Gervin " "I could get 30 or 40 every night real easy, these days"

[QUOTE=Scott Pippen]not always worse players, but it is the way the game is being played. Much easier to score now for wing players. Hard for centers. That is purpose of zone defense. Do you really think Shaquille declined THAT FAST?

Physical talent level is up, but fundamental IQ's and basketball skill combine with NBA rule changes in my opinion the true game is not what is used to be. Still great, but not the same.[/QUOTE]

If anything it has more to do with IQ today. The game is simply not free flowing like it used to be, and thats why I think it is less enjoyable to most these days, as rankings would suggest.

The game has improved, as all sports and progressive activities do over time.

I love it how 75% of the posters are probably anywhere from 14-18 and have not seen the Ice man play and are just throwing there two cents in for the heck of it, I dont understand how they can really argue with someone who actauly was around during those eras? Just by looking at a boxscore and some espn classics and looking at some old game tape, Basically I never seen him play so I cant make an input to the extent to get into an argument with someone who has been around the game far longer then I have(Unless he is a complete moron. But I really just wanted to point that out, half of these kids think they know more than a adult who has been around the game before they were born, Sorry if I'm way off an all of you have seen him play or atleast were around close to that era lol

[QUOTE=stephanieg]Is it true that Gervin once said his idea of teamwork was when a team mate passed him the ball?[/QUOTE]

Thats classic. :oldlol:

I miss those days when people could be as arrogant and cocky as they wanted to, as long as they were good/winning. Before you had to be all PC and careful about what you say. Bird, MJ, Barkley, and now Gervin have all become quotable icons to me.

Bring back the olden days. :applause:

Allen Iverson, Earl Boykins and Gilbert Arenas can score in this league but Ice can't. too funny.

[QUOTE=RainierBeachPoet]i grew up watching the iceman and he was a serious scoring machine.

in fact, i really liked the run and gun offense that san anton had in the late 70s/early 80s. they were a very entertaining team to watch and once they picked up artis gilmore, they had a very effective low post game too (although i liked mike mitchell in the post too). if a couple of playoff series games 7 went their way, that spurs team easily could have been champs

i wouldnt bet against gervin getting thirty a game (40 is a stretch but i think he was just speaking in hyperbole) if he were in his prime and playing in 2008. he got most of his points off of mid range jumpers so the changes in current rules hoops would be to his advantage as a scorer.

the one thing that would be very different for ice would be the size of the guards these days. ice used to be able to effectively isolate his man who was generally 3-7 inches shorter than he was. being a 6-7 guard was a big advantage for ice. most clubs these days could put a taller guard on him which i believe would make gervin have to work harder at scoring. but if i were his coach, i would just run him off of more screens to more easily free him up

one thing is for sure though: he is a legit hall of famer. the folks here at ish who didnt have a chance to see him play would know differently if you had seen him as many years as i did, he would flourish in any era because of his great jumper and aiblity to score-- every era looks for those kind of guys[/QUOTE]

amen brother. most of these younguns are out there doing moves nowadays they didn't even know Ice invented.

Damn, didn't realise ISH got this bad, there's only 3-4 guys in this thread who aren't talking out of their arse.

This league has many players who can score, yet you wouldn't think they could, or wouldn't have much of a chance, but then you have people saying that Gervin couldn't score in this league? That's ignorance at it's finest. The players of today are not as mighty as some of you think.

[QUOTE=JtotheIzzo]complete f*cking rubbish

watch a game from the seventies, defenses were a JOKE.

His BS finger roll would get swatted to the mezzanine level everytime he drove to the hoop.

The old man needs to shut his wrinkly old trap.[/QUOTE]

Remember though that the 3-point field goal wasn't implemented till October of 79.....So scoring 30 on any given night, even with lack of defense (but still defense nontheless) was still a challenge...

[QUOTE=Kebab Stall]Damn, didn't realise ISH got this bad, there's only 3-4 guys in this thread who aren't talking out of their arse.

This league has many players who can score, yet you wouldn't think they could, or wouldn't have much of a chance, but then you have people saying that Gervin couldn't score in this league? That's ignorance at it's finest. The players of today are not as mighty as some of you think.[/QUOTE]


Agreed. If anyone actually read the whole article there are some pretty incredible things in there:

Such as Ice scoring 63 points in 33 minutes [B]AT WILL[/B], because he was trying to beat David Thompson out for the scoring title.

Such as Ice scoring 33 in a quarter, etc.

Such as Ice scoring 35 in the 1st half at the end of his career.


Which brings me to a larger point...

You could make a case that this article is the most revealing one yet into Kobe's 81 point game, and how other great scorers could have achieved that pretty easily if they had so chosen to do so.

If Ice had 63 points in 33 minutes, that is over a 90 pt. performance over 48 minutes. Take off some for rest, and it is still well over 81.
In addition his 53 first half points, speaks to Kobe's incredible 2nd half.
[B]Do you seriously think that after Ice scored 53 in the first half, he couldn't have scored about half in that in the 2nd half for 81?[/B]

David Thompson in the article scored 73 [B]AT WILL[/B] as well just before. And we've of course heard about DRob's 71 in a similar scenario.

All of this evidence would lead one to believe that any truly great scorer could if they so choose make their mind up, with teammates in the background, to score an incredible amount of points.

Of course they would have to be truly great scorers like Ice, MJ, Kobe, Dominique, etc.

P.S. Kobe's game is still incredible, as is Wilt's, but this article is an eye opener to just how easy it is to amass numbers at will if great scorers so choose. And to just how great Ice was and would be today. :bowdown:

i remember this last day of the season drama when ice and dt were vying for the scoring championship

if i recall, both of these games were insignificant in terms of the playoffs so both teams were just feeding ice and dt for them to score. the goal of the game wasnt team play and to win the game, but for their teammate to win the scoring title

i would bet that if just scoring a bunch of points was the goal of all sorts of teams these days, there are guys who could put up 60+ points too

ish would have had a forum discussion field day with all of this (if the internet existed back then!)

[quote=BIZARRO]Agreed. If anyone actually read the whole article there are some pretty incredible things in there:

Such as Ice scoring 63 points in 33 minutes [B]AT WILL[/B], because he was trying to beat David Thompson out for the scoring title.

Such as Ice scoring 33 in a quarter, etc.

Such as Ice scoring 35 in the 1st half at the end of his career.


Which brings me to a larger point...

You could make a case that this article is the most revealing one yet into Kobe's 81 point game, and how other great scorers could have achieved that pretty easily if they had so chosen to do so.

If Ice had 63 points in 33 minutes, that is over a 90 pt. performance over 48 minutes. Take off some for rest, and it is still well over 81.
In addition his 53 first half points, speaks to Kobe's incredible 2nd half.
[B]Do you seriously think that after Ice scored 53 in the first half, he couldn't have scored about half in that in the 2nd half for 81?[/B]

David Thompson in the article scored 73 [B]AT WILL[/B] as well just before. And we've of course heard about DRob's 71 in a similar scenario.

All of this evidence would lead one to believe that any truly great scorer could if they so choose make their mind up, with teammates in the background, to score an incredible amount of points.

Of course they would have to be truly great scorers like Ice, MJ, Kobe, Dominique, etc.

P.S. Kobe's game is still incredible, as is Wilt's, but this article is an eye opener to just how easy it is to amass numbers at will if great scorers so choose. And to just how great Ice was and would be today. :bowdown:[/quote]

[QUOTE=BIZARRO]Agreed. If anyone actually read the whole article there are some pretty incredible things in there:

Such as Ice scoring 63 points in 33 minutes [B]AT WILL[/B], because he was trying to beat David Thompson out for the scoring title.

Such as Ice scoring 33 in a quarter, etc.

Such as Ice scoring 35 in the 1st half at the end of his career.


Which brings me to a larger point...

You could make a case that this article is the most revealing one yet into Kobe's 81 point game, and how other great scorers could have achieved that pretty easily if they had so chosen to do so.

If Ice had 63 points in 33 minutes, that is over a 90 pt. performance over 48 minutes. Take off some for rest, and it is still well over 81.
In addition his 53 first half points, speaks to Kobe's incredible 2nd half.
[B]Do you seriously think that after Ice scored 53 in the first half, he couldn't have scored about half in that in the 2nd half for 81?[/B]

David Thompson in the article scored 73 [B]AT WILL[/B] as well just before. And we've of course heard about DRob's 71 in a similar scenario.

All of this evidence would lead one to believe that any truly great scorer could if they so choose make their mind up, with teammates in the background, to score an incredible amount of points.

Of course they would have to be truly great scorers like Ice, MJ, Kobe, Dominique, etc.

P.S. Kobe's game is still incredible, as is Wilt's, but this article is an eye opener to just how easy it is to amass numbers at will if great scorers so choose. And to just how great Ice was and would be today. :bowdown:[/QUOTE]

Great point. :applause:

Not to mention Ice had most of his big scoring games with no 3 point line. The 63 was in '78 and in only 33 minutes. nd not to mention, Ice was winning scoring titles in the '80s, not the WEAK '70s (though he had some in the '70s) as some will claim.

Ice would average 30+ in this era. Hell Arenas dropped 29, Bron dropped 30, T-Mac dropped 32, AI 33 and Kobe 35, why couldn't he?

lol stfu "iceman" - you couldnt even come close. :lol

[QUOTE=Psileas]What exactly among the things he said is crap? Enlighten us, please.

Gervin was a better and more efficient scorer than pretty much anyone. People get excited about the scoring performances of Iverson or, in the older says Dominique, but Gervin was a more efficient and productive scorer than both-actually holds the 2nd best career point/minute ratio ever, behind only Jordan. He also holds a career NBA FG% of 51.1%, which is impressive for a guy his size, regardless of era.

It's also funny how the dude mentions the defense of the 70's, yet ignores that he had his 2 most productive seasons in the [B]80's [/B] and that he averaged 20+ as late as in 1985, at the age of 33 (and in only 29.0 mpg of playing time).

So, his finger-roll would be blocked every time he'd drive, huh...Is that why dwarves like Tony Parker and last year's Navarro are so rarely blocked when attempting their "BS"? Is that why Billups who gets up like 5 inches off the ground rarely has his shot swatted away? Gervin has a good 4-5 inches over all of them, has long arms and could jump higher, especially compared to the last two. So, maybe, before starting talking about the "00's supermen", you need to put some things into perspective and realize that players haven't become [B]that[/B] much better that quickly through time. Basketball isn't informatics, where a 3-year old technology is considered mainstream or even obsolete.[/QUOTE]

[B]Also one must add to the fact that not everything as time passes gets bettered. Music of the 70s and 80s is way superior and not to mention 80s music is way modern sounding than the 90s and 2000s. Newer does not mean more advanced-more modern etc it just means newer. The game had more friction before and handchecking: the ability to tire down your opponent while always having a "chance" to see where he was moving was a wepone that made it more difficult for scorers to actually score more and at a higher %. Another thing we must add is that if the game is more competitive today around the world doesn`t mean **** because back then in the NBA only the REALLY GOOD FUNDAMENTAL PLAYERS where chosen or those whom HAD EXTREAME AMOUNTS OF TALENT. Very few was there a chance of "lets see what`s going to happen with that kid":no: . To end the game game creative wise, talent wise, fundamentally wise, basketball iq wise, team play wise etc has decreae the last 15 or so years. The only thing that has kept going well is athletic abilities, that snce the 80s.

:confusedshrug: [/B]

[QUOTE=flu game][url]http://www.thegoodpoint.com/basketball/oct08/the-man-and-the-monument-how-george-gervin-became-champion-of-the-people.html[/url][/QUOTE]

I don't doubt that he could average 30 a season... but it wouldn't be 40, and it wouldn't be "real easy." Teams aren't giving up 108, 109 points on average anymore.

30 a night easily? Maybe. 40 a night easily? Stretching it. He was a phenomenal player but I think he got a little arrogant with his claims.

And Bill Russell would average 25 rebounds a game easily.

[QUOTE=Kebab Stall]That's ignorance at it's finest. The players of today are not as mighty as some of you think.[/QUOTE]


And on the flipside, the players today arent as awful as some people make it seem.

Players of today are almost always put down in favor of players from the past on here.

[QUOTE=gencbiba]And Bill Russell would average 25 rebounds a game easily.[/QUOTE]
Well Russell never averaged over 25 in any season, but Gervin on the other hand averaged over 30 twice (32 and 33 to be exact.)

Its not as bad as Wilt saying he would average 60-70 ppg in the 90s.

[QUOTE=L.Kizzle]Well Russell never averaged over 25 in any season, but Gervin on the other hand averaged over 30 twice (32 and 33 to be exact.)[/QUOTE]

Never averaged 40 though. Just an old star trying to become relevant again. His spotlight is over.

[QUOTE=gencbiba]Never averaged 40 though. Just an old star trying to become relevant again. His spotlight is over.[/QUOTE]
[I]"Don't hate the player, hate the game" [/I]

it can be easy for him to score.. but every night is an overstatement. 40 ppg for a season. Gervin?? dont think so

[quote=Sir Charles][B]George Gervin is one of the Greatest SGs ever by far a better scorer than Kobe could dream of being. This guy played in an era where handchecking existed, was 6`7, could leap, had major wingspan for his frame, could donate fundamentals to players of today and was fast quick like a gassel not to mention that after Jordan, he was probably the most difficult SG to stop when taking driving to the basket or taking a jumpshot frontwords. T

Some clips[/B]

[URL="http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=sU4HLdrWAsc"]http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=sU4HLdrWAsc[/URL][/quote]

I would like to see Gervin get those kind of #'s against the zone.

[QUOTE=Godfather]I would like to see Gervin get those kind of #'s against the zone.[/QUOTE]

Yeah man, even since they allowed teams to start using zones and shading no one ever scores over 30 anymore. Sucks.

[QUOTE=Psileas]I agree about the Kobe hyperbole. Kobe, after all, is a player whom "Sir Charles" doesn't like, anyway and it's well-known he's biased against him.

And I had forgotten that he bolds his own messages. Partially because when I quote messages, I never bother to copy the exact same type of the writer's style. If he writes in green, I won't bother to quote his text in green, as well. I didn't use the "bold" thing for sarcasm reasons.[/QUOTE]

[B]Wrong I don`t hate on Bryant I think Bryant is the Best SG in the laste 8-10 years but he doesn`t have the the fundamentals Ice had "Scoring Wise" just "Scoring Wise". Bryant is probably an all around better player and maybe even more skilled in a "1 on 1 off the dribble" (ala Jordan) game but Ice`s front "face jump shots", "foot work to post shoot" and when "finding his way through the lane or onto the basket in general using the backboard or finger rolls" are way superior offensive skills than Bryant`s (in general). Ice was a leaper, quick as hell , great foot work and fundamentals to get his jumpers, off the backboard shots and lay ups off etc, was 6`7 and had wingspan of a typical 6`9er probably...that makes him way more of a threat comming on to the basket reason why he shot at a way superior FG% than Bryant and in a time where handchecking was allowed.[/B]

[QUOTE=plowking]Basketball is the only sport where the previous generation is considered better then the current generation. This is ridiculous first of all. People actually think the game has gone backwards and that players are becoming worse?[/QUOTE]


Can you name any runningback intodays game better than JIm Brown
Can you name 5 better baseplayers in todays game better than Hank Aaron,Mickey Mantle,Willie mays, Babe Ruth, Joe Dmagigo can you name a better boxer today than Ali,Joe Louis can you name a better hockey player today than Wayne G. So I guess basketball isnt the only sport that the old legends are better than todays players.

[QUOTE=Niquesports]Can you name any runningback intodays game better than JIm Brown
Can you name 5 better baseplayers in todays game better than Hank Aaron,Mickey Mantle,Willie mays, Babe Ruth, Joe Dmagigo can you name a better boxer today than Ali,Joe Louis can you name a better hockey player today than Wayne G. So I guess basketball isnt the only sport that the old legends are better than todays players.[/QUOTE]

[B]Exactly to be great in these days doesn`t make you better than before`s players (just because excessive marketing, superior global communications etc) and in basketball it has clearly been show by coaches (who still coach today) and ex players that very few players of today are great compared to the 80s and 90s span of talent in most areas :confusedshrug:

Todays players can mostly be compared skill wise to the 70s span (ofcourse athletically they are more 80s and 90s) and even some 70s players are clearly superior to the ones today: Jabbar for example can only be compared to likes of Hakeem and Shaq.

Shaq is one example of a somewhat modern player whom would be a Top All Time 4-5 Center in any era. Same with Garnett Defensively and All Around Wise (offensive scoring wise he can`t)

Guys like Allen Iverson would not be considered as great if the handchecking rules were kept not to mention the hard way of play of the 80s: no puss fouls. Also all the flashy athletic leaping guys that appeared in the drafts of the 90s ended up having no chance on the 80s draft Legends or Great Role Players: that was clearly shown as these 80s Draft Legends and Roke Players Drafted in that era totally (not half way but totally) dominated the league up un till 2000 (1st team with more 90s drafts that finally won). The fact is very 90s stars achieved the same impact as those 80s draft players and in most cases where totally over shadowed by the Jordan`s, Barkley`s, Hakeem`s, Ewings etc.

Only the rich in fundamentals 90s draft players where not over shadowed such as : Grant Hill, Jason Kidd, Payton, Chris Webber and very few more.

More Examples:

Soccer:

Any Player today has the All Around Fundamental Offensive Skills as Pele? :no: (player of the 50s-60s-70s)
Any Player today has more Impact or is More Modern (80s player) than Rudd Gullit? (whom lasted only 5-6yers before they destroyed his leggs because he was to much of an impact player: think of Kaka but add to that = speed, potence, center forward headering capacity and way more defensive skills: could play Central Back, Full Back etc) :no:
Any Player today has the Technical Efficiency in a Fast Break (counter attack) or Scoring Efficiency than Teofilo Cubillas? :no: (player from the 60s-70s)
Any Player today has the Scoring Fundamentals as Marco Van Basten? :no:
Any Player today has Superior 1 on 1 Offensive Skills per meter than Romario? :no:
Any Defender today has more in General Skills and Soccer IQ than Franz Beckenbauer? :no: (player from the 60s-70s)
Any goal Keeper today has the Goal Keeping IQ as Rinat Dasaev ? (Russia Goal Keeper of the 70s and 80s) :no:
Any goal Keeper today more Agil or Athletic than Thomas Knokono? (Camerun Goal Keeper of the 70s-80s-90s)

Any Boxer toady has a harder jab than Mike Tyson today? :no:

Etc..like those there are many examples [/B]

[QUOTE=Niquesports]Can you name any runningback intodays game better than JIm Brown
Can you name 5 better baseplayers in todays game better than Hank Aaron,Mickey Mantle,Willie mays, Babe Ruth, Joe Dmagigo can you name a better boxer today than Ali,Joe Louis can you name a better hockey player today than Wayne G. So I guess basketball isnt the only sport that the old legends are better than todays players.[/QUOTE]

In 30 years people will be saying the same thing about guys today, the problem is you're judging people that are still playing and havent etched their legacies in stone yet, against guys who already have.


And :roll: Babe Ruth and Joe Dimaggio, I cant take any athlete serious when their were segregated leagues.

[QUOTE=Sir Charles][B]

Any Boxer toady has a harder jab than Mike Tyson today? :no:

Etc..like those there are many examples [/B][/QUOTE]
:roll:

Yes, plenty of heavyweights with harder jabs than Mike, he barely even used a jab.

[QUOTE=abuC]:roll:

Yes, Mike Tyson barely even used a jab.[/QUOTE]

[B]I ment hit any hit. His hit register is still the strongest till date and he is an 80s and early 90s boxer.

Any Heavyweight more Skilled, Agil or as Quick as Cassius Clay? :no: [/B]

[QUOTE=abuC]:roll:

Yes, Mike Tyson barely even used a jab.[/QUOTE]

[B]I ment hit any hit. His hit register is still the strongest till date and he is an 80s and early 90s boxer.

Any Heavyweight more Skilled, Agil or as Quick as Cassius Clay? :no: [/B]

[QUOTE=Sir Charles][B]Exactly to be great in these days doesn`t make you better than before`s players (just because excessive marketing, superior global communications etc) and in basketball it has clearly been show by coaches (who still coach today) and ex players that very few players of today are great compared to the 80s and 90s span of talent in most areas :confusedshrug:

Todays players can mostly be compared skill wise to the 70s span (ofcourse athletically they are more 80s and 90s) and even some 70s players are clearly superior to the ones today: Jabbar for example can only be compared to likes of Hakeem and Shaq.

Shaq is one example of a somewhat modern player whom would be a Top All Time 4-5 Center in any era. Same with Garnett Defensively and All Around Wise (offensive scoring wise he can`t)

Guys like Allen Iverson would not be considered as great if the handchecking rules were kept not to mention the hard way of play of the 80s: no puss fouls. Also all the flashy athletic leaping guys that appeared in the drafts of the 90s ended up having no chance on the 80s draft Legends or Great Role Players: that was clearly shown as these 80s Draft Legends and Roke Players Drafted in that era totally (not half way but totally) dominated the league up un till 2000 (1st team with more 90s drafts that finally won). The fact is very 90s stars achieved the same impact as those 80s draft players and in most cases where totally over shadowed by the Jordan`s, Barkley`s, Hakeem`s, Ewings etc.

Only the rich in fundamentals 90s draft players where not over shadowed such as : Grant Hill, Jason Kidd, Payton, Chris Webber and very few more.

More Examples:

Soccer:

Any Player today has the All Around Fundamental Offensive Skills as Pele? :no: (player of the 50s-60s-70s)
Any Player today has more Impact or is More Modern (80s player) than Rudd Gullit? (whom lasted only 5-6yers before they destroyed his leggs because he was to much of an impact player: think of Kaka but add to that = speed, potence, center forward headering capacity and way more defensive skills: could play Central Back, Full Back etc) :no:
Any Player today has the Technical Efficiency in a Fast Break (counter attack) or Scoring Efficiency than Teofilo Cubillas? :no: (player from the 60s-70s)
Any Player today has the Scoring Fundamentals as Marco Van Basten? :no:
Any Player today has Superior 1 on 1 Offensive Skills per meter than Romario? :no:
Any Defender today has more in General Skills and Soccer IQ than Franz Beckenbauer? :no: (player from the 60s-70s)
Any goal Keeper today has the Goal Keeping IQ as Rinat Dasaev ? (Russia Goal Keeper of the 70s and 80s) :no:
Any goal Keeper today more Agil or Athletic than Thomas Knokono? (Camerun Goal Keeper of the 70s-80s-90s)

Any Boxer toady has a harder jab than Mike Tyson today? :no:

Etc..like those there are many examples [/B][/QUOTE]


I think in any sports you will only find about 5 players that can be mentioned in the all time class of there sport per era.I think the 70's is the most underrated era in basketball.

[QUOTE=abuC]:roll:

Yes, plenty of heavyweights with harder jabs than Mike, he barely even used a jab.[/QUOTE]

[B]Sorry i ment hit. Any boxer today has a harder hit than Tyson? Strongest registered hit till today :confusedshrug:

Any Tennis player has More Natural Talent than Mcenroe whom even went against using stiff Racket`s because he said "That Helps Less Talented Players Be Better than They Really Are"[/B]

[QUOTE=Sir Charles][B]I ment hit any hit. His hit register is still the strongest till date and he is an 80s and early 90s boxer.

Any Heavyweight more Skilled, Agil or as Quick as Cassius Clay? :no: [/B][/QUOTE]


Hit register? This isnt Rocky 4, when did anyone calculate Mike's power? Also, George Foreman is probably the hardest puncher in heavyweight history.


Nope, there arent any heavyweights as gifted as Ali, but then again Boxing was second only to baseball then in terms of popularity, now you have a much smaller talent pool to pick from. Most American athletes that fit the body mold of heavyweight boxer are steered towards football or basketball.


Look, I get it, you think everything from 1960-1980 is greater than today, my grandfather is the same way about the 40s and 50s, that doesnt make it true.

[QUOTE=abuC]In 30 years people will be saying the same thing about guys today, the problem is you're judging people that are still playing and havent etched their legacies in stone yet, against guys who already have.


And :roll: Babe Ruth and Joe Dimaggio, I cant take any athlete serious when their were segregated leagues.[/QUOTE]


I can agree with your point but with the exception of say maybe Kobe,LBJ that from what you have seen will be even considered in a all time class I already said Shaq and I dont think at this point in his career Paul is better that players like Tiny,Walt Frazier ect. but the jury is still out on him

[QUOTE=abuC]Hit register? This isnt Rocky 4, when did anyone calculate Mike's power? Also, George Foreman is probably the hardest puncher in heavyweight history.


Nope, there arent any heavyweights as gifted as Ali, but then again Boxing was second only to baseball then in terms of popularity, now you have a much smaller talent pool to pick from. Most American athletes that fit the body mold of heavyweight boxer are steered towards football or basketball.


Look, I get it, you think everything from 1960-1980 is greater than today, my grandfather is the same way about the 40s and 50s, that doesnt make it true.[/QUOTE]
No thats not my point my point is that todays basketball is not better than the old days just evolved with bigger stronger playerds due to modern tech. and training.

[QUOTE=Niquesports]I can agree with your point but with the exception of say maybe Kobe,LBJ that from what you have seen will be even considered in a all time class I already said Shaq and I dont think at this point in his career Paul is better that players like Tiny,Walt Frazier ect. but the jury is still out on him[/QUOTE]



If I had a crystal ball I'd be able to tell you, it's too hard to say who will be what, players emerge and some come from out of nowhere. In the 80s, people had their doubts about Jordan, look at how he turned out.

[QUOTE=abuC]Hit register? This isnt Rocky 4, when did anyone calculate Mike's power? Also, George Foreman is probably the hardest puncher in heavyweight history.


Nope, there arent any heavyweights as gifted as Ali, but then again Boxing was second only to baseball then in terms of popularity, now you have a much smaller talent pool to pick from. Most American athletes that fit the body mold of heavyweight boxer are steered towards football or basketball.


Look, I get it, you think everything from 1960-1980 is greater than today, my grandfather is the same way about the 40s and 50s, that doesnt make it true.[/QUOTE]

[B]Foreman i think has the strongest jab ever and overall Tyson has the strongest punch or upper cutt something like but here you go again: Foreman a boxer from the 70s-80s and early 90s and Tyson and 80s-90s Boxers. We are entering the year 2010 and still there is no heavy weight that has registered those types of punches. Then again, Ali-Clay from the 60s and 70s still there has not been a more skilled or quick heavy Weight till today. :confusedshrug: [/B]

[B][U]By the way increasing the Competition Pool does not mean that there will appear just by Magic Better Boxers, Players etc[/U]:no: ...that is actually totally biased because by doing so you are [COLOR="Blue"]"Spreading the Quality of Competition". "Compeition Which Overall Has Not Been Tested![/COLOR]. What makes you thinkl that there is actual QUALITY Competition?.

In the 80s very few players entered the NBA: American or Non American, so the level of competition and talent that entered the league was TOP of the TOP. Todays Europeans have gotten better in regards to their peer Americans but what is that has closen the gap between them and the Us? That gap has not closen only because of the popularity of the Sport World Wide and more people overseas playing but = [COLOR="blue"]European Players have Kept to the Fundamentals they saw in the 70s and 80s[/COLOR] [COLOR="DarkRed"]while Americans have not. [/COLOR]

That is why Any Average Role Player in Europe can play in the actual NBA back in the 90's and 80s very few could: players like Toni Kucoc, Petrovich, Saboins if they played in todays NBA PRIME ages 22 to 32 they would school BIg Time, Big Time because in the NBA for the last 10-12 years there has occured the entrance of to many unfundamental pricks that yes can Jump Nice, Dunk Cool, Have Some Nice Moves but have the worst of All Fundamentals Seen in 30 Years or So. :confusedshrug: [/B]

[QUOTE=Niquesports]No thats not my point my point is that todays basketball is not better than the old days just evolved with bigger stronger playerds due to modern tech. and training.[/QUOTE]

[B]Bigger stronger players? :no: :banghead: :hammerhead: :rolleyes:

Name one 6`4/6`5er in the NBA today that is as strong as Charles Barkley was? Yes the dude that picked up Shaq like a waste basket from the ground at age 36.?

I see none today :rolleyes:

Overall there is only one 7 footer that is as strong or stronger than Shaq and that is Wilt, a Player from the 60s escentially...I see none today other than Shaq

Name one PG stronger than Magic? I see none today

Name one one SG stronger than Jordan? I see none today

Actually in the 80s and 90s there was a tendancy to choose PFs that where stocky breed not thin breed like what i see today. Guys like Charles Oakley, Kevin Willis, Anthony Mason, Rick Mahorn, Otis Thorpe etc would crush 95% of the Powerforwards of today Strength wise because the NBA requiered physical play back then, while todays NBA has a policy of forced will in creating skilled players, because there arent many. Evidence: helping perimeter players score easier with the no handcheckin rules, easy lanes on to the basket, 5 second rule tured around the basket is anti Stocky Player etc..[/B]

[QUOTE=Sir Charles][B]Foreman i think has the strongest jab ever and overall Tyson has the strongest punch or upper cutt something like but here you go again: Foreman a boxer from the 70s-80s and early 90s and Tyson and 80s-90s Boxers. We are entering the year 2010 and still there is no heavy weight that has registered those types of punches. Then again, Ali-Clay from the 60s and 70s still there has not been a more skilled or quick heavy Weight till today. :confusedshrug: [/B][/quote]

What are you talking about, do you even know what a jab is? Foreman didnt even have a great jab, you clearly dont know anything about boxing and are just rambling. Tyson had explosive punches, but George and Earnie Shavers hit much much harder. The heavyweight division has been dead for the last 10 years, using it to try and prove some point is stupid. Again, the NFL and NBA are where all the prospects that fit the current modern heavyweight body type are at currently.

[quote][B][U]By the way increasing the Competition Pool does not mean that there will appear just by Magic Better Boxers, Players etc[/U]:no: ...that is actually totally biased because by doing so you are [COLOR="Blue"]"Spreading the Quality of Competition". "Compeition Which Overall Has Not Been Tested![/COLOR]. What makes you thinkl that there is actual QUALITY Competition?.[/b] [/quote]


:roll:

You cannot be serious, the modern heavyweight should be between 6"3 and 6"8 & between 240-260lbs, what athletes fit that criteria? No, better boxers wouldnt magically appear but there would be more people between that body type actually training and working on their skills. And anytime you increase a talent pool you end up with better competition in the long run, if the NBA sticks with 30 teams for the next 5-10 years you will see more and more quality players on each team. It's simple statistics.



[quote]In the 80s very few players entered the NBA: American or Non American, so the level of competition and talent that entered the league was TOP of the TOP. Todays Europeans have gotten better in regards to their peer Americans but what is the kep to the gap that has closen between them and the Us? That gap is not only popularity of the Sport World Wide but = [COLOR="blue"]European Players have Kept to the Fundamentals they saw in the 70s and 80s[/COLOR] while Americans have not.

That is why Any Average Role Player in Europe can play in the actual NBA back in the 90's and 80s very few could: players like Toni Kucoc, Petrovich, Saboins if they played in todays NBA PRIME ages 22 to 32 they would school BIg Time, Big Time because in the NBA for the last 10-12 years there has occured the entrance of to many unfundamental pricks that yes can Jump Nice, Dunk Cool, Have Some Nice Moves but have the worst of All Fundamentals Seen in 25 Years or So. :confusedshrug: [/B][/QUOTE]


This is complete and utter garbage, Im sorry but you're just not a rational thinker. You sound like an ESPN talking point with all this crap about fundamentals, basically regurgitating whatever trash you've picked up. Everything you've just vomited out is nothing more than opinion, where are the facts to back it up?