Printable View
[QUOTE=32jazz]You said the 70's (Kareem we were speaking of)you friggin idiot & that's a long way from 1962(Elgin Baylor) when we have all acknowledged that the pace of the game was much faster than it is today.
Again keep your idiocy confined to this thread.[/QUOTE]
Heh, man, the 70's were weaker then the 60's. There was this thing called the ABA that was half the size and had half of the best players?
[QUOTE=Mikaiel]Early 80's and mid-80's ...[/QUOTE]
Whom? I seriously doubt anyone would sign a 48 year old Chamberlian for anything but a publicity stunt. But I'm interested.
[QUOTE=Niquesports]What makes this discussion even the more silly is hearing people talking about the 70's and 60's being weak at center when you look at how weak todays Centers are. With the exception of D Howard is there any other dominating intimitating center today NO!!!!!!!!!!![/QUOTE]
Weak compared to the late 80's to 90's. Yup.
[QUOTE=32jazz]
Because big men today do not want to play,nor can they can play, the 'back to the basket' traditional Center position(not glamorus enough) as these fundamentally sound big men of yore.
[/QUOTE]
Heh, I think a lot of that has to do with rule changes. That's not as effective at all as it used to be. Thats why post 04 in his prime Duncan stopped shooting so much let Parker/Manu score more. Center is a weaker position today for sure but I think the rules are also huge contributors to that.
[QUOTE=32jazz]
Could you imagine these same people would be criticizing the 'unathletic' Tim Duncan & swearing that he could not play with Shaq/Howard or today's big men if he had played in the 1970's. :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]
Heh, and who's ever called Tim Duncan unathletic? Good crap. TD has been a pure machine his entire career.
[QUOTE=indiefan23]Weak compared to the late 80's to 90's. Yup.[/QUOTE]
IF you are older than 35 I will respect your opinion because at the least you saw Centers like
kareem
Moses Malone
Unseld
Reed
Cowens
Sam LAcy
Bob Lanier
Walton
Alivn Adams
Jack Sikma
Play not to mention the Big bodies of Clifford Ray and Tom Bowinkile then after the merger you had Dan issell , Artis Gilmore and Billy patluz this just off the top of my head. But my point isnt if the 70's Centers were better than the 80's C but that they were better than todays C.
[QUOTE=Niquesports]IF you are older than 35 I will respect your opinion because at the least you saw Centers like
kareem
Moses Malone
Unseld
Reed
Cowens
Sam LAcy
Bob Lanier
Walton
Alivn Adams
Jack Sikma
Play not to mention the Big bodies of Clifford Ray and Tom Bowinkile then after the merger you had Dan issell , Artis Gilmore and Billy patluz this just off the top of my head. But my point isnt if the 70's Centers were better than the 80's C but that they were better than todays C.[/QUOTE]
Willis Reed.
Nate Thurmond also registered the leagues first Quadruple double in 74(?)(official since blocks & steals weren't kept before around 73/74) & Wilt was winding down his career.
No doubt that the 'Centers' of the 60's/70's are better than Centers of today. I do admit the talent & ability at the swing positions(SG/SF) is definitely better today OVERALL than in the 60's/70's.
Artis Gilmore & Bob Lanier are considered second tier guys(in the overall 70's) ,but would dominate today.
I am out of here Nique. Too ridiculous.
[QUOTE=indiefan23]Yea, I'm pretty sure. Elgin Baylor at 6'5" pulled down 19.8 boards a game.
;0[/QUOTE]
Dennis Rodman averaged 16.1 boards a game at the age of 35, and he was listed at 6'7 and 210 pounds. Charles Barkley put up a 19 and 14 at the age of 33 and he was listed at 6'6 (and that was far from his best season). Corrected for pace those are very similar rates to Baylors, so was the late 90's a weak era?
[QUOTE=32jazz]Willis Reed.
Nate Thurmond also registered the leagues first Quadruple double in 74(?)(official since blocks & steals weren't kept before around 73/74) & Wilt was winding down his career.
No doubt that the 'Centers' of the 60's/70's are better than Centers of today. I do admit the talent & ability at the swing positions(SG/SF) is definitely better today OVERALL than in the 60's/70's.
Artis Gilmore & Bob Lanier are considered second tier guys(in the overall 70's) ,but would dominate today.
I am out of here Nique. Too ridiculous.[/QUOTE]
stats were inflated tho. Nobody is avg 50 and 25 today.
[QUOTE=32jazz]I didn't even bother ask him what 6'5 player averaged 40 ppg & 20 rpg.:rolleyes: Just too stupid to acknowledge.
But he points to an aging Kareem(who was 32/33 by 1980) & his falling rebound numbers of the late 80's to prove the 70's was a 'weak era' since Kareem dominated.
Kareem was hardly among the best five rebounders at his absolute peak against those so called 'weak Players' of the 1970's:rolleyes:
Top Rebounds per game(High rebound numbers are because of faster Pace of game & not ability of players):
1970
*Wilt -18.4- Injured most of season(Knee) but would have won it again
1)Hayes 16.9
2)Unseld 16.7
3)Kareem 14.5
1971
1) Wilt 18.6(on a ruined knee:pimp: barbarically repaired by todays standard)
2)Unseld-16.9
3)Hayes-16.6
4)Kareem -16
1972
1)Wilt-19.2
2)Unseld- 17.6
3)kareem-16
1973
1)Wilt-18.6
2)Thurmond-17.1
3)Cowens-16.2
4)Kareem-16.1
1974
1)Hayes-18.1
2)Cowens-15.7
3)McAdoo-15.1
4)Kareem
1975
1)Unseld-14.8
2)Cowens-14.1
3)Lachey-14.2
4)McAdoo-14.1
5)Kareem
1976
1)Kareem-16.9
1977
1)Walton-14.4
2)Kareem-13.3
3)Malone-13.1
4)Gilmore-13.0
1978
1)Truck Robinson-15.7
2)Malone-15.0
3)Cowens
4)Hayes
6)Gilmore-13.1
7)Kareem
1979
1)Malone
2)Kelley
3)Kareem
4)Gilmore-
Kareem could only muster about 4 top three RPG's finish & one(1) rebounding title at his absolute peak in the so called 'weak' 1970's:rolleyes: Wilt especially, & others used to criticize Kareem's relatively weak rebounding(compared to all time greats like Wilt). So to point out the rebounding numbers of a 'relatively weak'(historically speaking) rebounder like Kareem in the late 80's when he was in his late 30's & retired at 41 or 42 years of age is ludicrous. But I am preaching to the choir.[/QUOTE]
[B]Kareem was a great rebounder...Not Better Wilt or Moses but he was well beyond just a good or average Rebounding Center. Then if you look at Kareem`s FG% EFFECTIVE SKILL SCORING...with his Sky Hook and Skilled Touch he was REALLLY the 1st Feneace center....and he shot way more effective on Hakeem ages 24-27 (and himself passed his prime ages 39-41) and made Hakeem lower his FG% (7`3 and Hakeem was not a banger liek Moses whom could weather you down he was also a Feneace Center).
Also when you look at Kareem`s rebounding number one must also realize that his physical prime was from 1969-70 to about 1981-82: he wasn`t the strongest (he was strong though!) and his leap, potence agilit etc wasn`t the same as the 70s....from the pics you can just tell.
Wilt would dominate Today
In the physical 80s with players rich in fundamentals-passing game-ball iq-court vision and teams packed with great role players and superstars per team he would dominate!: imagine building a team built on a Rebounder, Shot Blocker and Athletic Freak as Strong as Wilt with a Great Fadeaway to good with that.
Kareem in the late 90s and 2000s with current ruels it would be laughable..to control his SPEED AND SKILL SET. A 7`3 with the SKILL SET OF A SF! Shooting, Jump Shot, Hooks, Layups and Dunks...GO loo kat Kareem`s head nearly touching the basket on a rebound when he was 21-22 at 7`3!
:confusedshrug: [/B]
[QUOTE=Sir Charles][B]Kareem was a great rebounder...Not Better Wilt or Moses but he was well beyond just a good or average Rebounding Center. Then if you look at Kareem`s FG% EFFECTIVE SKILL SCORING...with his Sky Hook and Skilled Touch he was REALLLY the 1st Feneace center....and he shot way more effective on Hakeem ages 24-27 (and himself passed his prime ages 39-41) and made Hakeem lower his FG% (7`3 and Hakeem was not a banger liek Moses whom could weather you down he was also a Feneace Center).
Also when you look at Kareem`s rebounding number one must also realize that his physical prime was from 1969-70 to about 1981-82: he wasn`t the strongest (he was strong though!) and his leap, potence agilit etc wasn`t the same as the 70s....from the pics you can just tell.
Wilt would dominate Today
In the physical 80s with players rich in fundamentals-passing game-ball iq-court vision and teams packed with great role players and superstars per team he would dominate!: imagine building a team built on a Rebounder, Shot Blocker and Athletic Freak as Strong as Wilt with a Great Fadeaway to good with that.
Kareem in the late 90s and 2000s with current ruels it would be laughable..to control his SPEED AND SKILL SET. A 7`3 with the SKILL SET OF A SF! Shooting, Jump Shot, Hooks, Layups and Dunks...GO loo kat Kareem`s head nearly touching the basket on a rebound when he was 21-22 at 7`3!
:confusedshrug: [/B][/QUOTE]
Sir Charles I must admit we agree . WIlt would be everything D Howard is and more. a more consistant scorer and would not get outplayed by taller Centers.
Kareem would be doing everything yao is supposed to be doing on a night in night out basis IF kareem was playing to day you could bet he would have been past the first round several times
[QUOTE=Niquesports]Sir Charles I must admit we agree . WIlt would be everything D Howard is and more. a more consistant scorer and would not get outplayed by taller Centers.
Kareem would be doing everything yao is supposed to be doing on a night in night out basis IF kareem was playing to day you could bet he would have been past the first round several times[/QUOTE]
[B]Wilt`s Rebounding Capacity, Shooting Touch, B-Ball IQ, Passing Game, Stamina is way above Howard`s....way above..:rolleyes:
Yao?...Yao would get Owned by a Prime Kareem....:rolleyes:
Undertoday`s Rules Yao would get fouled out by the Second Quarter...
Kareem had trouble with bulky stocky players that could rebound..like Moses or Howard...but he would just settle for Scoring and Passing...like he did passed his pime in the 80s. Kareem`s Passing Game is Just Out of this World too and would get his teamates better involved than any big man. Only Duncan is compareble today in that aspect today.
Kareem = Most Offensively Skilled Center Ever...:bowdown: [/B]
[QUOTE=indiefan23]Whom? I seriously doubt anyone would sign a 48 year old Chamberlian for anything but a publicity stunt. But I'm interested.[/QUOTE]
The Cavs in the early 80's and the Nets in the mid-80's. And I'm not sure it would have been a publicity stunt. Apparently, in the early 80's, he dominated a pick-up game that included NBA players, even Magic Johnson. He said something like "There will be no lay-ups in this gym" and then he blocked a ton of shots. Years after he retired, in his mid-40s ...
[QUOTE=indiefan23]Yea, I'm pretty sure. Elgin Baylor at 6'5" pulled down 19.8 boards a game.[/QUOTE]
I've never said Elgin Baylor would be successful in today's league. Obviously he would be way too undersized. But that doesn't mean he wasn't a great rebounder. He was undersized even back then. Not every 6'5 guys pulled down that many rebounds. He was like a Dennis Rodman. Let's say Rodman played in that era and pulled down 25-28 rebounds. You'd say there would be no way he would dominate in the 90's, or that Hakeem, Robinson, Ewing or Mutombo would have done better. But he outrebounded every one of those guys. He won the rebounding title 7 straight years with those guys in the league, sometimes by a comfortable margin, even in his mid-30s and he was only 6'7.
The fact that Baylor was one of the greatest rebounders of his era doesn't mean it was a weak era or anything. Size isn't everything when it comes to rebounding. Just look at some recent dominating rebounders : Dwight Howard, Marcus Camby, Kevin Garnett, Ben Wallace, Dennis Rodman, Charles Barkley, Moses Malone. None of those guys are over 7 feet. And they each won at least one rebounding title. With guys significantly taller than them in the league. How many rebounding titles Yao Ming, Manute Bol or Gheorghe Muresan have ?
Wilt dominating the boards in his era had nothing to do with him being taller than most guys around him. Or else Yao would be dominating right now. Or Elgin Baylor would have lost the rebounding battle every single night. Wilt was just a great rebounder. Let me say it again : In his last season in the league, during the 72-73 season, his rebounding rate was the same as Tim Duncan's career high (19.6%). All right let's say the competition was easier then that it is now. He was 35-36 years old. Clearly not in his prime. So now take a prime Wilt. I suppose his rebounding rate goes significantly up (there's no data for this). High enough to offset the difference in level of competition between then and now. There's nothing you can say that can prove Duncan would outrebound Wilt.
Have you seen some clips of Wilt ? The guy would be one of the most, if not THE most, athletic guys in the league. Do you really think he could play today and not dominate ? At least on the boards ? The 2nd and 3rd best rebounder in terms of rebounds per game this year were Troy Murphy and David Lee ... In rebound rate, they finished 4th and 7th. Kevin Love finished 2nd. Do you really think Wilt couldn't do better than that ?
[QUOTE=Mikaiel]
I've never said Elgin Baylor would be successful in today's league. Obviously he would be way too undersized. But that doesn't mean he wasn't a great rebounder. He was undersized even back then. Not every 6'5 guys pulled down that many rebounds. He was like a Dennis Rodman. Let's say Rodman played in that era and pulled down 25-28 rebounds. You'd say there would be no way he would dominate in the 90's, or that Hakeem, Robinson, Ewing or Mutombo would have done better. But he outrebounded every one of those guys. He won the rebounding title 7 straight years with those guys in the league, sometimes by a comfortable margin, even in his mid-30s and he was only 6'7.
The fact that Baylor was one of the greatest rebounders of his era doesn't mean it was a weak era or anything. Size isn't everything when it comes to rebounding. Just look at some recent dominating rebounders : Dwight Howard, Marcus Camby, Kevin Garnett, Ben Wallace, Dennis Rodman, Charles Barkley, Moses Malone. None of those guys are over 7 feet.
Wilt dominating the boards in his era had nothing to do with him being taller than most guys around him. Or else Yao would be dominating right now. Or Elgin Baylor would have lost the rebounding battle every single night. Wilt was just a great rebounder. Let me say it again : In his last season in the league, during the 72-73 season, his rebounding rate was the same as Tim Duncan's career high (19.6%). All right let's say the competition was easier then that it is now. He was 35-36 years old. Clearly not in his prime. So now take a prime Wilt. I suppose his rebounding rate goes significantly up (there's no data for this). High enough to offset the difference in level of competition between then and now. There's nothing you can say that can prove Duncan would outrebound Wilt.
Have you seen some clips of Wilt ? The guy would be one of the most, if not THE most, athletic guys in the league. Do you really think he could play today and not dominate ? At least on the boards ? The 2nd and 3rd best rebounder in terms of rebounds per game this year were Troy Murphy and David Lee ... In rebound rate, they finished 4th and 7th. Kevin Love finished 2nd. Do you really think Wilt couldn't do better than that ?[/QUOTE]
:applause:
Only four(4) true 7 footers have even won rebound titles in the Leagues history:eek: :
Wilt(11 or 12)
Kareem(1)
Robinson(1)
Mutumbo(2 ?)
Height/size isn't the only thing involved in rebounding(ask Dennis Rodman).
Even at 19 rebounds per game in'61 Baylor was still not a top three rebounder when it came to boards per game:confusedshrug: A very good rebounder ,but not dominate like Wilt/Russell.
Not much else to add to that post.
[QUOTE=Mikaiel]The Cavs in the early 80's and the Nets in the mid-80's. And I'm not sure it would have been a publicity stunt. Apparently, in the early 80's, he dominated a pick-up game that included NBA players, even Magic Johnson. He said something like "There will be no lay-ups in this gym" and then he blocked a ton of shots. Years after he retired, in his mid-40s ...[/quote]
Hmm... I dunno man. Its totally possible of course. I think Bill Simmons wrote about this phenomenon though. Its a little wishy washy but there's a lot to it. If I played MJ would I embarrass my childhood idol and remind him that while he's the GOAT now he's a broken down old man shell of who is not relevant anymore? I wouldn't. Could Nique get layups on a 48 year old Wilt. I think so. When you play old men or children you show some class. Not to say its impossible, but at 45 your body has broken down. I still think thats a stunt.
[quote]I've never said Elgin Baylor would be successful in today's league. Obviously he would be way too undersized. But that doesn't mean he wasn't a great rebounder. He was undersized even back then. Not every 6'5 guys pulled down that many rebounds. He was like a Dennis Rodman. Let's say Rodman played in that era and pulled down 25-28 rebounds. You'd say there would be no way he would dominate in the 90's, or that Hakeem, Robinson, Ewing or Mutombo would have done better. But he outrebounded every one of those guys. He won the rebounding title 7 straight years with those guys in the league, sometimes by a comfortable margin, even in his mid-30s and he was only 6'7.[/quote]
Yea, but Dennis focused only on boarding. Don't get me wrong: he's one of my fav players ever and maybe one of the most under rated ever. For a guy to approach a 40/20 season at 6'5", yea, I think Baylor could absolutely play in the NBA's peak. But what would his numbers be like? Remember that Baylor was in 5'th at almost 20 boards a game so for being a great rebounder he was average. Lets look at Rodman's best season on the bulls in 96/97. He pulled down 16.1 boards. #2 was Mutombo at 11.6. That year Wilt had 27.2 boards.
So if we were to translate Rodman's proportion to that season he will have averaged 16.1/11.6*27.2=37.7 boards a game. Wilt pulled down 27.2 BPG and because of that I recgonize he was massively above his era and I give him credit as one of the few players who could contribute in a significant way to the NBA at it's 90's peak. If Rodman was averaging almost 38 rebounds a game and outclassing his competition to that level. Could Rodman pull down almost 40 a game then? Probably. Wilt had 27.2 playing almost 13 more minutes and 25 more possessions against mostly undersized competition.
If Wilt gets credit for approaching 30, Rodman absolutly gets cred for 40 and I'm sure there are people who will say I'm assuming Wilt is second and the way I did it is dubious. They've got a point, but it won't be nearly as strong as they think.
Even if you only adjust for minutes alone, not the 25 extra possessions OR the incredibly weaker/undersized competition, Wilt's numbers come down to 20.14 BPG which is only 4 rebounds off what Rodman did in the 90's when only adjusting for their minutes. Likewise if Rodman played 47.8 minutes he would have grabbed 25 boards a game in 96.
Rodman is the best rebounder of all time and if he went back he would destroy Wilt, I'm sorry to say. If not in head to head matchups (though I doubt this: Rodman owned Shaq on multiple occasions) then statistically it would be pure and raw ownage and I would look at his play and numbers and say "yea, that guy could board in today's league."
But a big thing is that rebounding wasn't really the same in those days. Watch the tape and they're not even really boxing out on free throws or put a body on bigs in the paint. Also who can play 48 minutes a game today? When you're defending players like Allen Iverson you're going to pick up fouls. I always thought that never fouling out was Wilt's greatest acomplishment. Then I saw tape and realized that with players not really boxing out or playing physicial defense or DWade types crashing into the lane it really was not that big a deal.
And like I was saying, while you admit players then would have difficulty there's lots of people in this thread who claim not only that they'd be able to be the same, but that they'd be better then today's players.
[quote]The fact that Baylor was one of the greatest rebounders of his era doesn't mean it was a weak era or anything. Size isn't everything when it comes to rebounding. Just look at some recent dominating rebounders : Dwight Howard, Marcus Camby, Kevin Garnett, Ben Wallace, Dennis Rodman, Charles Barkley, Moses Malone. None of those guys are over 7 feet. And they each won at least one rebounding title. With guys significantly taller than them in the league. How many rebounding titles Yao Ming, Manute Bol or Gheorghe Muresan have ?[/quote]
Yea, but they're all an inch or two away with the exception of Barkley who was a ridiculously strong player. A 6'5" guy getting 20 boards indicates that size didn't matter so much and if not that then at least the stats are inflated. My whole point was that Yao, Gheorghe and Bol probably could have pulled off rebounding titles in the 70's but had no shot later. Across the board its evened out.
[quote]Wilt dominating the boards in his era had nothing to do with him being taller than most guys around him.[/quote]
Sorry, I watch the game. Wilt is taller and people are not even attempting to force him out of the lane. He jumped, reaches over top and because he was the only one up there he grabbed the ball. His size had everything to do with it. You can see him doing this countless times on the tape.
[quote]Or else Yao would be dominating right now. Or Elgin Baylor would have lost the rebounding battle every single night. Wilt was just a great rebounder. Let me say it again : In his last season in the league, during the 72-73 season, his rebounding rate was the same as Tim Duncan's career high (19.6%).[/quote]
I'm not even suggesting he was bad. I'm just saying his stats are inflated. At that time the ABA was kicking up and he still outsized everyone. I don't even care if Kareem was in the league. I mean, how blatantly stupid an argument is that? Kareem was in the eastern conference so Wilt played him twice a year for 4 years. Guys on this thread are raging about how dumb I am based on the fact that Wilt and Kareem matched up 8 times out of Wilt's 1045 NBA games and I don't think that means much. I mean, I've heard people spount ad nauseam that Wilt went against greats such as Kareem, Unseld and Dave Cowens, 3 others from the top 5 that year. But in reality Wilt only faced those guys 6 times total out of 82 games each year.
[quote]All right let's say the competition was easier then that it is now. He was 35-36 years old. Clearly not in his prime. So now take a prime Wilt. I suppose his rebounding rate goes significantly up (there's no data for this). High enough to offset the difference in level of competition between then and now. There's nothing you can say that can prove Duncan would outrebound Wilt.[/quote]
Where are you getting Wilt's rebound rate from anyway? I didn't think stats on rebound % existed then. Unless you mean per 36 minutes, but if you do Wilt's per minute stats are not as good as Duncans anyway. soo.....
I think you're understating competition here. I'm 6'2". When I'm playing people who are like, 5'11" I can own them. When Wilt was 7'1", athletic and the league's premier boarders were 6'5-6'9", its a MASSIVE difference. I dunno, I saw Duncan totally handle Shaq on both ends of the floor. I see no reason why he wouldn't do freakishly better in a league so much slower and less athletic then he is.
[quote]Have you seen some clips of Wilt ? The guy would be one of the most, if not THE most, athletic guys in the league. Do you really think he could play today and not dominate ? At least on the boards ? The 2nd and 3rd best rebounder in terms of rebounds per game this year were Troy Murphy and David Lee ... In rebound rate, they finished 4th and 7th. Kevin Love finished 2nd. Do you really think Wilt couldn't do better than that ?[/QUOTE]
I think he could play today, sure. But he's not more athletic then Shaq. He's not more athletic then Camby in his prime. He's has nothing close to Dream's polish. He played a leauge of players who mostly would not make the NBA today. In today's (or 90's, is what I mean most) league you can jump out of the gym and be 7 feet, but if you're latteral movement is slow you'll get killed so you ride pine. The margin of error is so slim. For bigs the pounding they put on their bodies so much me intense. The training so much more scientific. Would Wilt 'dominate'?
I don't think so. I think he'd be good. If we put Wilt into a time machine and stuck him in a game vs prime Shaq this is what would happen. Shaq's enormously powerful and agile ass attached to his 350 lb body would swing back and knock Wilt into the stands and Wilt would wonder what in the name of hell just happened cuz people just didn't do that to him before. No one tried and no one in the history of the game was even capable.
And since I've had all these bull crap 'character' arguments thrown at me, I'm going to say he'd be much worse. Wilt, if anything, was an egomaniac. How would 'he' react to the pressures and temptations of being a massive celebrity, being offered movie deals, asked to present grammys, staring in commercials and generally making 1000's of times the amount of cash any normal person makes instead of just a few times it? I know what would happen. He would fold. Wilt claimed he slept with 20,000 women and you think he's going to handle all that attention? Wilt would go Kanye West in about 1 year and be enormously distracted. Its not a knock, he's just human. In all honestly, its probably those things that got to him before that prevented him from winning more titles.