Gordon Hayward is better than John Havlicek

[jongib369]

A lot of your posts goes off topic, and I won't bother ranking players not related to the discussion.

How can you watch the tapes you posted and come to that conclusion? It is more than stylistic changes, which none the less can also improves efficiency on the court, and have. Watch the types of passes, shots, and plays they make. It is blatantly obvious, especially if you have grown up playing basketball.
Strategy and time, as well as money are the biggest reasons for improvement in basketball, and other sports too.
$100 million dollar contracts? Of course players are going to be more invested and spend more time when the money is that nice. Literally everything is monitored, tracked and almost everything is done to make sure these individuals pan out or maximize their skill. This wasn't done in the 50's or 60's. Not even in the 80's so much, but the game was naturally evolving and we saw great progression.

Like with any model, the three main components to growth are capital and labour. Your capital is your players. Basketball is more played than it ever was, and capital component of the growth is probably maxed out if anything. The talent pool is all there essentially.
Labour is the hours spent in fine tuning the skills. This has obviously risen exponentially, and training now is far more specific, basketball focused and fine tuned than ever before. Yet there are still probably improvements to be made if we can have a guy like Curry and Durant come along and be able to shoot off the dribble the way they do. Obviously even more specific and better training methods can be incorporated.
Then there is technology. This is tactics, defensive and offensive schemes, etc. With rule changes these are constantly changing, but as a whole, players now are undeniably better defensively particularly, than ever before. There are so many less leak out plays, and easy points than ever before in basketball.
Once labour and capital max out, this is where the progression comes from, though I believe we are still a few decades away from this sport maxing out in terms of "the perfect team" or the highest level of competition.

I know how popular basketball was, I know how integrated it was as well. Furthermore, I know how young it was then, and relatively speaking, still is right now.



I browsed your post, you made good points but I'm not going to actually give it a serious read until you answer my questions. They are not off topic, I think there was a failure to understand why I was asking.

John Havlicek was born in 1940, so that means if he started playing basketball at the age of 10, he was learning the game that was played like this

1950 High school
https://youtu.be/M7o2wdyeews

What would be his freshman year, in his own state
College game
Lockland vs Reading 1954 Ohio Basketball (1 of 1) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnuAtFa5zXM)

High school
1954 IHSAA State Championship Milan v.s Muncie Central
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZ1_4YCGiLw)


His Senior year
College
Northwestern Basketball vs. Ohio State University, 2/10/1958
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqXN2ECI9zw)
Highschool
Decatur High School versus Eisenhower High School Basketball
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LunL_fLCEc)

John Havliceks/Jerry Lucas/Bobby Knights 1960 NCAA title
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Os8F5h4oid4)

Utah vs USC Basketball 03/07/1960
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNoN2sr6Wmc)


Gordon Hayward 1990

2000 NCAA Basketball National Championship - Florida vs Michigan State
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UwjhbBD2IA4)

2000 IHSA Boys Basketball Class AA Championship Game: Aurora (West Aurora) vs. Chi. (Westinghouse) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ijr5bDgleRs)

2004 High School Boys Basketball - Galesburg vs. Moline
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUqusbXMZ6I)


Gordon Haywards state finals
IHSAA 2008 Boys Basketball 4A State Finals - Marion vs. Brownsburg (4th Qtr)
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhKTbNDwskk)

If what you say is true, there is no way in hell that John is as good of a player as Gordon Hayward, right?


The last game of a basketball legend - John "Hondo" Havlicek. The seven minute standing ovation the Boston Garden crowd gives him is truly remarkable, I even had to cut it a little bit, so it wouldn't last for too long. The standing O might even be more spectacular than the actual game. Hondo doesn't shoot particularly well, but I guess what matters in this kind of a game is that the C's win and even at the age of 38 Havlicek fills out the stat sheet. April 9, 1978. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Vekb4RhplI)

The fact that someone who grew up learning basketball during those early periods, could still compete as late as 1978 shows how beta the league was back then XD

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:


Does anyone doubt Dr J would be a force today?

I believe he cited Havlicek as his toughest defender.

I still can't find it, but know I've seen it...At least I'm pretty sure :lol

I hate to make an assumption of Plowkings opinion...But if John was indeed Ervings toughest defender even at that state of his career, and in Plowkings mind John would be at best average today in his prime....Does that mean he also thinks Doc would be shut down or at least SIGNIFICANTLY hindered by the "superior" Kawhi Leonard, or Hayward? To the point of being "average" himself? There's no denying that Kawhi is an amazing player/defender. Him having the bigger, more athletic body would be more suited for guarding him....Though with not as much stamina most likely.

"Then there is technology. This is tactics, defensive and offensive schemes, etc. With rule changes these are constantly changing, but as a whole, players now are undeniably better defensively particularly, than ever before. There are so many less leak out plays, and easy points than ever before in basketball."

"Michael Jordan is an outlier. Though he is an outlier far further along that progression curve than Havlicek. An average wing player, like Gordon Hayward probably is as good, if not better. "


http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--5AQgiQVF--/1922q2524ur0xjpg.jpg

1972 NBA vs ABA All-Star Game
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nN17x5up5n4), I've got a good memory in certain areas, but the details of this game completely escapes me atm. I'll watch to see if they guarded each other

NBA
*John Havlicek - 17pts
*Connie Hawkins - 6pts
*Wilt Chamberlain - 6pts
*Oscar Robertson - 14pts
*Archie Clark - 15pts
Bob Lanier - 15pts
Nate Archibald - 12pts
Bob Love - 10pts
Gail Goodrich - 8pts
Paul Silas - 3pts

ABA
*Rick Barry - 11pts
*Dan Issel - 8pts
*Artis Gilmore - 14pts
*Jimmy Jones - 7pts
*Donnie Freeman - 16pts
Julius Erving - 13pts
Ralph Simpson 12pts
Willie Wise - 12pts
George Thompson - 7pts
Roger Brown - 2pts
Mel Daniels - 2pts

I don't think the outcome of this game means anything...I'll have to see if they evev guarded eachother, and their shot attempts/% based off that. But As far as the seasons they played in the NBA against each other, when John was old, he held him to an astounding 1-2 points less per game (lol)...No idea about the FG% though, which would be more revealing as to Hondos D on him. But if the man DID say John was the toughest, I'll take his word for it

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=ervinju01&p2=havlijo01

[jongib369]

Obviously I'm not being serious, but if what plowking said is true, and I'm understanding him correctly Gordon would absolutely trash John

[Genaro]

Too long didn't read and won't.

[jongib369]

Too long didn't read and won't.
Awesome, go back to your picture books, and ESPN highlights

[MMKM]

Is that statement even debatable?

Steve Blake is better than Bob Cousy

[72-10]

hopefully the OP will be blocked soon and thread deleted

[jongib369]

Is that statement even debatable?

Steve Blake is better than Bob Cousy
Hopefully posters with attention spans longer than 2 seconds will give the time to actually watch, and answer this. I believe it to be a completely legitimate point to bring up.

[warriorfan]

hopefully the OP will be blocked soon and thread deleted
:roll:

[Jameerthefear]

didn't read. go to sleep old timer

[jongib369]

hopefully the OP will be blocked soon and thread deleted
I know right, god forbid this boards topics aren't 99% Kobe hating, or Curry **** sucking threads

[jongib369]

Boogie>Nate Thurmond

Kirk>West

Ben Gordon>Gail Goodrich

Dwight/Whiteside>Russell/Wilt

Faried/Love/Ibaka>Pettit/Hayes/McAdoo

I see the light, how foolish I've been


Could you imagine the beat down Dwight would put on Kareem? If Thurmond who was obviously inferior to the defensive teachings of today could hold Kareem to about 44-45%...Dwight would have him at what? 35%?

[LoneyROY7]

Hayward would absolutely manhande Havlicek. :oldlol:

[jongib369]

Hayward would absolutely manhande Havlicek. :oldlol:
Gordon is a strong guy, but no. He'd get his, and even have games where he'd out perform Havlicek. But that guy who learned basketball from those 40s/50s scrubs would overall outperform Hayward. In my opinion at least

[MMKM]

Gordon is a strong guy, but no. He'd get his, and even have games where he'd out perform Havlicek. But that guy who learned basketball from those 40s/50s scrubs would overall outperform Hayward. In my opinion at least

Cool well that settles it

[jongib369]

Cool well that settles it
Where the **** is kblaze? Does he come on here anymore? I'd love to hear his opinion on this actually

[MMKM]

Havlicek was 6'5. He was smaller, less athletic and less skilled than Hayward. He would have a hard time even making a D1 college roster in today's game. Even John Havlicek would tell you that John Havlicek would get destroyed by Gordon Hayward. Anyone who watches game film of each of them could tell who is better. I could show game film of each of them to a little girl who knows nothing about basketball and she would pick Gordon Hayward for her team. It is that obvious. No one could possibly really think Hondo is better than any current forward in the NBA. If you do, Trump should ban you from the United States.

[bdreason]

Obviously the average player is superior in the modern game, but I don't think that applies as much when comparing elite players.

In 1971, Havlicek averaged 29/9/8 on 45/82%. That's almost a 30 point triple double. Now, you could say it's because of pace or competition or whatever, but let's look at Kareem Abdul Jabbar's offensive output the same season.

In 1971, Kareem averaged 32/16/3 on 58/69%, which was also his 2nd highest scoring average of his entire career. That means that Kareem, arguably the greatest scorer in the history of the sport, only averaged 3 more PPG than a guy who would get "manhandled" by Gordon Hayward?

I guess that would make Kareem what? A Serge Ibaka level player in the modern league? Sorry, I'm not buying it. Truly elite players transcend generations.

[MMKM]

Obviously the average player is superior in the modern game, but I don't think that applies as much when comparing elite players.

In 1971, Havlicek averaged 29/9/8 on 45/82%. That's almost a 30 point triple double. Now, you could say it's because of pace or competition or whatever, but let's look at Kareem Abdul Jabbar's offensive output the same season.

In 1971, Kareem averaged 32/16/3 on 58/69%, which was also his 2nd highest scoring average of his entire career. That means that Kareem, arguably the greatest scorer in the history of the sport, only averaged 3 more PPG than a guy who would get "manhandled" by Gordon Hayward?

I guess that would make Kareem what? A Serge Ibaka level player in the modern league? Sorry, I'm not buying it. Truly elite players transcend generations.

The perimeter game has evolved 10x as much as the post game. That explains it.

You can't equivocate 2 peoples stats and claim that because one would survive today's game, so would the other.

Here:
Mikan played well in Cousys era
Cousy played well in Russell's era
Russell played well in wilts era
Wilt played well in Kareem's era
Kareem played well in magics era
Magic played well in Jordan's era
Jordan played well in Shaq era
Shaq played well in kobes era
Kobe played well in lebrons era

Therefore they are all linked so Mikan would play well in today's game. That's faulty logic. All you have to do is look at game film, Kareem would still be a beast Hondo would suck balls it's that simple

[bdreason]

The perimeter game has evolved 10x as much as the post game. That explains it.


So how much would Gordon Hayward average in 1971?

[MMKM]

So how much would Gordon Hayward average in 1971?

75 ppg. Read my edit, this isn't that complicated

[bdreason]

It's been 20 years since prime MJ. I guess in another 20 years or so, the average perimeter player will be as good or better than MJ. Evolution of the perimeter game, right?

Kind of strange that the greatest perimeter player of all-time played 20 years ago. You would think the natural evolution of the sport would have produced multiple, superior, perimeter players by now. I mean, easier travel, better diets, better training, better mathematics, better understanding of offensive and defensive schemes, and what did it all produce in the last 20 years of "basketball evolution"?


James Harden. :facepalm

[TheBigVeto]

LOL no. Hayward is a great player, top 10 in his position currently but Havlicek is 2nd GOAT SG after Jordan dawg.

[jongib369]

It's been 20 years since prime MJ. I guess in another 20 years or so, the average perimeter player will be as good or better than MJ. Evolution of the perimeter game, right?

Kind of strange that the greatest perimeter player of all-time played 20 years ago. You would think the natural evolution of the sport would have produced multiple, superior, perimeter players by now. I mean, easier travel, better diets, better training, better mathematics, better understanding of offensive and defensive schemes, and what did it all produce in the last 20 years of "basketball evolution"?


James Harden. :facepalm
http://40.media.tumblr.com/7b8d6441c09e06f1d195768349929b48/tumblr_nurzdzbTTa1qm9rypo1_1280.jpg

http://oi63.tinypic.com/2qnbq7o.jpg

http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa258/thefreshprince101/Sports%20Pictures/8485sixersdrjdefensefl0.jpg

http://thesource.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/kobe-jordan.jpg

http://warriorsworld.bayareaballllc1.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/8261672.jpg

[jongib369]

https://41.media.tumblr.com/41d9248ee2bb25988d04f29769d5427c/tumblr_nzdxelX8Kb1td15w4o1_540.jpg

"The year before I came into the NBA, Neil Johnston was third in the league in scoring, and I was worried about him from the start. I wasn't worried about his shooting; Neil had a low-trajectory, soft little hook, and I figured I could block nine out of 10 of them. But this created a new problem for me. If I did block them Neil would surely change his style against me and come up with something I probably couldn't handle as easily. So I took the psychological route. I would let him alone just enough to keep him puzzled; block just enough so that he wouldn't get riled and try something new. I would keep a little mental boxscore and make sure the score came out in our favor. Or try, anyway." (http://celticspride.pixnet.net/blog/post/24638835-bill-russell%3A-the-psych...and-my-other-tricks)


https://41.media.tumblr.com/2b39323b7656c755427120cacd624f3a/tumblr_nzdx9sXkb51td15w4o1_540.jpg
https://40.media.tumblr.com/cf5a9ba00758a2fcccea06ac82dc76b3/tumblr_nzdx9sXkb51td15w4o3_1280.jpg
https://36.media.tumblr.com/2a1a35378ca24970b2354ff325823c58/tumblr_nzdx9sXkb51td15w4o2_1280.jpg
http://lakers.topbuzz.com/gallery/d/4292-1/kareem-vs-wilt-52301.jpg
https://images.rapgenius.com/265d4c0571dbc3835280114085121848.650x767x1.jpg
https://40.media.tumblr.com/02bbf96609c2fcc48ea1eda2a1918639/tumblr_nzdxpgAlAT1td15w4o1_540.jpg
http://i.usatoday.net/communitymanager/_photos/game-on/2012/03/09/howshqx-large.jpg

[plowking]

It's been 20 years since prime MJ. I guess in another 20 years or so, the average perimeter player will be as good or better than MJ. Evolution of the perimeter game, right?

Kind of strange that the greatest perimeter player of all-time played 20 years ago. You would think the natural evolution of the sport would have produced multiple, superior, perimeter players by now. I mean, easier travel, better diets, better training, better mathematics, better understanding of offensive and defensive schemes, and what did it all produce in the last 20 years of "basketball evolution"?


James Harden. :facepalm

Again, you and the OP are using faulty logic as someone mentioned.

Basketball is a young game, as I've said several times. There is still room for growth. It takes time to reach that level. As you progress in time, the progression in the game slows though the median/mean continues to progress, so you get a flattening of this progression curve.

Just like running. Eventually we will not be able to beat a 100m time that is set. Someone will eventually reach that point, until several hundreds of years passes and something changes.

Michael Jordan is an outlier. Though he is an outlier far further along that progression curve than Havlicek. An average wing player, like Gordon Hayward probably is as good, if not better.
Like supercars of 20 years ago being slower than an Audi S3 today. A sports hatch today completely killing Ferraris and Lambos of 20 years ago. Eventually we will get to a point, where the car can't get much quicker, and a current outlier is, and always will be in line with any possible future ones.
Such is the case with guys like Shaq and Jordan for example.

[jongib369]

Again, you and the OP are using faulty logic as someone mentioned.

Basketball is a young game, as I've said several times. There is still room for growth. It takes time to reach that level. As you progress in time, the progression in the game slows though the median/mean continues to progress, so you get a flattening of this progression curve.

Just like running. Eventually we will not be able to beat a 100m time that is set. Someone will eventually reach that point, until several hundreds of years passes and something changes.

Michael Jordan is an outlier. Though he is an outlier far further along that progression curve than Havlicek. An average wing player, like Gordon Hayward probably is as good, if not better.
Like supercars of 20 years ago being slower than an Audi S3 today. A sports hatch today completely killing Ferraris and Lambos of 20 years ago. Eventually we will get to a point, where the car can't get much quicker, and a current outlier is, and always will be in line with any possible future ones.
Such is the case with guys like Shaq and Jordan for example.
Do you have a list of outliers from the 50s/60s?

I shit posted and purposefully exaggerated my points...But I don't see how my logic is faulty. With how inferior the game was supposedly, I don't see how you can then say Havlicek is even close, even if an outlier from his time since he wasn't as much of one as Jordan. Obviously lol

Like what did John accel at in your eyes that could make him still be a star today, and then what are glaring holes?

[MMKM]

It's been 20 years since prime MJ. I guess in another 20 years or so, the average perimeter player will be as good or better than MJ. Evolution of the perimeter game, right?

Kind of strange that the greatest perimeter player of all-time played 20 years ago. You would think the natural evolution of the sport would have produced multiple, superior, perimeter players by now. I mean, easier travel, better diets, better training, better mathematics, better understanding of offensive and defensive schemes, and what did it all produce in the last 20 years of "basketball evolution"?


James Harden. :facepalm

Just because I said the guard game has evolved more than the post game, that doesn't mean it will continue to do so. Again, faulty logic.

Dude think what you want, I mean all I have to do is watch the film but whatevs. Not gonna convince you otherwise so to each his own.

[MMKM]

Do you have a list of outliers from the 50s/60s?

I shit posted and purposefully exaggerated my points...But I don't see how my logic is faulty. With how inferior the game was supposedly, I don't see how you can then say Havlicek is even close, even if an outlier from his time.

Like what did John accel at in your eyes that could make him still be a star today, and then what are glaring holes?

Uh glaring holes ok he was a 6'5 forward and he could barely get above the rim, he shot 43% career and averaged 6 rpg against competition inferior to today's game. He had the ball handling ability of a decent high school player. Basically the thing he did best was shoot free throws and shot a stationary shot at 6'5 with an occasional runner, that's getting destroyed in today's game

[jongib369]

Also, since we're talking outliers...

Obviously there's no way of knowing, but to get a better sense of your opinion...What % of the players from these decades would make the league today. As is, or if given a summer to learn/adjust if you think it'd make a difference

50s

60s

70s

80s

90s

[Psileas]

Havlicek was 6'5. He was smaller, less athletic and less skilled than Hayward. He would have a hard time even making a D1 college roster in today's game. Even John Havlicek would tell you that John Havlicek would get destroyed by Gordon Hayward. Anyone who watches game film of each of them could tell who is better. I could show game film of each of them to a little girl who knows nothing about basketball and she would pick Gordon Hayward for her team. It is that obvious. No one could possibly really think Hondo is better than any current forward in the NBA. If you do, Trump should ban you from the United States.

The little girl would also pick James White over Larry Bird as well and it would be pretty obvious, too.
Do you realize Havlicek faced a lot of players that Magic and Bird faced and was still able to compete against them at age 38? Or that, somehow, Magic and Bird facing those game guys wasn't automatically transforming them into 50 point monsters or their 70's opponents into scrubs?


The perimeter game has evolved 10x as much as the post game. That explains it.

You can't equivocate 2 peoples stats and claim that because one would survive today's game, so would the other.

Here:
Mikan played well in Cousys era
Cousy played well in Russell's era
Russell played well in wilts era
Wilt played well in Kareem's era
Kareem played well in magics era
Magic played well in Jordan's era
Jordan played well in Shaq era
Shaq played well in kobes era
Kobe played well in lebrons era

Therefore they are all linked so Mikan would play well in today's game. That's faulty logic. All you have to do is look at game film, Kareem would still be a beast Hondo would suck balls it's that simple

THAT is faulty logic. All you have to do is explore and exploit all the talents that the old player would have and would transfer well into today's era and which you, completely wrongfully, assume Mikan and Havlicek had none because they were just cultivated to fit in the 50's/70's (only partially, of course, because the pioneers of the game are the ones who set the eras, without them, we'd still be many decades back, basketball-wise). Why the hell should I assume that Mikan would be unable to compete today because 40's/50's gameplay was instilled in him? There is absolutely ZERO evidence that how he played in his era would be his maximum capacity talent-wise playing in a latter era and him toying with his current opposition leads me to believe that the evidence is not just zero, it's negative.

[MMKM]

Ok well I've said my piece. You take the guy who's 6'5, can barely dribble and plays below the rim, averages 6 rpg and shoots 43% career. I'll draft Gordon Hayward. I guess we are just seeing differently. Some people like antiques, prefer PAC Man over PS4, like classic cars, drinking an ice cold Coke out of a glass bottle.... I'm guessing you are one of those guys. Not judging, we just see it differently.

[jongib369]

Ok well I've said my piece. You take the guy who's 6'5, can barely dribble and plays below the rim, averages 6 rpg and shoots 43% career. I'll draft Gordon Hayward. I guess we are just seeing differently. Some people like antiques, prefer PAC Man over PS4, like classic cars, drinking an ice cold Coke out of a glass bottle.... I'm guessing you are one of those guys. Not judging, we just see it differently.
https://youtu.be/8Vekb4RhplI

That's his very last game in 1978, after putting up respectable numbers season wise for a 37 year old at that time. A lot of players in the league at that point played at least college ball in the late 60s playing in the nba into the 80s, and didn't just destroy the early 60s late 50s college players that went pro. At what year does John go from star, to just ordinary? 1985? 1995?

[jongib369]

Does anyone know Kerrs stats versus other bigs? Like Mikan, Lovelette, Russell, Wilt, Bellemy, Thurmond etc

I heard Kerr got ejected for getting so mad at Russell blocking most of his shots their first meeting...I assume that wasnt always the case later on, as he must of adjusted. He started in 54 and ended around 65 or 6 I believe.

[DrakeTheSnake]

Those are some interesting beliefs.

[jongib369]

I know Lovelette put up 20+ on Wilt and Russell the first few seasons. About a point more on Wilt


http://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/71c6ad9b95a2821dace4416f5ab7c8e93a9f4b48/c=0-181-2321-1929&r=x383&c=540x380/local/-/media/Indianapolis/Indianapolis/2014/03/26//1395840130000-AP07060609351.jpg

https://cbsla.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/2193642.jpg?w=640&h=360&crop=1

[jongib369]

Those are some interesting beliefs.
What is? That not all those 50s/60s players aren't as bad as some seem to think? It's a radical idea, I know

[jongib369]

The little girl would also pick James White over Larry Bird as well and it would be pretty obvious, too.
Do you realize Havlicek faced a lot of players that Magic and Bird faced and was still able to compete against them at age 38? Or that, somehow, Magic and Bird facing those game guys wasn't automatically transforming them into 50 point monsters or their 70's opponents into scrubs?



THAT is faulty logic. All you have to do is explore and exploit all the talents that the old player would have and would transfer well into today's era and which you, completely wrongfully, assume Mikan and Havlicek had none because they were just cultivated to fit in the 50's/70's (only partially, of course, because the pioneers of the game are the ones who set the eras, without them, we'd still be many decades back, basketball-wise). Why the hell should I assume that Mikan would be unable to compete today because 40's/50's gameplay was instilled in him? There is absolutely ZERO evidence that how he played in his era would be his maximum capacity talent-wise playing in a latter era and him toying with his current opposition leads me to believe that the evidence is not just zero, it's negative.
Thanks for taking the time to respond to some of this! Guy thinks Gordon would average 75 a game, Jesus lmao

Hope that was an exaggeration like I did myself lol

[bdreason]

Just because I said the guard game has evolved more than the post game, that doesn't mean it will continue to do so. Again, faulty logic.

Dude think what you want, I mean all I have to do is watch the film but whatevs. Not gonna convince you otherwise so to each his own.


And how do you explain the SG position actually REGRESSING over the past 20 years? Who are the best SG's today? Harden and Thompson? Would anyone in their right minds take those two players over Jordan and Drexler? Where is the progression?


I also thinks it's important to separate player abilities from league rules. You look at an old video clip and think players can't handle the ball because they are playing under a different rule-set. Let's see how well Gordon Hayward can bring the ball up the court when he can't palm the ball on every dribble. Let's see how effective his slashing abilities are when there's a big camped in the paint, and traveling rules are actually enforced.


Now, for the record, I have already acknowledged that the average player in the modern game is superior to the average player in the 50/60/70's, but John Havlicek was not an average player.

[90sgoat]

I've changed my mind on topics like this, not least because I get to actually watch footage due to so many great posters here collecting that old stuff. When you get the chance to really watch decades of play, you begin to understand what basketball really is like on the fundamental level.

The first discovery I made is that extreme athleticism makes for great highlight reels and myth, but in the game of basketball, it is simply not enough to make you a great player. Remember, we're playing basketball, not doing track and field.

Second, the level of athleticism needed to compete in the NBA has not changed that much. We have guys like Kevin Love, who can barely dunk, lead the league in rebounding. We have 5'3'' Mugsy Bogues having an illustrious career (he could not dunk). Tiago Splitter won 2 rings and have the weakest stand still vertical I've ever seen, he would look like a stiff compared to Mikan if you black and white'd it.

Third, I discovered that 'style' changes and that some players have a style which is only adopted a decade or more later. Pistol Pete Maravich did passes and played in a way which would make him a surefire all star. Oscar Robertson could walk in from the street today and be absolutely right at home with a pick and roll, pick and pop game, that was his literal game if you watch the footage. Doctor J likewise, right of the street as an athletic win into current NBA. Wilt, Kareem, likewise, their game was so advanced at their era that they wouldn't even need any time to adjust.

Of course, not all great players have a game which is instantly recognized as being transferable. Larry Bird to most new fans look funny, not flashy, sort of lame with those short shorts and moustache, yet not a soul doubts Bird is one of the greatest ever. You could find many teams of the 80s who had a style which transcends eras, Pistons are a good example, but that doesn't mean they are better? Bird is better, much better.

Which leads me to my conclusion. We vastly overrate how long it would take great NBA players to learn and adopt to new styles and rules. We see this because of those players who play several decades.

John Stockton played and dominated in 3 decades with a fairly basic, simple toolset. Stockton would not look vastly different in black and white 60s Celtics uniform. Stockton was not a great athlete but beat many great athletes. Bird was not a great athlete but beat many GOAT athletes. Oscar was a great athlete but lost to lesser athletes.

Essentially, what makes a great basketball player is not flair or how flashy a crossover, it is the fundamentals, the body control to feign, the quick mind to pass, drive, shoot, the fundamental technical ability shoot, pass, drive. It's basketball and not track and field. If you give Hondo six months, I am sure he'd be dribbling with semi-carry like the rest, he'd get measured at 6-6 like Barkley was (who was max 6-5), he'd spend a summer working on his shot, so it looked more 'standard' and then he'd come back and be a better Gordon Hayward and just like Hayward, he'd use his high bball IQ and dominate better athletes like he dominated better athletes back then.

[jongib369]

I've changed my mind on topics like this, not least because I get to actually watch footage due to so many great posters here collecting that old stuff. When you get the chance to really watch decades of play, you begin to understand what basketball really is like on the fundamental level.

The first discovery I made is that extreme athleticism makes for great highlight reels and myth, but in the game of basketball, it is simply not enough to make you a great player. Remember, we're playing basketball, not doing track and field.

Second, the level of athleticism needed to compete in the NBA has not changed that much. We have guys like Kevin Love, who can barely dunk, lead the league in rebounding. We have 5'3'' Mugsy Bogues having an illustrious career (he could not dunk). Tiago Splitter won 2 rings and have the weakest stand still vertical I've ever seen, he would look like a stiff compared to Mikan if you black and white'd it.

Third, I discovered that 'style' changes and that some players have a style which is only adopted a decade or more later. Pistol Pete Maravich did passes and played in a way which would make him a surefire all star. Oscar Robertson could walk in from the street today and be absolutely right at home with a pick and roll, pick and pop game, that was his literal game if you watch the footage. Doctor J likewise, right of the street as an athletic win into current NBA. Wilt, Kareem, likewise, their game was so advanced at their era that they wouldn't even need any time to adjust.

Of course, not all great players have a game which is instantly recognized as being transferable. Larry Bird to most new fans look funny, not flashy, sort of lame with those short shorts and moustache, yet not a soul doubts Bird is one of the greatest ever. You could find many teams of the 80s who had a style which transcends eras, Pistons are a good example, but that doesn't mean they are better? Bird is better, much better.

Which leads me to my conclusion. We vastly overrate how long it would take great NBA players to learn and adopt to new styles and rules. We see this because of those players who play several decades.

John Stockton played and dominated in 3 decades with a fairly basic, simple toolset. Stockton would not look vastly different in black and white 60s Celtics uniform. Stockton was not a great athlete but beat many great athletes. Bird was not a great athlete but beat many GOAT athletes. Oscar was a great athlete but lost to lesser athletes.

Essentially, what makes a great basketball player is not flair or how flashy a crossover, it is the fundamentals, the body control to feign, the quick mind to pass, drive, shoot, the fundamental technical ability shoot, pass, drive. It's basketball and not track and field. If you give Hondo six months, I am sure he'd be dribbling with semi-carry like the rest, he'd get measured at 6-6 like Barkley was (who was max 6-5), he'd spend a summer working on his shot, so it looked more 'standard' and then he'd come back and be a better Gordon Hayward and just like Hayward, he'd use his high bball IQ and dominate better athletes like he dominated better athletes back then.
Thanks for the response! Glad you appreciate video collecting some posters like myself have done. Would you like to see a college version of this?

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=384832

I've yet to do it because I'm not sure how many people would even give a damn haha...So knowing some appreciate it like myself is nice to hear

[90sgoat]

Thanks for the response! Glad you appreciate video collecting some posters like myself have done. Would you like to see a college version of this?

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=384832

I've yet to do it because I'm not sure how many people would even give a damn haha...So knowing some appreciate it like myself is nice to hear

Yes, it's great to see that old footage, but I understand if most are not that interested.

I am mostly interested because my knees are not all that good anymore and I would like to go into coaching when I can't play anymore and for that you need to really understand the game outside of what one player does.

[jongib369]

Yes, it's great to see that old footage, but I understand if most are not that interested.

I am mostly interested because my knees are not all that good anymore and I would like to go into coaching when I can't play anymore and for that you need to really understand the game outside of what one player does.
Awesome! I'm about to go to the gym, but if I don't head home with my girlfriend afterwards I'll probably start working on it :cheers:


Here's some basics/moves to teach, and some college footage for you in the meantime

The Basics of Basketball, 1960's - Film 6741
(https://youtu.be/yiaJygbwC0Q)

Northwestern Basketball vs. Pittsburgh, 12/8/1956
(https://youtu.be/DXKPdocDuFg)


Advanced Basketball Shooting Skills with Pro Basketball Coach Bill Walton (https://youtu.be/8MWmB3WWN-w)

Kyle Wiltjer Beautiful Old School Hook Shot Kentucky vs Samford 12/20/2011
(https://youtu.be/SjE0VPSY-O0)

[KevinNYC]

Does anyone doubt Dr J would be a force today?

I believe he cited Havlicek as his toughest defender.

[ArbitraryWater]

Again, you and the OP are using faulty logic as someone mentioned.

Basketball is a young game, as I've said several times. There is still room for growth. It takes time to reach that level. As you progress in time, the progression in the game slows though the median/mean continues to progress, so you get a flattening of this progression curve.

Just like running. Eventually we will not be able to beat a 100m time that is set. Someone will eventually reach that point, until several hundreds of years passes and something changes.

Michael Jordan is an outlier. Though he is an outlier far further along that progression curve than Havlicek. An average wing player, like Gordon Hayward probably is as good, if not better.
Like supercars of 20 years ago being slower than an Audi S3 today. A sports hatch today completely killing Ferraris and Lambos of 20 years ago. Eventually we will get to a point, where the car can't get much quicker, and a current outlier is, and always will be in line with any possible future ones.
Such is the case with guys like Shaq and Jordan for example.

https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3132/5735690507_23d5b93c1c.jpg

[jongib369]

Does anyone doubt Dr J would be a force today?

I believe he cited Havlicek as his toughest defender.
I was wondering how long it'd take for someone e to bring that up, thank you

[jongib369]

Does anyone doubt Dr J would be a force today?

I believe he cited Havlicek as his toughest defender.

I still can't find it, but know I've seen it...At least I'm pretty sure :lol

I hate to make an assumption of Plowkings opinion...But if John was indeed Ervings toughest defender even at that state of his career, and in Plowkings mind John would be at best average today in his prime....Does that mean he also thinks Doc would be shut down or at least SIGNIFICANTLY hindered by the "superior" Kawhi Leonard, or Hayward? To the point of being "average" himself? There's no denying that Kawhi is an amazing player/defender. Him having the bigger, more athletic body would be more suited for guarding him....Though with not as much stamina most likely.

"Then there is technology. This is tactics, defensive and offensive schemes, etc. With rule changes these are constantly changing, but as a whole, players now are undeniably better defensively particularly, than ever before. There are so many less leak out plays, and easy points than ever before in basketball."

"Michael Jordan is an outlier. Though he is an outlier far further along that progression curve than Havlicek. An average wing player, like Gordon Hayward probably is as good, if not better. "


http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--5AQgiQVF--/1922q2524ur0xjpg.jpg

1972 NBA vs ABA All-Star Game
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nN17x5up5n4), I've got a good memory in certain areas, but the details of this game completely escapes me atm. I'll watch to see if they guarded each other

NBA
*John Havlicek - 17pts
*Connie Hawkins - 6pts
*Wilt Chamberlain - 6pts
*Oscar Robertson - 14pts
*Archie Clark - 15pts
Bob Lanier - 15pts
Nate Archibald - 12pts
Bob Love - 10pts
Gail Goodrich - 8pts
Paul Silas - 3pts

ABA
*Rick Barry - 11pts
*Dan Issel - 8pts
*Artis Gilmore - 14pts
*Jimmy Jones - 7pts
*Donnie Freeman - 16pts
Julius Erving - 13pts
Ralph Simpson 12pts
Willie Wise - 12pts
George Thompson - 7pts
Roger Brown - 2pts
Mel Daniels - 2pts

I don't think the outcome of this game means anything...I'll have to see if they evev guarded eachother, and their shot attempts/% based off that. But As far as the seasons they played in the NBA against each other, when John was old, he held him to an astounding 1-2 points less per game (lol)...No idea about the FG% though, which would be more revealing as to Hondos D on him. But if the man DID say John was the toughest, I'll take his word for it

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=ervinju01&p2=havlijo01

[Fire Colangelo]

Hayward... lol wtf.

It's one thing to take prime LeBron/KD/PG/Melo/Kawhi over Hondo... but Hayward?

[jongib369]

Hayward... lol wtf.

It's one thing to take prime LeBron/KD/PG/Melo/Kawhi over Hondo... but Hayward?
Plowking seems to be coming from the opinion that the NBA has changed/developed so much those guys as is could in no way shape or form have an impact today. Beyond guys like Wilt, at best they'd be average. Like I said in the post above

"I hate to make an assumption of Plowkings opinion...But if John was indeed Ervings toughest defender even at that state of his career, and in Plowkings mind John would be at best average today in his prime....Does that mean he also thinks Doc would be shut down or at least SIGNIFICANTLY hindered by the "superior" Kawhi Leonard, or Hayward? To the point of being "average" himself? There's no denying that Kawhi is an amazing player/defender. Him having the bigger, more athletic body would be more suited for guarding him....Though with not as much stamina most likely.


Plowking

"Then there is technology. This is tactics, defensive and offensive schemes, etc. With rule changes these are constantly changing, but as a whole, players now are undeniably better defensively particularly, than ever before. There are so many less leak out plays, and easy points than ever before in basketball."

"Michael Jordan is an outlier. Though he is an outlier far further along that progression curve than Havlicek. An average wing player, like Gordon Hayward probably is as good, if not better. " "

I'm curious what he thinks prime Havlicek, and Erving would average today as they were ... Considering Julius was 18 in 1968, he's another player that 'unfortunately had to develop a lot of his skills in the horrid 60s. Being taught by guys who played in the 40s/50s most likely. EWEY. It's a shame something like Haywood v. National Basketball Association
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haywood_v._National_Basketball_Association) didn't happen earlier. Could you imagine if he played in the NBA during 69 season? What would people say then about the 60s?

http://www.boston.com/sports/colleges/extras/colleges_blog/December09Sports/webJuliusErving1970.jpg

https://41.media.tumblr.com/30d4db555c17a24fc9b5657bc29a4b37/tumblr_nzfscy98Ep1td15w4o2_1280.jpg



What if he was born 5-10 years earlier?(10 being 1940, when havlicek was born)


About Average if transplanted to today? :rolleyes:

[jongib369]

Thanks for the opinions so far everyone, whether we agree or not

:cheers:

[bdreason]

Does anyone doubt Dr J would be a force today?

I believe he cited Havlicek as his toughest defender.


Dr. J played in 70's bro. Gerald Green would dominate that guy.

[bizil]

It can get TRICKY when comparing eras. If u took a guy like Hondo and PUT him in today's game, he would be a SUPERSTAR in my book! For starters, u would be giving him today's skillset, medical advances, etc. Would he be the 1st or 2nd best SF in the world like he was at times in the 70's? I would say no because u have Bron, Durant, George, etc. around.

BUT I see no reason why he wouldn't be a top five SF in the world. Until guys like Pippen and Bron came around, Hondo was the MOST COMPLETE two way SF of all time. And he was an alpha dog scorer flat out. I think Hondo's skillset is TIMELESS! A lot the greats from the 60's and 70's would STILL BE GREAT today! Some of them just won't be as DOMINANT as they were back in the day.

It's DISRESPECTFUL to assume Hayward would be better than a Hondo. Hondo should ONLY be compared to the best of the best at the SF. Guys like Bron, Durant, George, etc. Hayward hasn't EARNED the right for that discussion YET!

[bizil]

Hayward... lol wtf.

It's one thing to take prime LeBron/KD/PG/Melo/Kawhi over Hondo... but Hayward?

I agree! When comparing legends of the past, I think its ONLY FAIR to put them in today's game. And give them today's advances in medicine, on court skillset, etc. Many of the legends of the past were ahead of their time anyway. AND INFLUENCED what we see today!

So when it comes to Hondo, I think he would be a great player in any era. But he might not be AS GREAT! Great players should be compared to great players. Hayward hasn't EARNED the right to be compared to a Hondo.

[GrapeApe]

I agree! When comparing legends of the past, I think its ONLY FAIR to put them in today's game. And give them today's advances in medicine, on court skillset, etc.

Exactly. The same principle is true of modern players being hypothetically transported to an earlier era. It's important to level the playing field, so to speak. How would today's players perform without modern advantages? How would past players perform if given the same advantages as modern players? That's why it's so difficult to compare players across eras.

The best way to level the playing field is to compare how players performed relative to their competition. Though not perfect and not without some flaws of its own, IMO it is the most fair way to compare players across eras.

[jongib369]

Exactly. The same principle is true of modern players being hypothetically transported to an earlier era. It's important to level the playing field, so to speak. How would today's players perform without modern advantages? How would past players perform if given the same advantages as modern players? That's why it's so difficult to compare players across eras.

The best way to level the playing field is to compare how players performed relative to their competition. Though not perfect and not without some flaws of its own, IMO it is the most fair way to compare players across eras.
How do you think Hondo, and Erving would do today as they were?

[GrapeApe]

How do you think Hondo, and Erving would do today as they were?

As in if they were transported to a modern NBA game? They'd struggle, though the current rules and style of play would probably have more to do with it than anything. Imagine a modern player adjusting to the game of 40-50 years ago. They'd be called for travelling and carrying nearly every time they had the ball.

That's another reason it's difficult to compare across eras. Not only are players different, the game as a whole is also different. I don't think anyone argues that guys like Hondo (and Erving to a lesser degree) wouldn't struggle if they jumped in a time machine and were placed in today's game. They would need time to adjust, but the talent would still be there.

[bizil]

As in if they were transported to a modern NBA game? They'd struggle, though the current rules and style of play would probably have more to do with it than anything. Imagine a modern player adjusting to the game of 40-50 years ago. They'd be called for travelling and carrying nearly every time they had the ball.

That's another reason it's difficult to compare across eras. Not only are players different, the game as a whole is also different. I don't think anyone argues that guys like Hondo (and Erving to a lesser degree) wouldn't struggle if they jumped in a time machine and were placed in today's game. They would need time to adjust, but the talent would still be there.

I agree! If u transported Hondo and Doc AS THEY WERE at their peaks in today's game, they would struggle to be great players. BUT if u give them the EVOLUTION of today's game in their skillsets, they would be great. Because as u stated, the talent would still be there.

For example, Dr. J was known as the ultimate freak athlete SF. Who was a great scorer and rebounder at the SF. But he wasn't regarded as a great defender or passer (not saying he sucked at those either). So assuming he could carry that into today's game roughly, I would put him as a top 4 SF in the world. ONLY behind Bron, Durant, and PG. At Doc's peak, he was the best SF in the world. And it stayed that way until Bird came around.

So instead of being the best SF in the world, I could see Doc more in the top 4 SF's. The all around games of George and Bron as well as Durant's shooting ability would be the main reasons why.

[oarabbus]

I agree! If u transported Hondo and Doc AS THEY WERE at their peaks in today's game, they would struggle to be great players. BUT if u give them the EVOLUTION of today's game in their skillsets, they would be great. Because as u stated, the talent would still be there.

For example, Dr. J was known as the ultimate freak athlete SF. Who was a great scorer and rebounder at the SF. But he wasn't regarded as a great defender or passer (not saying he sucked at those either). So assuming he could carry that into today's game roughly, I would put him as a top 4 SF in the world. ONLY behind Bron, Durant, and PG. At Doc's peak, he was the best SF in the world. And it stayed that way until Bird came around.

So instead of being the best SF in the world, I could see Doc more in the top 4 SF's. The all around games of George and Bron as well as Durant's shooting ability would be the main reasons why.


I could see Dr. J being better than Paul George but not as good as Bron

Durant... it's tough. Real close, if Durant stays healthy then give him the edge

[jongib369]

Plowking seems to be coming from the opinion that the NBA has changed/developed so much those guys as is could in no way shape or form have an impact today. Beyond guys like Wilt, at best they'd be average. Like I said in the post above

"I hate to make an assumption of Plowkings opinion...But if John was indeed Ervings toughest defender even at that state of his career, and in Plowkings mind John would be at best average today in his prime....Does that mean he also thinks Doc would be shut down or at least SIGNIFICANTLY hindered by the "superior" Kawhi Leonard, or Hayward? To the point of being "average" himself? There's no denying that Kawhi is an amazing player/defender. Him having the bigger, more athletic body would be more suited for guarding him....Though with not as much stamina most likely.


Plowking

"Then there is technology. This is tactics, defensive and offensive schemes, etc. With rule changes these are constantly changing, but as a whole, players now are undeniably better defensively particularly, than ever before. There are so many less leak out plays, and easy points than ever before in basketball."

"Michael Jordan is an outlier. Though he is an outlier far further along that progression curve than Havlicek. An average wing player, like Gordon Hayward probably is as good, if not better. " "

I'm curious what he thinks prime Havlicek, and Erving would average today as they were ... Considering Julius was 18 in 1968, he's another player that 'unfortunately had to develop a lot of his skills in the horrid 60s. Being taught by guys who played in the 40s/50s most likely. EWEY. It's a shame something like Haywood v. National Basketball Association
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haywood_v._National_Basketball_Association) didn't happen earlier. Could you imagine if he played in the NBA during 69 season? What would people say then about the 60s?

http://www.boston.com/sports/colleges/extras/colleges_blog/December09Sports/webJuliusErving1970.jpg

https://41.media.tumblr.com/30d4db555c17a24fc9b5657bc29a4b37/tumblr_nzfscy98Ep1td15w4o2_1280.jpg



What if he was born 5-10 years earlier?(10 being 1940, when havlicek was born)


About Average if transplanted to today? :rolleyes:

:confusedshrug:

[Nick Young]

Gordan Hayward in the 80s would be considered on the same level as Larry Bird.

The 80s were just not a good time for basketball, real talk.

[CuterThanRubio]

This explains your angst driven novella in the other thread, didn't realize you were a Hondo fanboy.

That explains a lot!

[jongib369]

This explains your angst driven novella in the other thread, didn't realize you were a Hondo fanboy.

That explains a lot!
http://40.media.tumblr.com/ab5609dfbfd815ab094975b8b722e3b0/tumblr_mlet2gdMWE1qm9rypo1_1280.jpg

[Old Man River]

NBA was best in the old days


:pimp: :pimp: :pimp: