ESPN Cuts Six Celtics, Adds Three To List Of NBA’s 50 Greatest Players

jrleftfoot wrote:I`m trying to think where I said Lebron , with his 4 mvps, three times finals mvps, 11 first team all nba honors to Jordan`s 10, first player since Russell to appear in 6 straight finals, 5 time all defensive first team, 1 time defensive player of the year honors and superior rebounding and assist numbers, was better than Jordan. Guess what, I didn`t .God forbid on this forum , where Lebron is the devil incarnate, despite being far more socially active and altruistic than the self - absorbed Jordan. But I digress. I said  think Magic was better. Throw  any numbers out there you want . Magic played against far better competition, the mid-80s Celtics for instance. Come back to me when Jordan switches from point guard, or in his case shooting guard, to center in the  middle of the finals with Parish and McHale patrolling the paint, and totally dominates.

mrkleen09 wrote:

jrleftfoot wrote:I`m trying to think where I said Lebron , with his 4 mvps, three times finals mvps, 11 first team all nba honors to Jordan`s 10, first player since Russell to appear in 6 straight finals, 5 time all defensive first team, 1 time defensive player of the year honors and superior rebounding and assist numbers, was better than Jordan. Guess what, I didn`t .God forbid on this forum , where Lebron is the devil incarnate, despite being far more socially active and altruistic than the self - absorbed Jordan. But I digress. I said  think Magic was better. Throw  any numbers out there you want . Magic played against far better competition, the mid-80s Celtics for instance. Come back to me when Jordan switches from point guard, or in his case shooting guard, to center in the  middle of the finals with Parish and McHale patrolling the paint, and totally dominates.

This conversation was happening before you showed up and offered Magic and every reply after you show up isnt directly speaking to you - try and follow along.

My response was to generally comment to KJ (about the conversation I had around Lebron) and to you calling MJ overhyped.  

I happen to agree that the competition in the NBA was better in the 80s than when Jordan played (and better by far than today), but to say that Magic dominated the Celtics - come on man.

swish wrote:

    I don't see how "competition" defines the caliber of play - which I believe to be the issue here. For the most part there seems to be a pattern, at least on this board, that is somewhat partial to the generation that they grew up in. (The good old days perhaps)

  swish

mrkleen09 wrote:

swish wrote:

    I don't see how "competition" defines the caliber of play - which I believe to be the issue here. For the most part there seems to be a pattern, at least on this board, that is somewhat partial to the generation that they grew up in. (The good old days perhaps)

  swish

Of course this is all subjective, but in terms of not understanding how better competition = better caliber of play, not sure what to tell you.

To me, its not about the good old days.  The 80s was by most objective measures, the best decade of NBA basketball.

The most superstars, more all time greats playing in the 80's than any other decade in NBA history. The 1986-87 season was also known as the "Golden Era" of the NBA. The 1987 NBA season featured up to 20 Hall of Fame players such as Magic Johnson, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, James Worthy, Larry Bird, Michael Jordan, Kevin McHale, Robert Parish, Moses Malone, Julius Erving, Isiah Thomas, Dominique Wilkins, Charles Barkley, Akeem Olajuwon, Clyde Drexler, Karl Malone, John Stockton, Alex English, Patrick Ewing, Adrian Dantley, Joe Dumars, and Dennis Rodman.  You look at the All Star teams in the mid 1980s and you see NO fluff at all.

cowens/oldschool wrote:80's all the way !!!!

Phil Pressey wrote:I wonder how some legacies might look if there had never been a star system. Lebron is great, but what if the refs hadn't been in his back pocket? Would he seem as transcendent?

He wasn't the best shooter. James never had to worry about fouling out. If he had gotten called more fairly on bully moves to the rim, I think he drops out of the top ten, perhaps the top 20. I also think Jordan was overrated for the same reason. Many people compare the NBA to professional wrestling.

The two are definitely some of the greatest players, but I think there was a lot of packaging and fluff too distorting the true history.

swish wrote:
Phil

 Check out the low foul count that Wilt and Russ were burden with as favorite sons - or was it a case of them just playing smart ?

  swish

mrkleen09 wrote:

jrleftfoot wrote:I`m trying to think where I said Lebron , with his 4 mvps, three times finals mvps, 11 first team all nba honors to Jordan`s 10, first player since Russell to appear in 6 straight finals, 5 time all defensive first team, 1 time defensive player of the year honors and superior rebounding and assist numbers, was better than Jordan. Guess what, I didn`t .God forbid on this forum , where Lebron is the devil incarnate, despite being far more socially active and altruistic than the self - absorbed Jordan. But I digress. I said  think Magic was better. Throw  any numbers out there you want . Magic played against far better competition, the mid-80s Celtics for instance. Come back to me when Jordan switches from point guard, or in his case shooting guard, to center in the  middle of the finals with Parish and McHale patrolling the paint, and totally dominates.

This conversation was happening before you showed up and offered Magic and every reply after you show up isnt directly speaking to you - try and follow along.

My response was to generally comment to KJ (about the conversation I had around Lebron) and to you calling MJ overhyped.  I happen to agree that the competition in the NBA was better in the 80s than when Jordan played (and better by far than today), but to say that Magic dominated the Celtics - come on man.[/quote                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       I was talking about that particular series when he played center, and yes, he dominated. Sorry if I interrupted a private conversation. I thought everybody was entitled to respond, especially since YOUR  response was  partially to me. My bad. Try to follow along? Getting a little testy are we?

Phil Pressey wrote:

swish wrote:
Phil

 Check out the low foul count that Wilt and Russ were burden with as favorite sons - or was it a case of them just playing smart ?

  swish

I would be guessing. The game seemed faster back then with a lot of chucking and less fouling in general. Did you notice a change in the league in regards to star calls? If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but in my opinion LeBron has gotten away with so much. I started watching around 1980. It seems that David Stern changed basketball from a pure sport to a television event.

I am a purist. I'd like to see no more palming, back to a step and a half before traveling and ref the game as if you don't know who the players are.

swish wrote:

cowens/oldschool wrote:80's all the way !!!!

Old/school

Excellent chance that the 80's gang would get croaked by the current crew.

 swish

cowens/oldschool wrote:

swish wrote:

cowens/oldschool wrote:80's all the way !!!!

Old/school

Excellent chance that the 80's gang would get croaked by the current crew.

 swish

Have to disagree, but don't know what scenario you have in mind

swish wrote:
  Phil

 Nothing wrong with being a purist - but over the years I've come to except the changes that take place in all sports - sort of a keeping up with the times attitude. As far as the foul call officiating - while the game has become much more physical over the decades - the whistle is blown less frequently. Back in the 50's-60's on average about 52 times a game, 80's about 50 times per game, this past year about 40 times a game. When it comes to favorable treatment for super stars - I just wonder if it just might be a case of the stars understanding the importance of their staying in the game. Who knows for sure. In my opinion the take over by Blacks, at the speed positions in the 1980's and continuing right to the present, is one of several major factors that have seen the talent level over the last 35 or so years far outdistance the early years.  

 swish

Phil Pressey wrote:

swish wrote:
  Phil

 Nothing wrong with being a purist - but over the years I've come to except the changes that take place in all sports - sort of a keeping up with the times attitude. As far as the foul call officiating - while the game has become much more physical over the decades - the whistle is blown less frequently. Back in the 50's-60's on average about 52 times a game, 80's about 50 times per game, this past year about 40 times a game. When it comes to favorable treatment for super stars - I just wonder if it just might be a case of the stars understanding the importance of their staying in the game. Who knows for sure. In my opinion the take over by Blacks, at the speed positions in the 1980's and continuing right to the present, is one of several major factors that have seen the talent level over the last 35 or so years far outdistance the early years.  

 swish

Thanks for the info. Those games must have gone on forever. I'm with Mike Gorman liking a quick two hour game.

I guess I agree with your take that the players today are bigger, faster and more efficient. Yet it might also be true that the greats of the past could have trained and ate like today's athlete and probably be as good. It is a never ending debate.

It's nice to have Brad Stevens because whatever direction the league is heading, he is competitive and forward thinking. Ainge is on a roll lately with draft picks. Smart is solid. Rozier is exceeding every expectation. He could have a higher ceiling than Marcus Smart? Smart was good for #6. Brown seemed like a crapshoot #3 pick last year, but now he is showing more reason to trust in Danny. Tatum could be the next transcendent player. I know, it could be Ball, Fultz, Simmons or someone no one is expecting. Tatum seems to have the it factor. I think this idea of an "it factor" can transcend eras and trends, and why I respect both sides of this debate.

We're a lot faster than the 1986 and 2008 teams. I guess play it out on video games. Maybe a statistician could simulate some answers. It was tried with boxing. I'm still not sure how Marciano beat Ali.

cowens/oldschool wrote:swish do we go with a starting 5 or can we add 3 subs?

mrkleen09 wrote:I apologize for starting this mess and there is clearly no way to prove era vs era.

If we played in the soft as a sneaker full of shit, touch foul, kick your leg out and get 3 shots era of today - not so sure.  

But if we are talking about the big boy days of the 80s, I subscribe to Cowens often stated philosophy that the 1986 Celtics would pound the modern day Warriors into a pulp.

cowens/oldschool wrote:Swish you should go with present, I'm going with 85-95.

You should go with 07-17, since you said present would croak 80's

swish wrote:In regards to your below statement
"Yet it might also be true that the greats of the past could have trained and ate like today's athlete and probably be as good. It is a never ending debate."

How true Phil. Sort of like saying that if the Wright Brothers had the Technology and materials of the present day they could have built a stealth bomber. They did the best with what they had to work with - a fantastic achievement for sure - the best of their day. It seems to be the history of man-kind - to keep building on the past.

swish