why post the video at all? If we can't judge these players by the small amount of video we have, why even talk about them at all? **** em

[kshutts1]

My grandad said players used to shoot with both hands from the chest and didn't jump. He said that back in the 40's players were taught to not jump on defense.

Is that era as good as today's basketball also?

^this all came from a guy watched Bill Russell a bunch in college.
To be fair, defensive players today shouldn't jump until the offensive player does

[jlip]

He reminds me of Jason Kidd.

[CavaliersFTW]

Then why post the video at all? If we can't judge these players by the small amount of video we have, why even talk about them at all? **** em
you can talk about em, just remind yourself of the context before you make bold statements... you are looking at a random few clips of a dude who has almost nothing on film of his entire career... like, I've seen more footage of George Mikan than this dude in my archive and I don't even collect Mikan footage cause he played in the 40's and 50's. Guy Rodgers due to playing for small markets and such drifted through the 60's almost totally undocumented.

Show a few random clips of Paul Pierce driving inside once or twice, maybe a post up or two, shooting a few jump shots... make sure some of them are slow motion and of poor quality. You think anyone in the future will be impressed? Does it mean Paul Pierce must never have had any amazing moments or noteworthy talent in his career or couldn't do some great things?

[SHAQisGOAT]

http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/z%20Funny%20NBA%20Photos/0%20Players/Lebron%20James/--vs--6.gif
http://nsa27.casimages.com/img/2011/09/08/110908041029190258.gif

We need a grainy black & white version of this.

:roll: :roll:

/thread right there

[Nikola_]

Look at these clowns of the 60's...

http://www.chicagonow.com/chicago-bulls-confidential/files/2014/01/KevinLove.jpg

http://ballislife.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Steve-Nash-cant-hear-you-reporters.-Hes-somewhere-far-away.-Photo-via-@mcten.jpg

http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2010/0405/nba_a_bogut_300.jpg

http://photos.famouswiki.com/r/ricky-rubio-34097/gallery/ricky-rubi-287225.jpg

das raciss

[ralph_i_el]

you can talk about em, just remind yourself of the context before you make bold statements... you are looking at a random few clips of a dude who has almost nothing on film of his entire career... like, I've seen more footage of George Mikan than this dude in my archive and I don't even collect Mikan footage cause he played in the 40's and 50's. Guy Rodgers due to playing for small markets and such drifted through the 60's almost totally undocumented.

Show a few random clips of Paul Pierce driving inside once or twice, maybe a post up or two, shooting a few jump shots... make sure some of them are slow motion and of poor quality. You think anyone in the future will be impressed? Does it mean Paul Pierce must never have had any amazing moments or noteworthy talent in his career or couldn't do some great things?

But we HAVE footage of PP AND his competition. Until I see some tape that actually impresses me, i'm not giving them the benefit of the doubt:confusedshrug:

Players and coaches learn from the past and expand on things that were done before them. Each new generation of players is better than the past because:

1. They have more past players to study
2. A larger talent pool
3. More money in sports

It's not that these guys are physically inferior. Less athletic players existed because of the smaller pool of players in general.

We wouldn't have Tim Hardaway without Bob Cousey....We wouldn't have Allen Iverson without Tim Hardaway.

[pudman13]

Players and coaches learn from the past and expand on things that were done before them. Each new generation of players is better than the past because:

1. They have more past players to study
2. A larger talent pool
3. More money in sports



If you make this argument, which is reasonable (and you can add in stuff like better sneakers, softer rims, weight training, diet, etc...), you also have to argue that the greats of any other era, if they played today, would also have these benefits and would use them to their advantage and be great today.

[Marchesk]

If you make this argument, which is reasonable (and you can add in stuff like better sneakers, softer rims, weight training, diet, etc...), you also have to argue that the greats of any other era, if they played today, would also have these benefits and would use them to their advantage and be great today.

Which also means that Lebron, Kobe and Durant back then would grow up without them.

[pudman13]

The other one I forgot to mention, which is probably the most significant of all, is the change in palming rules. If players of the 60s and 70s had been allowed to dribble on the side of the ball, they would have developed a whole different skill set.

[CavaliersFTW]

But we HAVE footage of PP AND his competition. Until I see some tape that actually impresses me, i'm not giving them the benefit of the doubt:confusedshrug:

Players and coaches learn from the past and expand on things that were done before them. Each new generation of players is better than the past because:

1. They have more past players to study
2. A larger talent pool
3. More money in sports

It's not that these guys are physically inferior. Less athletic players existed because of the smaller pool of players in general.

We wouldn't have Tim Hardaway without Bob Cousey....We wouldn't have Allen Iverson without Tim Hardaway.
3 years ago this was the best footage of Elgin Baylor, and it was put out by NBA.com as his "career highlights"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VH7ft2vziPU

I'm sure your foolproof logic lead you to believe he wasn't very good at basketball either. After all, that's all you could see him do. **** testimonial. **** stats and accolades. **** understanding how tiny a glimpse you are actually getting.

[Marchesk]

The other one I forgot to mention, which is probably the most significant of all, is the change in palming rules. If players of the 60s and 70s had been allowed to dribble on the side of the ball, they would have developed a whole different skill set.

Yep, and that's why Guy Rodgers and Bob Cousy were such great dribblers. Or I mean, you can tell they had great handles because they could do what they did without being allowed to palm.