Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops

Go Back   Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops > InsideHoops Main Basketball Forums > NBA Forum

NBA Forum NBA Message Board - NBA Fan Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-01-2013, 08:22 PM   #61
2010splash
Now a Cavs fan again
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,026
2010splash has a bad reputation2010splash has a bad reputation2010splash has a bad reputation
Default Re: Ways to compare across eras - MJ vs Wilt

Quote:
Originally Posted by DatAsh
Why don't you tell me who from that list you seriously believe Havlicek would be better than?
2010splash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 08:27 PM   #62
Mrofir
National High School Star
 
Mrofir's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,350
Mrofir is a pretty well-respected posterMrofir is a pretty well-respected posterMrofir is a pretty well-respected posterMrofir is a pretty well-respected poster
Default Re: Ways to compare across eras - MJ vs Wilt

I really think you could run a psychology experiment where you show 2 minute clips of an anonymous basketball player to the test subject. One clip is of a superior player, in black and white with bad fps and bad overall quality. The other is an HD clip of an inferior player, taken in a nice gym, maybe with more people watching. 9\10 people believe the inferior player is better due to the quality of the video, as well as ingrained prejudices against anything that looks old.


People just completely ignoring the bridge argument and instead making emotional claims about the quality of the league today, with nothing to back it up. Just naming a list of players you think are better than Hondo and saying it is so, does not make it so.

Hondo averaged 16-4-4 at age 37, in 1978, the year before Larry Bird entered the league. Obviously Bird had the slightly more decorated career, but are we to believe that Bird belonged to a completely different league than Hondo? Or are we to believe that Kobe belongs to a completely different league than Bird? Do we believe Bird in his prime today would be 25% less effective? If so, are we also to believe that Kobe belongs to a different league than MJ and Magic, who had to be at their very best to get the better of Larry? It makes no sense. When you look at history, there are a million arguments for why the quality of the league fluctuates somewhat randomly, and very very few real arguments that quality is on a linear path upward.

Last edited by Mrofir : 03-01-2013 at 08:35 PM.
Mrofir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2013, 08:28 PM   #63
DatAsh
Local High School Star
 
DatAsh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,606
DatAsh has an incredible reputation hereDatAsh has an incredible reputation hereDatAsh has an incredible reputation hereDatAsh has an incredible reputation hereDatAsh has an incredible reputation hereDatAsh has an incredible reputation hereDatAsh has an incredible reputation here
Default Re: Ways to compare across eras - MJ vs Wilt

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010splash
Why don't you tell me who from that list you seriously believe Havlicek would be better than?

All but Jordan, Olajuwon, Shaq, Kobe, Lebron, and Duncan.

Barkley, Robinson, Malone, and Garnett are arguable for me.
DatAsh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2013, 10:03 AM   #64
Psileas
NBA lottery pick
 
Psileas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Great!
Posts: 5,252
Psileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterPsileas is considered a brilliant InsideHoops poster
Default Re: Ways to compare across eras - MJ vs Wilt

Quote:
Itís more than 2-3 minutes. Plenty of clips from playoff series and Finals from the 60s are there on YouTube. If you see a player performing awkward and unathletic movements in the 10 minutes or 30 minutes or several hours of clips available, it is unlikely that they were doing anything different in the footage that is unavailable to us. The players are the same, regardless of what type of footage theyíre shown in. Also, Russell was certainly an anomaly for his time. Never said he wasnít athletically gifted.

First of all, please, let's not pretend that while watching the very few games of Havlicek, you had your eyes specifically set on him. I don't even think you seriously expect me to believe that someone like you would have viewed whole 1960's and 1970's games.
Yeah, OK, awkward movements, just because they are different compared to the ones you have been used to... What matters isn't how they look to you, it's whether they are effective. And there wasn't a single period in his career when they weren't. Not in 1962, not in 1978.


Quote:
Thatís some ridiculous overrating of him then.

Players from the 90ís who own Havlicek: Jordan, Olajuwon, Ewing, Barkley, Robinson, Malone, Pippen, Penny, Hill, T. Hardaway, Mourning, Mutombo, Shaq, Miller, Drexler, Payton, Kemp, Stockton, K. Johnson

Players from the 00ís who own Havlicek: Kobe, LeBron, Wade, McGrady, Carter, Iverson, Shaq, Duncan, Garnett, Pierce, Allen, Nash, Nowitzki, Rose, Griffin, Rondo, Kidd, Marion, Howard, Bosh, Aldridge

Iím definitely forgetting at least 20 more and completely excluding average players. It's no secret that today's era is far more competitive than the 60's.

Miller, who did nothing but shoot? Mutombo who was worlds more limited offensively? Bosh? Aldridge? Just no, especially against a Havlicek who has got used to the modern game (because, even arguments involving the stupid "time travel" thing still include adaptable human beings). Not to mention that you like to pretend that all these players you grouped were in their primes at the same period (e.g, Kidd and Griffin).


Quote:
As mentioned earlier, there is enough footage of 60ís Celtics games on YouTube. Certainly enough to form a valid judgment on Havlicekís athletic ability. Nobody is calling Russell or Wilt unathletic, because despite not having been around to watch them live, we can reasonably conclude that they were not based on what footage of them exists. Havlicek, West, and Cousy, on the other hand, were far from athletic. Horrible hand-eye coordination, foot speed, and aerial fluidity. No way in hell they were as nimble in mid air, agile, or coast to coast fast like the current wing superstars (Kobe, LeBron, Wade, Rose, Westbrook, Durant, Harden etc).

Please, do provide us the enough footage of the 60's Celtics of YT. BTW, this is a rhetorical request, since I already have seen the games you imply. If you think this is "enough footage to form an educated opinion", let me add that the very first couple of games of Larry Bird that I viewed was one from the early 80's. He was getting something like 12/10/4. My similarly educated guess: A nice starting piece, nothing special. Maybe David Lee in today's league.
BTW, do you have Kareem in your list of players who would own Havlicek? Because I also saw Game 6 of the 1974 Finals, and too bad Havlicek's "awkwardness" didn't allow Kareem to block even one of his shots whenever Havlicek was getting close to the basket. Too bad also that Havlicek's "bad hand-eye coordination" allowed him to grab the most crucial offensive rebound in front of Kareem and send the game to OT.

And now we also have horrible hand-eye coordination for Cousy!
Horrible hand-eye coordination, foot speed, and aerial fluidity for West! Spot on, man, that's definitely what http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEzwR1a8KuA shows. "His instincts are the best I've ever seen", says one poor mind in the beginning of the video...What does he know?
Honestly, why do I even bother with you? You even equated Bill Russell with Chandler in another thread, then you went to this. All typical examples of era bias personified. "Fortunately" (although, obviously, ignorance is never fortune), similar young detractors of the 80's and 90's have already appeared in good numbers and guys like you start getting doses of your own medicine.

Quote:
Glaring weaknesses are taken advantage of in todayís game. Athletically inferior players are simply outclassed when trying to defend a superior athlete who has at least moderate skill. Players who lack the fundamental skills of dribbling the right way, shooting with proper form, and playing sound position defense get abused with regularity, if they are even seeing the court at all. Havlicek would certainly get his ass handed to him by the likes of a Pierce, George, or Mayo level player today... never mind players like Harden, Kobe, Wade, Carmelo, LeBron, etc.

When I mentioned Dr.J or Gervin, I didn't give you hypotheticals. I gave you facts. Unfortunately, your hypotheticals are inconsistent with the facts. I already gave you another fact: When Havlicek was getting near Kareem in 1974, what you would definitely expect to happen if Havlicek got near the basket against modern big men usually DID NOT happen.
I only bothered to answer this last quote just to point out another inconsistency. I won't any longer. I know my facts, you know your hypotheticals, we're both happy, I guess...
Psileas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 11:29 PM   #65
La Frescobaldi
I brick nerf balls
 
La Frescobaldi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 3,689
La Frescobaldi has a terrific reputationLa Frescobaldi has a terrific reputationLa Frescobaldi has a terrific reputationLa Frescobaldi has a terrific reputationLa Frescobaldi has a terrific reputationLa Frescobaldi has a terrific reputation
Default Re: Ways to compare across eras - MJ vs Wilt

this is such an interesting thread i bumped it but also to point out that maybe some of the more narrow-minded guys that posted on this thread, might consider some actual facts:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-18735617
talking about how new track technology helps sprinters break records:

"Records and personal bests tumbled in the main stadium on Friday, thanks in part to a new track design that harnesses the power of the little toe.

The £1m track features technology that aims to rebound energy from the sideways movement of athletes' feet, including little toes and the side of the foot.

The previous Olympic track in Beijing was designed to maximise the rebound when runners pushed forward and backwards, but the inevitable sideways movement was effectively lost energy, the track designer told the Guardian. Joe Hoekstra, project manager for supplier Mondo, which also laid the track in Beijing, said a special underlay is patterned with rhombus-shaped ridges to increase the track's reaction to lateral movement and is in use for the first time in London.

"Since Beijing we realised we needed to make the material more reactive sideways, as well as forwards and backwards," he said. "We saw that sometimes the little toe touches first and there is a roll over. We have previously provided shock absorption and reaction in the straight line and we have been working on a material that is omnidirectional."

The top of the track has also been made softer than in Beijing to increase its ability to drive energy back into the athletes' feet. "It trashes the notion that hard is fast," he said.

The roof of the stadium was also designed to maximise track speeds. The stadium engineer ran wind tunnel tests to assess the impact of designs of winds at track level and decided on a partial roof to minimise wind on the track.

"We have already had 15 personal bests from the athletes who competed in those five heats and Jessica Ennis set a world record," said Debbie Jevans, Locog's director of sport. She added that the enthusiasm of the crowd could also be helping athletes produce top times. "I doubt that any of those athletes have competed at 10 o'clock in the morning in front of such a full stadium," she said."
**************************************************

Carl Lewis, Ben Johnson took steroids...................
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGiEKeJnmpg

So here you have just 2 simple examples (and there are thousands upon thousands) ... of evolution.... right?

According to some of the guys in this thread ~ ~ the modern athlete is more athletic than older guys even though we've built tracks with incredible technology so that they can beat the records..... and we've developed these drug cocktails to give them more stamina, strength and so forth........................ but the modern athlete is somehow still.... more athletic?

Of course those examples are from track & field, but the point stands; sorry, evolution just didn't happen between 1968 and 2008.
La Frescobaldi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2013, 12:48 AM   #66
CavaliersFTW
NBA All-star
 
CavaliersFTW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 9,939
CavaliersFTW is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterCavaliersFTW is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterCavaliersFTW is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterCavaliersFTW is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterCavaliersFTW is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterCavaliersFTW is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterCavaliersFTW is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterCavaliersFTW is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterCavaliersFTW is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterCavaliersFTW is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterCavaliersFTW is considered a brilliant InsideHoops poster
Default Re: Ways to compare across eras - MJ vs Wilt

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psileas
First of all, please, let's not pretend that while watching the very few games of Havlicek, you had your eyes specifically set on him. I don't even think you seriously expect me to believe that someone like you would have viewed whole 1960's and 1970's games.
Yeah, OK, awkward movements, just because they are different compared to the ones you have been used to... What matters isn't how they look to you, it's whether they are effective. And there wasn't a single period in his career when they weren't. Not in 1962, not in 1978.




Miller, who did nothing but shoot? Mutombo who was worlds more limited offensively? Bosh? Aldridge? Just no, especially against a Havlicek who has got used to the modern game (because, even arguments involving the stupid "time travel" thing still include adaptable human beings). Not to mention that you like to pretend that all these players you grouped were in their primes at the same period (e.g, Kidd and Griffin).




Please, do provide us the enough footage of the 60's Celtics of YT. BTW, this is a rhetorical request, since I already have seen the games you imply. If you think this is "enough footage to form an educated opinion", let me add that the very first couple of games of Larry Bird that I viewed was one from the early 80's. He was getting something like 12/10/4. My similarly educated guess: A nice starting piece, nothing special. Maybe David Lee in today's league.
BTW, do you have Kareem in your list of players who would own Havlicek? Because I also saw Game 6 of the 1974 Finals, and too bad Havlicek's "awkwardness" didn't allow Kareem to block even one of his shots whenever Havlicek was getting close to the basket. Too bad also that Havlicek's "bad hand-eye coordination" allowed him to grab the most crucial offensive rebound in front of Kareem and send the game to OT.

And now we also have horrible hand-eye coordination for Cousy!
Horrible hand-eye coordination, foot speed, and aerial fluidity for West! Spot on, man, that's definitely what http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEzwR1a8KuA shows. "His instincts are the best I've ever seen", says one poor mind in the beginning of the video...What does he know?
Honestly, why do I even bother with you? You even equated Bill Russell with Chandler in another thread, then you went to this. All typical examples of era bias personified. "Fortunately" (although, obviously, ignorance is never fortune), similar young detractors of the 80's and 90's have already appeared in good numbers and guys like you start getting doses of your own medicine.



When I mentioned Dr.J or Gervin, I didn't give you hypotheticals. I gave you facts. Unfortunately, your hypotheticals are inconsistent with the facts. I already gave you another fact: When Havlicek was getting near Kareem in 1974, what you would definitely expect to happen if Havlicek got near the basket against modern big men usually DID NOT happen.
I only bothered to answer this last quote just to point out another inconsistency. I won't any longer. I know my facts, you know your hypotheticals, we're both happy, I guess...
holy sh*t that was an epic dose of ether
CavaliersFTW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2013, 01:24 AM   #67
CavaliersFTW
NBA All-star
 
CavaliersFTW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 9,939
CavaliersFTW is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterCavaliersFTW is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterCavaliersFTW is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterCavaliersFTW is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterCavaliersFTW is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterCavaliersFTW is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterCavaliersFTW is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterCavaliersFTW is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterCavaliersFTW is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterCavaliersFTW is considered a brilliant InsideHoops posterCavaliersFTW is considered a brilliant InsideHoops poster
Default Re: Ways to compare across eras - MJ vs Wilt

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010splash
Perhaps "complete scrub" was an overstatement. But he certainly wouldn't be that good. Probably a role player in today's league and he absolutely would not be the hall of famer he was in the 60s and 70s. Dr. J "calling him one of his toughest opponents" is not evidence of Havlicek having the physical tools that would translate to a successful career in today's league. It's merely his opinion. Watching games of his, however, is a better way to judge how good he actually was.

And yes, the athletes on the late 80s Pistons and 90s Jazz were far superior to those in Wilt's days. You can scoff at the idea of players like Russell, Dumars, Vinnie etc being better athletes than your average 60s player, but it's simply the truth. If you actually watched clips of past games, you'd notice the comical skill level on display. Players dribbling around in circles with their heads down, poor shooting form, almost non-existent defense, etc.
2010splash, I'm curious, who would you rather build your team around if you HAD to pick one of the two;

A fresh from college time-traveled 1958 Elgin Baylor or a rookie modern era Wesley Matthews? Please give an in depth answer if you can, since you've seen so many of the innumerable 60's games that are just slathered all over Youtube i'm sure you've seen many of Elgin's games and are aware exactly what his game was like.
CavaliersFTW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2013, 01:46 AM   #68
LAZERUSS
NBA lottery pick
 
LAZERUSS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 5,026
LAZERUSS is popular on this boardLAZERUSS is popular on this boardLAZERUSS is popular on this boardLAZERUSS is popular on this boardLAZERUSS is popular on this board
Default Re: Ways to compare across eras - MJ vs Wilt

Quote:
Originally Posted by La Frescobaldi
this is such an interesting thread i bumped it but also to point out that maybe some of the more narrow-minded guys that posted on this thread, might consider some actual facts:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-18735617
talking about how new track technology helps sprinters break records:

"Records and personal bests tumbled in the main stadium on Friday, thanks in part to a new track design that harnesses the power of the little toe.

The £1m track features technology that aims to rebound energy from the sideways movement of athletes' feet, including little toes and the side of the foot.

The previous Olympic track in Beijing was designed to maximise the rebound when runners pushed forward and backwards, but the inevitable sideways movement was effectively lost energy, the track designer told the Guardian. Joe Hoekstra, project manager for supplier Mondo, which also laid the track in Beijing, said a special underlay is patterned with rhombus-shaped ridges to increase the track's reaction to lateral movement and is in use for the first time in London.

"Since Beijing we realised we needed to make the material more reactive sideways, as well as forwards and backwards," he said. "We saw that sometimes the little toe touches first and there is a roll over. We have previously provided shock absorption and reaction in the straight line and we have been working on a material that is omnidirectional."

The top of the track has also been made softer than in Beijing to increase its ability to drive energy back into the athletes' feet. "It trashes the notion that hard is fast," he said.

The roof of the stadium was also designed to maximise track speeds. The stadium engineer ran wind tunnel tests to assess the impact of designs of winds at track level and decided on a partial roof to minimise wind on the track.

"We have already had 15 personal bests from the athletes who competed in those five heats and Jessica Ennis set a world record," said Debbie Jevans, Locog's director of sport. She added that the enthusiasm of the crowd could also be helping athletes produce top times. "I doubt that any of those athletes have competed at 10 o'clock in the morning in front of such a full stadium," she said."
**************************************************

Carl Lewis, Ben Johnson took steroids...................
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGiEKeJnmpg

So here you have just 2 simple examples (and there are thousands upon thousands) ... of evolution.... right?

According to some of the guys in this thread ~ ~ the modern athlete is more athletic than older guys even though we've built tracks with incredible technology so that they can beat the records..... and we've developed these drug cocktails to give them more stamina, strength and so forth........................ but the modern athlete is somehow still.... more athletic?

Of course those examples are from track & field, but the point stands; sorry, evolution just didn't happen between 1968 and 2008.



Remember the full-body swimsuits that were the rage a few years ago? Something like 40 world records were broken in one year.

And let's put a persimmon driver, with a heavy steel shaft, and a balata ball in the hands of today's touring pros, and let's see them average the 280 off the tee that Nicklaus did in 1965. Hell, Nicklaus was longer in 2000 than he was in his prime.

And what about the "Fosbury Flop", which revolutionized the high jump? It immediately added several inches.

And how come the Long Jump record has stood for over 20 years, and before that, it was another 23 years? A total of a couple of inches more than the world record in 1968?

When Bob Hayes ran a 10.06 100 meters in the '64 Olympics, he did so with a pair of borrowed shoes, and on a track that resembled a plowed field. Are you going to tell me that Hayes would not have run a significantly faster time with just adding modern shoes and letting him run on a pristine track?

And once again, years ago Pat Riley said that he envisioned a time in the NBA in which a team would start five Magic Johnson's. Hmmm...I haven't seen even one since.

And none of this even takes into account that basketball is as much a game of skill, as it is athleticism (if not moreso.) How do explain James White being nothing more than a benchwarmer? Or a 37 year old Steve Nash leading the league in assists, and a 6-8 white guy running away with the rebounding title in the same season (and BTW, both played 33 and 36 mpg respectively.)

And if size were a key factor, why didn't the 7-4 350 lb. Priest Lauderdale dominate? He couldn't even make a roster. And, of course, I could give you a plethora of 7-2+ players who never amounted to anything in the NBA. Oh, and BTW, how could a 6-8 230 lb Rodman just blow away the likes of Shaq, Robinson, Divac, etc, in rebounds? Or a 6-5 Barkley winning a rebounding title? Or a 6-7 Ben Wallace, who couldn't hit a shot from five feet if his life depended on it, being one of the best players in the league?

It just doesn't add up. Granted, players like LeBron, who is a once in a generation type player, or Kobe, or Durant, would be great in any era, just as players like West, Oscar, Russell, and Wilt would be, as well. I believe the greats would be great in any era.
LAZERUSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2013, 04:12 AM   #69
La Frescobaldi
I brick nerf balls
 
La Frescobaldi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 3,689
La Frescobaldi has a terrific reputationLa Frescobaldi has a terrific reputationLa Frescobaldi has a terrific reputationLa Frescobaldi has a terrific reputationLa Frescobaldi has a terrific reputationLa Frescobaldi has a terrific reputation
Default Re: Ways to compare across eras - MJ vs Wilt

Quote:
Originally Posted by LAZERUSS


Remember the full-body swimsuits that were the rage a few years ago? Something like 40 world records were broken in one year.

And let's put a persimmon driver, with a heavy steel shaft, and a balata ball in the hands of today's touring pros, and let's see them average the 280 off the tee that Nicklaus did in 1965. Hell, Nicklaus was longer in 2000 than he was in his prime.

And what about the "Fosbury Flop", which revolutionized the high jump? It immediately added several inches.

And how come the Long Jump record has stood for over 20 years, and before that, it was another 23 years? A total of a couple of inches more than the world record in 1968?

When Bob Hayes ran a 10.06 100 meters in the '64 Olympics, he did so with a pair of borrowed shoes, and on a track that resembled a plowed field. Are you going to tell me that Hayes would not have run a significantly faster time with just adding modern shoes and letting him run on a pristine track?

And once again, years ago Pat Riley said that he envisioned a time in the NBA in which a team would start five Magic Johnson's. Hmmm...I haven't seen even one since.

And none of this even takes into account that basketball is as much a game of skill, as it is athleticism (if not moreso.) How do explain James White being nothing more than a benchwarmer? Or a 37 year old Steve Nash leading the league in assists, and a 6-8 white guy running away with the rebounding title in the same season (and BTW, both played 33 and 36 mpg respectively.)

And if size were a key factor, why didn't the 7-4 350 lb. Priest Lauderdale dominate? He couldn't even make a roster. And, of course, I could give you a plethora of 7-2+ players who never amounted to anything in the NBA. Oh, and BTW, how could a 6-8 230 lb Rodman just blow away the likes of Shaq, Robinson, Divac, etc, in rebounds? Or a 6-5 Barkley winning a rebounding title? Or a 6-7 Ben Wallace, who couldn't hit a shot from five feet if his life depended on it, being one of the best players in the league?

It just doesn't add up. Granted, players like LeBron, who is a once in a generation type player, or Kobe, or Durant, would be great in any era, just as players like West, Oscar, Russell, and Wilt would be, as well. I believe the greats would be great in any era.
I saw Ben Wallace make a set shot from the right hand block once Lazer that's GOT to be five feet doesn't it?
La Frescobaldi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2013, 05:42 AM   #70
BoutPractice
I'll pass
 
BoutPractice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,756
BoutPractice is popular on this boardBoutPractice is popular on this boardBoutPractice is popular on this boardBoutPractice is popular on this board
Default Re: Ways to compare across eras - MJ vs Wilt

I still think the "bridge" argument is the only fact-based argument in this (fascinating) discussion.

It is very significant for a simple reason:
- there is no hard evidence that as a general rule, great players from earlier eras couldn't play today. Intuition and the eye test, perhaps, but none of the proof you would expect to find if it were true.
- there is hard evidence, however, that great players from the 60s could dominate players from the 80s who dominated players from the 00s.
More broadly speaking, there is plenty of evidence that players who saw different eras did not suddenly become ineffective against new generation players.

Old, injured Wilt Chamberlain was competitive against prime KAJ, the one center that even those who see the 60s as an era of short white boys agree would own any era due to his height and skills.

To change a bit from the usual Wilt examples, I've heard Larry Bird being dismissed as an era specific player recently, so here are examples of some of Larry Bird's statlines against Jordan's Bulls:
41, 7 and 7 (1987)
38, 9 and 8 (1988)
44 and 10 (1988)
38, 11 and 9 (1990)
34, 15 and 8 (1991, this is injured, past his prime Larry VS the first championship Bulls with peak Jordan and presumably Pippen defending. The Celtics won the game)
Clearly he would be useless in today's league.
BoutPractice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2013, 07:04 AM   #71
La Frescobaldi
I brick nerf balls
 
La Frescobaldi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 3,689
La Frescobaldi has a terrific reputationLa Frescobaldi has a terrific reputationLa Frescobaldi has a terrific reputationLa Frescobaldi has a terrific reputationLa Frescobaldi has a terrific reputationLa Frescobaldi has a terrific reputation
Default Re: Ways to compare across eras - MJ vs Wilt

Quote:
Originally Posted by BoutPractice
I still think the "bridge" argument is the only fact-based argument in this (fascinating) discussion.

It is very significant for a simple reason:
- there is no hard evidence that as a general rule, great players from earlier eras couldn't play today. Intuition and the eye test, perhaps, but none of the proof you would expect to find if it were true.
- there is hard evidence, however, that great players from the 60s could dominate players from the 80s who dominated players from the 00s.
More broadly speaking, there is plenty of evidence that players who saw different eras did not suddenly become ineffective against new generation players.

Old, injured Wilt Chamberlain was competitive against prime KAJ, the one center that even those who see the 60s as an era of short white boys agree would own any era due to his height and skills.

To change a bit from the usual Wilt examples, I've heard Larry Bird being dismissed as an era specific player recently, so here are examples of some of Larry Bird's statlines against Jordan's Bulls:
41, 7 and 7 (1987)
38, 9 and 8 (1988)
44 and 10 (1988)
38, 11 and 9 (1990)
34, 15 and 8 (1991, this is injured, past his prime Larry VS the first championship Bulls with peak Jordan and presumably Pippen defending. The Celtics won the game)
Clearly he would be useless in today's league.

There are other factors in play here.
Let's take the young pup who knows more about the late 60s NBA by watching 2 hours of YT clips than a guy who watched P Jax and Billy C crash into each other and Cunningham leave the playoffs with a broken arm.
They understand it when Russell Westbrook or David Lee goes out; but they never heard of Billy Cunningham so it means nothing to them....they don't know about Sixers playing with hamstring pulls, walking down the court as fast as they can.... all they know is Chamberlain lost in the '68 playoffs so he's a choker.
They just make sh1t up in their mind and believe it to be fact.

Last edited by La Frescobaldi : 05-10-2013 at 07:08 AM.
La Frescobaldi is offline   Reply With Quote
This NBA Basketball News Website Sponsored by:
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:05 AM.




NBA Basketball Forum Key Links:
InsideHoops Home
NBA Rumors
Basketball Blog
NBA Daily Recaps
NBA Videos
Fantasy Basketball
NBA Mock Draft
NBA Free Agents
All-Star Weekend
---
High School Basketball
Streetball
---
InsideHoops Twitter
Search Our Site













Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. Terms of Use/Service | Privacy Policy