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 08-23-2007, 12:14 PM   #31
dawsey6
/thread
 
dawsey6's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,454
Default Re: Weird but might be accurate about Michael Jordan

Quote:
Originally Posted by G-train
Jordan would be top 2 or 3 in any draft. Everyone knew he would be a star, and he was expected to go number 1 or 2. Obviously no one knew he would be the greatest.
But this top 10 talk is BS.

He won both the Wooden and Naismith player of the year awards. He was a athletic and skilled prodigy. Read quotes from coaches/players/observers after the olympics in 84 and after/during that season.

His hype would match any player taken in the last 20 years (bar Lebron perhaps) had the media scrutiny been the same back then.


I think maybe he'd be top 5. Especially with media easily passing by weaknesses in players' games. Top 3 in any draft? I'm not too sure about that. He showed potiential, that's for sure, but as KO King mentioned before, he was not all that great on paper, despite being CPOY. In drafting, or course, collegiate achievements can be taken with a grain of salt.
dawsey6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 12:23 PM   #32
elz
Dylan spits hot fire!
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,484
Default Re: Weird but might be accurate about Michael Jordan

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Jordan was 6'6", basically the same height as Kobe give or take a quarter inch.





Are you talking about today's league?
yeah smart azz


todays players block shots at all 5 positions, in 1984 when he was drafted there wasn't many SG's with 40plus inch verticle leaps batting down other players jump shots. At 6 foot 6 Jordan was tall for a SG then, now that shts normal. He was a new generation of athlete when he came into the league.
Seeing that type of athlete in the 80's was a new thing. Now there's several athletes that physically can do what he did in his prime and more.
In the 80's todays Kobe would have been rediculously dominant. Its hard enough to cover him now, but back then they didn't have the athletes that defensively could keep up with him same with MJ
elz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 12:25 PM   #33
2LeTTeRS KD
Both teams played hard
 
2LeTTeRS KD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Why does it matter?
Posts: 1,738
Default Re: Weird but might be accurate about Michael Jordan

Quote:
Originally Posted by Da KO King
First, Dwyane Wade was not a top 10 lock. You guys are using revisionist history. No one had Miami picking Wade at 5. It wasn't considered a huge reach but it was a bit of a surprise. Majority of the “experts”, analyst, and random mocks had Wade either going to Washington at 10, Golden State at 11, or Orlando at 15. So let’s stop pretending Wade was a guaranteed top 5 guy. Wade’s going #5 was like Jeff Green going fifth this year. A shock but no one makes an issue of it.

I'm not operating on where these prosepcts could have or were predicted to go only where they actually where drafted. In 2003 Wade was drafted #5 an was a worse prospect. If you want to be honest Mike was also a better prospect than Carmelo who went #3 in that draft and probably would not have been drafted beyond #4 in that years draft. In 2004 he goes #3 at worse behind Howard and Okafor but likely #2 to Charlotte to start their franchise off with a bonafide star (trust me we seriously thought about draft Josh Childress, who was just as old as MJ when he came out with 1/2 the talent). In 2005 he probably is drafted #1 ahead of Bogut, but at the very worse I cant see him being picked after #5 which would put him behind Marvisn Willaiams, Chris Paul and Deron Williams but before Raymond Felton. In 2006 at worse he goes #2 and thats only if Colangelo is blinded by the love of Bargnani which I doubt. And finally this year I can't see him being picked at the latest after #4, as he's clearly a better prospect than Mike Conley.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Da KO King
Second, I did not compare Rodney Carney’s ability/game to that of a 21 year old Michael Jordan. I compared the perception of the two which would have been very similar. Phenomenal athletes with good starting point in terms of skill-set but limited upside due to age.

Yes, Michael was a Player of the Year. Yes, he hit a big (although way over-rated by the public and media) shot against Georgetown. None of that changes the fact that he would be considered thin and lacked range on his shot.

Yes he would have been thin if we bring the 84 version of Mike and make no changes, but if he's growing up in the 90s or in 2000s where everyone lifts I see no reason why he wouldn't. Even if we just bring that thin frame of his I still don't see that being a bigger problem for him than it was for players like Josh Childress, Corey Brewer, and Joakim Noah who still went top 10.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Da KO King
Third, I never said Michael had no shot at being in the top 10. In post #21 I clearly state,

Quote:
Originally Posted by Da KO King
Just like Carney, Jordan wouldn't be a guaranteed top 10 guy. He's be one of those guys that either goes top 10 or in the mid teens.

True you did post that he'd have a chance, but I'm saying Mike would be a lock for top 5 in any of these drafts and probably most others as well, especially since now that theres no high schoolers being 21 isn't that old, coming out at 22 after your senior year is actually the kiss of death to your draft prospects.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Da KO King
Fourth and final, Andrea Bargnani would in fact have been drafted over Mike. Current draft trends should make it obvious. Bargnani was a 20 year old 6’11” 230 lbs Italian PF with legit NBA 3-point range, excellent passing skills, and a developing post game.

21 year old American SG's rarely get drafted ahead of players like Bargnani anymore.

I disagree especially when going by your logic of where the player was expected to be draft Barganani was not supposed to be a #1 pick. He only was because there was no clear cut #1. Remember most people though Morrison, a college junior with below average athleticism would go #1, whose best skill his shot didn't even really have 3 point range. Insert a known college star with Jordan's pedigree and I guarantee he goes at 1.
2LeTTeRS KD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 12:47 PM   #34
John Starks
National High School Star
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,983
Default Re: Weird but might be accurate about Michael Jordan

Quote:
Originally Posted by elz
todays players block shots at all 5 positions, in 1984 when he was drafted there wasn't many SG's with 40plus inch verticle leaps batting down other players jump shots.

In 06-07, exactly 1 guard averaged more than a block per game - Wade....and that was 1.2 bpg. No pg's were over .5 bpg.

Quote:
Originally Posted by elz
At 6 foot 6 Jordan was tall for a SG then, now that shts normal. He was a new generation of athlete when he came into the league. Seeing that type of athlete in the 80's was a new thing. Now there's several athletes that physically can do what he did in his prime and more.

I gotta disagree. I think we see two kinds of guards now, those that are great athletes - in some instances better athletes than MJ (Igg, Richardson, Wade, LeBron, T-Mac) and those that can shoot - in some instances better shooters than MJ (Allen, Redd) we are not seeing anyone that is as lethal a combination of the two as MJ was in his prime.

When he was drafted, he was more like the athletethat couldn't shoot. He turned himself into a shooter...but athletes that can't shoot, still get drafted pretty high.

Quote:
Originally Posted by elz
In the 80's todays Kobe would have been rediculously dominant. Its hard enough to cover him now, but back then they didn't have the athletes that defensively could keep up with him same with MJ

Its just not true. In the 80's defenders were allowed to put a full extended arm on a player on the perimeter. Giving you the opportunity to control the offensive player and maintain a safe distance. Now you are really only allowed to look at them. It is a HUGE advantage for the permeter player..

...and who arethese rediculous athletic defenders that didn't exist in the day...Bowen is somehow a better defender than Cooper? Rolando Blakman with his long arms and huge hands, Moncrief- Dumars and Starks were less athletic but nastier than anyone in the league now (save Artest).

I don't think you know what you are talking about.
John Starks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 12:55 PM   #35
tontoz
NBA sixth man of the year
 
tontoz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 7,259
Default Re: Weird but might be accurate about Michael Jordan

Some pretty dumb posts in this thread.

First of all Jordan was the CPOY not once but TWICE. His athleticism was nasty and he was a great finisher in the lane. That summer after coaching him on the Olympic team Bobby Knight said Jordan was the best player he had ever seen. Anyone saying he wouldn't go top 5 in any draft has a screw loose.

And the centers of Jodan's era piss on today's lame ass centers. I don't see anyone today who can swat shots like Hakeem and Drob did.
tontoz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 01:42 PM   #36
Loki
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,079
Default Re: Weird but might be accurate about Michael Jordan

Quote:
Originally Posted by elz
yeah smart azz


todays players block shots at all 5 positions

Let's look at the blocks per game numbers of these "super athletes":


Kobe - .5 bpg
Carter - .5 bpg
Tmac - .4 bpg
Lebron - .7 bpg
Melo - .3 bpg
JJ - .2 bpg
Allen - .2 bpg
Pierce - .3 bpg
Arenas - .2 bpg
Redd - .2 bpg
Deng - .6 bpg


OMG FANTASTIC SHOTBLOCKERS !!!!1


Quote:
Now there's several athletes that physically can do what he did in his prime and more.

There's not a single athlete in today's game better than '85-'91 Jordan. James is close but not nearly as explosive or quick laterally, and he lacks the body control. Prime Carter was closest but also wasn't as quick and was a worse one-footed leaper. Wade is 2" shorter, worse first step, and not nearly the leaper. Worse body control, too.

Quote:
In the 80's todays Kobe would have been rediculously dominant. Its hard enough to cover him now, but back then they didn't have the athletes that defensively could keep up with him same with MJ

Kobe would be dominant in any era, but if you think he'd be more (or even nearly as) dominant as Jordan was, you're smoking stuff.
Loki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 01:58 PM   #37
vokey588
Can barely lace up my sneakers
 
vokey588's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Home: NY Univ: UNC
Posts: 8
Default Re: Weird but might be accurate about Michael Jordan

The key statistic that most people don't realize is that Jordan may not have scored BOATLOADS of points in college, but he shot 54% from the field. I read Dean Smith's book "A Coach's Life" and he said that that stat was a big reason Jordan was picked at number 3, and also said that FG% is one of the first stats a GM looks at.
vokey588 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 05:11 PM   #38
VCMVP1551
NBA sixth man of the year
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Charlie Villanuevas Eyebrows
Posts: 6,971
Default Re: Weird but might be accurate about Michael Jordan

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
It doesn't really matter what you "think." If Jordan is 6'4", then Kobe is 6'4.5" at best. They're roughly the same height.

Jordan and Kobe are the exact same height

[IMG][/IMG]

Kobe was measured 6'5" barefoot at the 1996 NBA pre-draft camp at 17 years and has grown a little since then. Jordan was 6'6 1/2" in shoes in the mid 80's making him about 6'5 1/2" barefoot. Also Wade, Igoudala, T-Mac ect. are not better athletes and in the mid 90's Jordan had some seasons where his 3P% rivaled the best pure shooters in the game. With the type of physical play he had to deal with in the late 80's Jordan would have dominated even more today.
VCMVP1551 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 05:19 PM   #39
eliteballer
NBA rookie of the year
 
eliteballer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,524
Default Re: Weird but might be accurate about Michael Jordan

Quote:
Originally Posted by VCMVP1551
Jordan and Kobe are the exact same height

[IMG][/IMG]

Kobe was measured 6'5" barefoot at the 1996 NBA pre-draft camp at 17 years and has grown a little since then. Jordan was 6'6 1/2" in shoes in the mid 80's making him about 6'5 1/2" barefoot. Also Wade, Igoudala, T-Mac ect. are not better athletes and in the mid 90's Jordan had some seasons where his 3P% rivaled the best pure shooters in the game. With the type of physical play he had to deal with in the late 80's Jordan would have dominated even more today.

Short 3 point line.
eliteballer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 05:26 PM   #40
VCMVP1551
NBA sixth man of the year
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Charlie Villanuevas Eyebrows
Posts: 6,971
Default Re: Weird but might be accurate about Michael Jordan

Quote:
Originally Posted by eliteballer
Short 3 point line.

Doesn't matter some players like Reggie Miller actually had their % go down a bit those years. Just as impressive.
VCMVP1551 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 05:31 PM   #41
Da KO King
NBA sixth man of the year
 
Da KO King's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: twitter.com/RandomHoopsMike
Posts: 7,544
Default Re: Weird but might be accurate about Michael Jordan

Quote:
Originally Posted by dejordan
...i do agree with you concerning the hypothetical sort of out of context "what if" question. if you had exactly the 84 jordan coming into the league in 07, he would not be as highly thought of as he was in his time.
At least one person understood my point. The rest of you
Da KO King is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 05:33 PM   #42
Da KO King
NBA sixth man of the year
 
Da KO King's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: twitter.com/RandomHoopsMike
Posts: 7,544
Default Re: Weird but might be accurate about Michael Jordan

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2LeTTeRS KD
I disagree especially when going by your logic of where the player was expected to be draft Barganani was not supposed to be a #1 pick. He only was because there was no clear cut #1. Remember most people though Morrison, a college junior with below average athleticism would go #1, whose best skill his shot didn't even really have 3 point range. Insert a known college star with Jordan's pedigree and I guarantee he goes at 1.
The projected #1 was not Adam Morrison, it was Lamarcus Aldridge.

A handful of people over-rating Adam Morrison does not hold sway with me.
Da KO King is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 05:42 PM   #43
2LeTTeRS KD
Both teams played hard
 
2LeTTeRS KD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Why does it matter?
Posts: 1,738
Default Re: Weird but might be accurate about Michael Jordan

Quote:
Originally Posted by Da KO King
The projected #1 was not Adam Morrison, it was Lamarcus Aldridge.

A handful of people over-rating Adam Morrison does not hold sway with me.

Point taken, but no matter how skinny Jordan was he's a better prospect than Aldridge as well.
2LeTTeRS KD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 05:43 PM   #44
Loki
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,079
Default Re: Weird but might be accurate about Michael Jordan

Quote:
Originally Posted by eliteballer
Short 3 point line.

See: 1990, 1993, 1990-1993 playoffs.

Thanks.
Loki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2007, 05:44 PM   #45
eliteballer
NBA rookie of the year
 
eliteballer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,524
Default Re: Weird but might be accurate about Michael Jordan

Quote:
Originally Posted by VCMVP1551
Doesn't matter some players like Reggie Miller actually had their % go down a bit those years. Just as impressive.

Reggie's didn't go down in fact his single best 3FG% year was in 97
eliteballer 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 11:56 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