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

Phil Pressey wrote:

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

If Kelly Olynyk could transform his body in one year, I imagine Bird and McHale could have done the same. Gordon Hayward is kind of big. I doubt there was a leap in human evolution within twenty or forty years.

Perhaps Sullinger would have had a better career playing in the 80's.

Now everyone is bulking up while maintaining or increasing speed.

I agree with Cowens that the bigger teams seem to give Golden State the hardest time. A few years back when it became obvious GS was creating distance between themselves and the rest of the league, Memphis seemed to be the only one who could compete against them.

Another issue is money and contracts. Players that know their teammates well understand where to put the ball. It becomes automatic. The Bird era was called the green machine and it came in waves. Only injuries and then tragedy with Bias and possibly Lewis could have stopped that run.

Nowadays in addition to injuries and bad luck is the salary cap. Oklahoma couldn't keep Harden. We couldn't keep Avery.

Who wouldn't have wanted to keep Olynyk? He was inconsistent, but I'd take him over Theis and pretty much every backup we have for bigs. Kelly is gone because of money.

GM's now have to time their players' career arcs to fit team budgets. Did Red have that hurdle?

Maybe we don't want Marcus Smart and Rozier to become too good, too soon? It's crazy to think like this, but it's the new NBA?

+1

gyso wrote:

Phil Pressey wrote:

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

If Kelly Olynyk could transform his body in one year, I imagine Bird and McHale could have done the same. Gordon Hayward is kind of big. I doubt there was a leap in human evolution within twenty or forty years.

Perhaps Sullinger would have had a better career playing in the 80's.

Now everyone is bulking up while maintaining or increasing speed.

I agree with Cowens that the bigger teams seem to give Golden State the hardest time. A few years back when it became obvious GS was creating distance between themselves and the rest of the league, Memphis seemed to be the only one who could compete against them.

Another issue is money and contracts. Players that know their teammates well understand where to put the ball. It becomes automatic. The Bird era was called the green machine and it came in waves. Only injuries and then tragedy with Bias and possibly Lewis could have stopped that run.

Nowadays in addition to injuries and bad luck is the salary cap. Oklahoma couldn't keep Harden. We couldn't keep Avery.

Who wouldn't have wanted to keep Olynyk? He was inconsistent, but I'd take him over Theis and pretty much every backup we have for bigs. Kelly is gone because of money.

GM's now have to time their players' career arcs to fit team budgets. Did Red have that hurdle?

Maybe we don't want Marcus Smart and Rozier to become too good, too soon? It's crazy to think like this, but it's the new NBA?

+1

Some excellent points gyso. I just want to point out that I don't think that evolution is playing any role in the skill level development of athletes.

swish

Swish,

Read Phil's post again, please.

Phil said, "I doubt there was a leap in human evolution . . ."

Yes there were a lot of good points, that is one reason that he got a "+1". The other reason is that he is new here and while we do not have a point system on this board, we can still do the +1 thing.

gyso

gyso wrote:Swish,

Read Phil's post again, please.  

Phil said, "I doubt there was a leap in human evolution . . ."

Yes there were a lot of good points, that is one reason that he got a "+1".  The other reason is that he is new here and while we do not have a point system on this board, we can still do the +1 thing.

gyso

gyso

I should have made it clearer, that I totally agreed with HIS view on the affect of evolution.

swish

1986-87 Celtics versus 2016-17 Golden State seems like a fair test. I don't see how either team stops the other. It might look like an all-star game.

The players back then seemed to have a better understanding of the game. What about the rules? Which ones do you use? It'd be an awkward situation as in baseball with designated hitters versus pitchers hitting.

If it's you only get a step and a half, Golden State would break the record for traveling violations. Then Cowens wins. If Golden State is too fast and gets a lot of steals, then they win.

I finally looked more deeply into the original debate on the top 50 list. I think that is too small a number. It should be top 300 or at least 200. Ray Allen is in over Tiny Archibald? I don't think so. That's the problem with only including 50 names. It's probably all subjective after the first twenty. I don't remember Ray leading the league in both scoring and assists.

cowens/oldschool wrote:

mrkleen09 wrote:All you need to do is look at the 1992 Dream Team vs any Team USA since.  Literally no comparison.

exactly, good point, looks like someone is having problems walking the talk

Terrible comparison - 25 years ago the level of international play was a far cry from its current level. Many players that now play on the international Olympic teams now play in the nba.

swish

swish wrote:

 Terrible comparison - 25 years ago the level of international play was a far cry from its current level.  Many players that now play on the international Olympic teams now play in the nba.

  swish

So wait.  You think the 1992 Dream Team would struggle in the olympics now that there is better international talent?  LOL.

You can take ANY NBA ALL STAR TEAM since 1992 - with all the international players you want  VS. the Dream Team. Hell you can take any NBA All Star team in HISTORY vs. the Dream Team.

Lets see your list Swish.

I'll take my 60's Celtics team or my 60s all NBA team against any of your modern teams. 60's rules apply until it's 3-0 and then you get the 3point shot. Start a new thread and let's get it on.

cowens/oldschool wrote:

mrkleen09 wrote:

swish wrote:

 Terrible comparison - 25 years ago the level of international play was a far cry from its current level.  Many players that now play on the international Olympic teams now play in the nba.

  swish

So wait.  You think the 1992 Dream Team would struggle in the olympics now that there is better international talent?  LOL.

You can take ANY NBA ALL STAR TEAM since 1992 - with all the international players you want  VS. the Dream Team.  Hell you can take any NBA All Star team in HISTORY vs. the Dream Team.

Lets see your list Swish.

I'm waiting too

Be patient - It's a coming.

swish

mrkleen09 wrote:

swish wrote:

 Terrible comparison - 25 years ago the level of international play was a far cry from its current level.  Many players that now play on the international Olympic teams now play in the nba.

  swish

So wait.  You think the 1992 Dream Team would struggle in the olympics now that there is better international talent?  LOL.

You can take ANY NBA ALL STAR TEAM since 1992 - with all the international players you want  VS. the Dream Team.  Hell you can take any NBA All Star team in HISTORY vs. the Dream Team.

Lets see your list Swish.

mrkleen

Sorry for the delay - other pressing matters - Here's my team taken from the 2016-17 season.

Front court,,,, DeAndre Jordan,Rudy Gobert, LeBron James, Kevin Durant, Karl Anthony Towns, Kawhi Leonard, Anthony Davis.
Back court,,,, Stephen Curry, Chris Paul, Klay Thompson, Kyrie Irving.

swish

cowens/oldschool wrote:Swish you should break it down to 5 starters and then the bench. You've got 11 players, that's fine, lets me add more high level quality too.

I'll go with Magic Jordan Bird Olajuwon and Kareem, thought might as well go twin towers and Olajuwon is such a devastating 2 way player, so athletic, great skills, so relentless and fast, covers everything, he would make Kareems job easier by being all world at everything, running the floor, plus the dirty work at such a high athletic level. Actually he makes all the starters better, all the lob passes he'll be getting from Magic and Bird and his finishing power. All time leader in blocked shots....makes our defense gell the way he can cover up for everybody.

on the bench McHale Pippen Barkley Drexler Isiah Shaq

McHale would be first big off the bench, can play so well with either starting big, love having versatility of Drexler and Pippen at wing and both ends. I had to add the little speed demon Isiah Thomas, another great 2 way player that is 5 tool and has a history of doing it all and in the clutch and when he played I hated him. How's Steph Curry gonna do when I throw Jordan, Pippen and Isiah on him?

You have 2 bigs that are terrible offensively in all star levels and can't hit their fritos....so I had to add Shaq. for some serious bully ball.

  Your below statement.

   "80's all the way !!!!"

    Stick to those players that only played on the teams of 1980-81 through 1989-90.

  swish

cowens/oldschool wrote:Well all my players except Shaq played in the 80's and Shaq was eligible for 92 Dream Team, but staff made a mistake going with Laetner. I was fine with a 10 year stretch, so if I'm going with 85-95 Shaq is eligible, but I only picked Shaq as my last player because you had 2 offensively challenged centers that can't hit FT's so I thought I'd add Shaq to add to the bigs that can't shoot theme. 

You had 07-17, why didn't you add KG, Dirk, Pierce, Kobe or Russell Westbrook? Chris Paul is a slow ball dominant choke artist, who cannot get it done ever at crunch time in a big playoff series. I can take Shaq off my team, that's fine.

I'm perfectly happy with the players that I selected - had no need to pick up players that played many years ago. The ones I selected would do just fine against your 80's greats.

swish

cowens/oldschool wrote:I think you could have picked a much better team and my team has no problem with your team. I think it would be so easy, I don't even want to debate, because it would be that easy and I don't want to pick on your weak picks and team.

Not so fast - at least tell me why. Heading to bed now - catch you tomorrow.

swish

Good list Swish - but IMO, not even close to the Dream Team.  I have it at 8-1 with two pushes.

Dream Team Swish Picks Notes Winner

David Robinson vs. DeAndre Jordan - DeAndre could hold his own defensively and rebounding, but David Robinson would score on him at will.
Winner Dream Team

Patrick Ewing vs. Rudy Gobert - Gobet has potential, but Ewing is much more powerful and much much better scorer
Winner Dream Team

Larry Bird vs. Lebron James  - I think this is as even as any on the board here
Call it a PUSH

Scottie Pippen vs. Kevin Durant  - If anyone in NBA history could stop KD, it would be Pippen.  Give a slight edge to Durant
Winner Swish

Michael Jordan vs Kawhi Leonard - GOAT vs a good young player.  MJ all day.
Winner Dream Team

Clyde Drexler vs Kyrie Irving - Two very different players.  Kyrie could get his shot, but in no way could he deal with Clyde's power.
Winner Dream Team

Karl Malone vs Karl Anthony Towns  - Interesting matchup.  Towns is a good young player and his 3 point shot would give Malone trouble.  But again, Karl Malone is way strong and much better down low
Winner Dream Team

John Stockton vs Chris Paul - Both great players.  
Call this a PUSH

Chris Mullin vs Klay Thompson  - Very similar players.  In comparing their best season to date - Mullin had more points, more assists, more rebounds, more steals and higher shooting %
Winner Dream Team

Charles Barkley vs Anthony Davis  - Again very similar stats.  But Barkley best season bests Davis in every category.
Winner Dream Team

Magic Johnson vs Stephen Curry - Magic could not cover Steph in 3 point land, but Magic would eat Curry alive down low.  Gotta to give this to Magic
Winner - Dream Team

Bob Cousy, Sam Jones, Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, Elgin Baylor,
Oscar Robertson, John Havlicek, Jerry West, Willis Reed, Elvin Hayes,
Jerry Lucas, Rick Barry,

Nobody scores on this team in the paint. Not Larry, not MJ, not nobody

60 rules and no 3pt shot and it will never be closer than 4-2

Add the 3pt shot and no doubt the logo and Barry kill it.

Need a 60 point game? No one stops Wilt

Defense wins championships and this team can't be matched.

Have fun

cowens/oldschool wrote:

mulcogiseng wrote:Bob Cousy, Sam Jones, Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, Elgin Baylor,
Oscar Robertson, John Havlicek, Jerry West, Willis Reed, Elvin Hayes,
Jerry Lucas, Rick Barry,

Nobody scores on this team in the paint. Not Larry, not MJ, not nobody

60 rules and no 3pt shot and it will never be closer than 4-2

Add the 3pt shot and no doubt the logo and Barry kill it.

Need a 60 point game? No one stops Wilt

Defense wins championships and this team can't be matched.

Have fun  

I like your team better than swish's

I agree that is a great team - and I think scoring down low against that 60s team would be difficult for sure.

But I dont see who on that team is dealing with Magic - certainly not Cousy, West or Rick Barry. And if you slide Robertson over, who is left to deal with Michael Jordan?Who is covering Barkley or Pippen on that 60s team? The big men are too slow and the fast players are not strong enough.

There is no way to answer this anyway - great fodder for speculation.

Glad to see another generation (mulcogiseng) joining in with his team. I'll weigh in soon with my defense of the current decade.

swish

Mrkleen - oldschool

This board seems to favor the old timers quite strongly when dealing with "Greatest" polls. In my opinion it's a case of name association based on memories of the stars of their youth. Call it a touch of the "good old days"
Recognizing the huge improvement in the talent level over the last 70 years is quite simple - the improvement since the late 40's has been much more then significant. Even the last 25 years or so has seen real change.
The 1991-92 USA Olympic team vs my selected group from 2016-17
Weight,,,,, front court,,,,, Average weight - 235.1
2 point average shooting percentages,,,,, All players,,,,, - 529. 9%

My selected group
Weight,,,,, Front court,,,,, average weight - 246.7
2 point average shooting percentages,,,,, all players,,,,,,- 574.8

* Used figures from 1991-92 and 2016-17
** figures for Magic were for 1990-91 - he didn't play in 1991-92.
*** Did't use Laettner - No pro figures

swish