COMBINE Tim Duncan and Kobe Bryant's titles/MVP's:

[LAZERUSS]

@Lazzerruss

Out of curiousity, who are those players? I got Steve Nash but can't think who the others are

In the 2010-11 season:

As you already know, a 37 year old Nash, (and who I believe is actually shorter than 6-3 BTW), easily won the APG title, and he did so in 33 mpg.

Th 6-8 Kevin Love (draft espress actually lists him at 6-7 3/4 BTW), ran away with the RPG, at 15.2 rpg, and in less than 36 mpg. The 6-9 3/4 Dwight Howard (same height as Russell BTW), came in a distant second at 14.1 rpg.

The 6-11 (no, he is not 7-0) Andrew Bogut, whose career has been plagued by chronic injuries, won the BPG title, at 2.6 bpg. BTW, the 7-0 gifted athlete, Javale McGee was next at 2.4 BPG.

And just last year, Ricky Rubio, starting all 82 games, and playing 32 mpg, shot .381 from the field. Was that a fluke, you ask? Well, in his two previous seasons he shot .357 and .360!


BTW, watch this footage, and you tell me that Rubio was anywhere near the player this guy was...who just so happened to have averaged 44 ppg in his college career in the 60's...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qv0YS1wHoQ


Love's 15.2 rpg, and in only 35 mpg, just illustrates the "geezers" arguments that a 7-1+ (likely 7-3 using today's measuring system), 280-300+ lbs, 7-8 wingspan, enormous strength (likely the strongest basketball player of all-time), a college high-jump champion (part-time and with poor technique), with most certainly a 40" vertical, and these skills...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCWrGWuU2Ak

would be CRUSHING today's NBA players on the glass.


And for those that were fortunate enough to have witnessed basketball in the 60's thru today, Jerry Lucas WAS Kevin Love, long before Love was. 6-8, 230 lbs, and perhaps the greatest long range shooter of his era, too (google the term, "Lucas Layup."

Or that the 6-9 Bob McAdoo (much like Russell, he was listed at 6-10 in college, and would certainly be listed closr to 6-11 today)...was not only a solid rebounder, but he was the "Kevin Durant" of his era. BTW. McAdoo had three straight 30+ ppg seasons, and nearly three straight post-seasons of 30+ ppg (just missed one at 28 ppg.) Think about this...for those that claim that he was scoring in an "inflated" era...in his 74-75 season, he averaged 43.2 mpg, 34.5 ppg, on a .512 FG% (and an .805 FT%), and 14.1 rpg...in an NBA that averaged 102.6 ppg, shot an eFG% of .457, and averaged 47.1 rpg. How about just LAST YEAR? The NBA averaged 101.0 ppg, on an eFG% of .501, and with 42.7 rpg.


And for those that claim that the NBA of the 60's was nothing but short white part-time shoe salesmen...how do they explain this...

http://www.cornerclubmoscow.com/joom...&id=1&Itemid=2

When Johnson played at Idaho in 1963, he already had a reputation as a leaper of the highest order. One evening at the Corner Club, a local tavern on Main Street in Moscow, Johnson was requested by owner Herm Goetz to display his rare ability to the patrons. The Corner Club was a very modest establishment, converted from a white-stuccoed small chapel in the 1940s with hardwood floors and a beamed ceiling. From a standing start near the bar, Johnson touched a spot on a beam 11'6" (3.505 m) above the floor. This spot was ceremoniously marked with a nail by Goetz, who then proudly proclaimed that anyone who could duplicate the feat could drink for free. A 40-inch (1.016 m) diameter circle was painted on the floor, and both feet had to start inside the circle to ensure a standing start. A full 23 years went by with many attempts at Gus Johnson's Nail, including Bill Walton in the summer of 1984, but there were no successes.

That was until 1986, when the College of Southern Idaho basketball team from Twin Falls stopped in town in January on their way to a game against NIC in Coeur d'Alene. Joey Johnson, a younger brother of then NBA star Dennis Johnson, was brought into the Corner Club for a try. The 6'3" (1.905 m) guard had a 48" (1.219 m) vertical leap and could put his chin on a basketball rim (10 feet (3.048 m)) with a running start.

Johnson laced up his shoes and touched the nail on his first try but was disqualified because he did not start with both feet inside the 40-inch circle. The next attempt came from a legal static start but was just a bit short. On his third try, Johnson grabbed and bent the legendary nail, a landmark event in Vandal sports history. Goetz pulled the nail out of the beam and pounded it back in, a half inch (13 mm) higher

Now, we only have a fraction of Gus Johnson's footage, and most of that came later in his career, but here are some highlights from the 6-6 230 lb Johnson...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uchAeIUAZco

Look at that footage...the man had a quality jump shot to over 15 ft.

Now, think about this...

He was a career 17 ppg, 13 rpg, .440 FG% player. In his best seasons in the 60's, his high scoring season was 21 ppg (only one over 20 in his carer), and his high rebounding season in the 60's was 13.6 rpg.

Maybe the "bashers" of the 60's can answer this question...just how did a man who was 6-6 230 lbs, that could shatter MULTIPLE backboards, had as high a vertical as MJ, and had those skills...was "only" a 17-13 player in the 60's? Or that the white 6-6 Dave DeBusschere was generally considered the better player?


Continued...

[LAZERUSS]

I get so sick-and-tired of those that claim that today's NBA is much more athletic than in the 60's and 70's.

If it is, it is only SLIGHTLY moreso. But even so...SO WHAT?

If basketball were a game of pure athleticism, Russell would have been scoring 40 ppg in the 60's, as would have Gus Johnson. And players like James White and Javale McGee would be leading the CURRENT NBA in scoring. Hell, Gerald Green, with his spectacular vertical...a CAREER .428 FG% in his NINE NBA seasons.!

Conversely, does anyone believe that Kevin Love could come anywhere as high as Dwight Howard in a leaping contest? And why hasn't McGee been among the leading rebounders?

Height? First of all, the 60's and 70's were LITTERED with 7-0+ players (legitimate 7-0+.) Swede Halbrook was 7-3 (and likely 7-4+ today.) NBA bust. Steve Turner was 7-4 (and likely 7-5+ today)...played college at Vanderbilt...and never made it to the NBA. Tom Burleson was 7-2 and was actually both an excellent college player (he was winning conference tournament MVPs over teammate David Thompson), and a good NBA player, who, unfortunately, suffered early career injuries. Even so, he was never considered anywhere near an elite NBA player in his era.

Factor in that virtually every player in the 60's and 70's were measured in bare feet, and the league would have had a TON of 7-0+ players. HOFers like Thurmond, Bellamy, and Lanier, would all have been listed at 7-0+. BTW, Walton was listed at 6-11, and there are many who would tell you that he was a legitimate seven-footer. Russell was listed at 6-9 in his NBA career, and was a shade under 6-10 (same exact height as Dwight Howard.) Chamberlain was listed at 7-1 (and was a shade over that.)

Back to height. Quick give me a list of all of the legitimate 7-3+ NBA rpg champions. I'll save you some time. ZERO. NADA. How about legitimate 7-2+ NBA rpg champions? In the entire history of the NBA there have been a TOTAL of THREE seasons in which a 7-2+ player has led the NBA in rpg (KAJ with one, and Mutombo with two.) Hell, add in Gilmore's four in his ABA seasons, and it is still only seven.

Conversely, subtract Wilt's ELEVEN, and there have been FAR more RPG titles won by 6-10 or shorter, than 7-0+. The 6-7 Truck Robinson won one. The 6-8 Rodman, in an era of centers like Ewing, Hakeem, Robinson, and Shaq, won SEVEN. Even the 6-5 Charles Barkley won a title. How do explain that?

The Barkley title is interesting. At a shade under 6-5, he led the NBA in rpg in 86-87 at nearly 15 rpg. And yet there are those that scoff at Baylor's 19.8 rpg in '61. Or Lucas' 21.1 rpg in '66. True, neither would sniff those averages today, BUT, if Love could average 15.2 rpg (and in 35 mpg), and Barkley 14.6 rpg, then surely those two would have been capable of those averages, as well.

Continued...

[LAZERUSS]

"The game is MUCH more advanced today, than in the 60's and 70's."

Is it? Is it REALLY?

The game of basketball was invented in the 1890's (yes the 1890's, and not the 1990's like ESPN might have you believe.) And aside from two major rule's changes...the 24 second shot clock in the mid-50's, and the 3pt shot in the late 70's (actually there were pro leagues using it back in the early 60's, and the ABA used it until the merger)...the game is essentially played today almost EXACTLY same way as it was in the 1890's. Think about this...there were COLLEGES playing the game in the late 1890's. There were PROFESSIONAL teams in the 1920's. The Harlem Globetrotters have been around since 1928.

Again, the game TODAY, with the two major rules changes, and several minor ones (the wider lane in '65...BTW, colleges still use the 12 ft lane; three seconds; offensive and defensive goal-tending, etc), is played with roughly the same sized ball, the same sized hoop (height and diameter), the same size court dimensions, and by the same number of players.

And contrary to what many here would have you believe, it is still a SIMPLE game. There are peewee leagues for cryingoutloud. It is a game of shooting, dribbling, passing, rebounding, and playing defense. Hell, we have WHEELCHAIR leagues.

Of course, the game becomes considerably more complicated at the higher levels, but the reality is, the NBA of today is not dramatically more complicated than it was 50 years ago. Nor are the players dramatically taller, more athletic, or more skilled today, either.

If basketball today is indeed much better, give me the exact season when it became what it is today, ...or even nearly so. Some have pointed to the ABA-NBA merger, while other's to the arrival of Magic and Bird in the '80 season.

Player-for-player...with obvious rare exceptions (and for a variety of reasons) played just as well the season before the merger, as they did after it (at least on the NBA side of that.) And the reality was, the merger added FOUR teams to the NBA, and with a few exceptions, basically replaced average or worse, NBA players. And the truth about the merger? Most of the better ABA players had jumped the ABA long before the merger.

Magic and Bird in 1980? Did those two come in and immediately win MVPs? Nope. The first FOUR MVP winners from the 1980 season on,...ALL players whose career spanned the 70's (and even 60's) into the 80's. How about scoring titles? The first FIVE...players from the 70's. Rebounding titles? The first SIX...yep, you guessed it...players from the 70's. FG% titles? Yep...first FIVE.

Incidently, almost player-for-player, for those whose careers spanned the 70's (and in KAJ's case, the 60's) into the 80's...shot BETTER in the decade of the 80's. Some DRAMATICALLY better (Dantley, Kareem, and especially Gilmore.) How come? Wouldn't the "newer generation" led by the likes of Bird and Magic, have just trampled the geezers from the 70's?

And...the ultimate argument...the "Bridges."

John Havlicek was just as great, at age 35, and in the mid-70's, as he had been at age 25, and in the mid-60's. Rick Barry averaged 35.6 ppg in '66, and ten years later, in '75, 30.6 ppg. A prime Gilmore, at age 27, and in '77, averaged 18.6 ppg on a .522 FG%. A 35 year old Gilmore, in '85, averaged 19.1 ppg on a .623 FG% (and in '82, 18.5 ppg on a .652 FG%.) A 23 year old Lanier averaged a career high 25.7 ppg in '72. In '79... 23.6 ppg. Moses was just as dominant in '83 as he had been in '79.

And how about these... (sorry Hakeem fans)...

Moses Malone, at 33 years old and at the tail-end of his career, was STILL outrebounding a 26 year old Hakeem, in ALL of their H2H's. An Olajuwon who would lead the NBA in rebounding that season.

Or a 34-35 year old Gilmore, just shelling a 22-23 Hakeem in their 10 straight H2H's, with a 23.7 ppg .677 FG%.

Or a 38-39 year old Kareem, in TEN STRAIGHT H2H's just carpet-bombing a 22-23 year old Hakeem with a 32 ppg .630 FG%. Included were THREE games of 40+ points, with a high of 46 (on 21-30 shooting, and in only 37 minutes.)

BTW, how about this...

A 40 year old Kareem, in FOUR H2H's against a 24 year old Hakeem (and with Sampson out)...outscored Hakeem by an 18.8 ppg to 17.3 ppg margin (BTW, Hakeem averagd 3 more mpg too), and get this...outshot Hakeem from the field by a .564 to .403 FG% margin!

Oh, and in the same week that Kareem just pummelled Hakeem with that 46 point game, he brutalized Patrick Ewing, as well. He outscored Ewing, 40-9, and outshot him from the field by a 15-22 to 3-17 margin!


Ok, so we KNOW that an OLD Kareem, nearing the end of his career, just has his way with Hakeem (and Ewing.) How about a PEAK Kareem, and against the relatively unknown Nate Thurmond (an aging Thurmond.) In their near 40 career H2H's (and a full-time Nate), from '69-70 thru '72-73...KAJ's career HIGH game... 34 points. In fact, he only had FIVE of 30+ against Thurmond in that span. Think about that...a PEAK Kareem, with FIVE 30+ point games in 35 H2H's with Thurmond...and yet a 38-39 year old Kareem, in a span of TEN games against Hakeem... SEVEN.

Then how about this. A 37-41 year old Kareem, and in 23 career H2H's with a 22-26 year Hakeem, outshot Hakeem by a .607 to .512 margin (and outscored him over that span, as well.) In his 35 H2H's with Thurmond...a CAREER .447 FG%.

And we all know that a PRIME Chamberlain was FAR more dominant against the SAME centers that a PRIME Kareem would face a few years later. I won't bother posting the H2H's, but a PRIME Wilt CRUSHED the likes Imhoff, Dierking, Reed, Thurmond, and Bellamy,...FAR more than a PEAK Kareem did in his H2H's with those same centers. And even a past-his-prime Wilt, and just the season before Kareem joined the league, put up 60+ games on Dierking and Jim Fox. In fact, IN KAJ's rookie season, Wilt hung a 43 point game on Dierking. Kareem's high against Dierking and Fox... 41 points.

Carry the above out...a PRIME Wilt was FAR more dominant than a PRIME Kareem. An OLD Kareem just demolished a near prime Hakeem. A PRIME Hakeem gave a young Shaq all he could handle in the mid-90's and even a fading Hakeem held Shaq to a high game of 37 points against him. And yet a 39 year old Kareem was routinely hanging 40+ point games on a young and much more athletic Hakeem. And, of course, Shaq went on to just MURDER of the centers of the late 90's and into the mid-00's.

Are the players of TODAY MUCH greater than those of 40-50 years ago? You tell me. The overwhelming evidence suggests otherwise.

[LAZERUSS]

I would add there's A LOT more good to great players these days. And it's not spread equally. The top teams have more talents. When it comes to the playoff, teams faced a lot better opponents overall.

For example, the 61-62 Detroit Pistons made the playoff and went to the conference finals. Compare that to last year's Portland who also made the semi finals but lost. How many of their players were remotely as good as...Damian Lillard or Lamarcus Aldridge...or even Batum or Wes Matthews.

Take a look at the '66-67 Lakers.

Jerry West and Elgin Baylor...West nearing his prime, and Elgin still close to his. They averaged 29 ppg and 27 ppg respectively.

Then Gail Goodrich, a future HOFer, who, within two years would be scoring 24 ppg. And Mahdi Abdul-Rahman (Walt Hazzard), who, the very next season would average 24 ppg. And Archie Clark, who would be an all-star the very next season, and average 20 ppg. And Rudy LaRussa, who would average 22 ppg the very next season. 6-10 journeyman Darrall Imhoff, who averaged 11 ppg and 13 rpg in that season. Hell, that team also had TWO seven-footers (and one was a PF), in Mel Counts and Henry Finkel.

Surely with all of that talent they were a dominant team, right? Well, not quite. They went 36-45. True, they did make the playoffs, but were swept by the even-more talented 44-37 Warriors in the first round (albeit, West was out for that series.) BUT, during the regular season, the Lakers went 3-6 against the Warriors, including losses by margins of 122-91, 130-107, 144-109, and 132-93.

Can you imagine the '10-11 Miami Heat, with a prime Lebron, and a near prime Wade (the Baylor and West of this era)...going 36-45, and being swept in the first round?

[LAZERUSS]

BTW, Russell won titles in 11 of his 13 seasons (and was injured in a Finals in which he did not win)...and in leagues with 8, 9, 10, 12, and 14 teams. He also played on three title teams that did not have HCA, including a 4th seed that had to win THREE series without HCA.

Of course those Celtic teams just coasted to those 11 titles, too, right? In his post-seasons, he played on a team that won a SEVENTH game, TEN times. And out of those ten seven game series, SEVEN were decided by FOUR points, or less (and even two OT wins.) 10-0 in game seven's, and again, seven of those by an eyelash.

[Psileas]

You are seriously dumb. You talked about Wilt numbers being worse because he faced Russel more times in the playoffs, i tell you he faced Russel 13 times during regular season, obviously more than in the playoff, and your response is retarded gibberish about fractions.

Nice trolling, dude. That's the best I can say for you. Hopefully, I'm right.

[SyRyanYang]

so you agree that players back then were working part time jobs to make ends meet?

kind of different when Duncan & Kobe are going up against professional athletes while Russell is going up against part time store clerks

/thread

[DatAsh]

You are seriously dumb. You talked about Wilt numbers being worse because he faced Russel more times in the playoffs, i tell you he faced Russel 13 times during regular season, obviously more than in the playoff, and your response is retarded gibberish about fractions.

He's right though. Fractions matter here.

[iamgine]

Take a look at the '66-67 Lakers.

Jerry West and Elgin Baylor...West nearing his prime, and Elgin still close to his. They averaged 29 ppg and 27 ppg respectively.

Then Gail Goodrich, a future HOFer, who, within two years would be scoring 24 ppg. And Mahdi Abdul-Rahman (Walt Hazzard), who, the very next season would average 24 ppg. And Archie Clark, who would be an all-star the very next season, and average 20 ppg. And Rudy LaRussa, who would average 22 ppg the very next season. 6-10 journeyman Darrall Imhoff, who averaged 11 ppg and 13 rpg in that season. Hell, that team also had TWO seven-footers (and one was a PF), in Mel Counts and Henry Finkel.

Surely with all of that talent they were a dominant team, right? Well, not quite. They went 36-45. True, they did make the playoffs, but were swept by the even-more talented 44-37 Warriors in the first round (albeit, West was out for that series.) BUT, during the regular season, the Lakers went 3-6 against the Warriors, including losses by margins of 122-91, 130-107, 144-109, and 132-93.

Can you imagine the '10-11 Miami Heat, with a prime Lebron, and a near prime Wade (the Baylor and West of this era)...going 36-45, and being swept in the first round?

We really got to take HOF pretty lightly when it comes to 50s and 60s players. No one would take HOFer Bob Cousy over Damian Lillard. Would anyone really take Rudy Larussa over say...Serge Ibaka?

[dubeta]

COMBINE the first 12 posters in this thread and you would have a team comparable to those Russell faced

[talkingconch]

bill russell is not a top 10, barely

alot of evidence has proved this in this thread already. just because u have 10 rings or whatever doesnt mean shit if it was in the 1950-60's

[Blue&Orange]

Nice trolling, dude. That's the best I can say for you. Hopefully, I'm right.

Dumb people always think they are right, even after being completely owned. They also don't know when to shut up, so they keep embarrassing themselfs.

[Psileas]

Dumb people always think they are right, even after being completely owned. They also don't know when to shut up, so they keep embarrassing themselfs.

True. Keep talking.

[Blue&Orange]

True. Keep talking.

Ok

I tell you wilt managed to be knowed as a playoff dipper in a league with 8 teams, you tell me it was not because lack of competition in a 8 team league, but because he would face Russel more times in the playoffs, i tell you he faced Russel 13 times during regular season, you talk about fractions


Hopefully you are right!


Like i said dumb people don't known when to shut up.

[LAZERUSS]

We really got to take HOF pretty lightly when it comes to 50s and 60s players. No one would take HOFer Bob Cousy over Damian Lillard. Would anyone really take Rudy Larussa over say...Serge Ibaka?

Oh no doubt. You are absolutely correct. Just look at some other examples...

John Stockton. Does anyone think that clown could make an NBA roster today? C'mon, I bet you can't name another HOF guard that played in his era, much less one that could make a roster today.

Steve Nash. Look, this is truly laughable. Sure he won B2B MVPs, but that was nearly a decade ago. Again, does anyone think a peak Kobe could play in TODAY's NBA?

Ricky Rubio. The sharp-shooting Rubio. BTW, can you give us his career FG% again? And while you are at it, how about his FG% from just last season?


How about Ibaka over say Jerry Lucas? No way a 6-8 Lucas would be a HOFer in TODAY's era, right. We know that because you just don't see 6-8 white guys putting up 26-12 seasons in TODAY's NBA.


Thanks for educating all of us here.