Where does Rick Barry's 75 finals rate

[Marchesk]

We hear a lot about how great Wade (06), Shaq or Jordan's finals were. How does Barry's compare?

He outscored the second leading scorer on his team by 18 points while leading the team in assists and steals in route to four game sweep over the 60 win Elvin Hayes/Wes Unseld Bullets.

29.5/4/5 with 3.5 steals on 44.4 FG% and 93.8 FT%. The average score was GSW 99.5 - BB 95.5

Wade in 06 was:

34.7/7.8/3.8 with 2.7 steals on 46.8 FG% and 77.3 FT%. The average score was 92.8 - 91.8.

Wade just over 16 FTs a game to Barry's 8, which would more than account for the scoring difference.

I can understand saying Wade had a better finals, but it's actually pretty close. Barry's finals is underrated. He also had the 40.8/8.8/3.3 finals against Wilt's great 67 76ers, helping take them to 6 games, when they had dominated Boston in 5. Jordan and Baylor are the only other players to score over 40 in a finals.

Barry was also only 22. You hear the excuses for how Lebron at 22 was no match for the Spurs. Try going against a 68 win Wilt led GOAT level team.

[Brook(lyn)Lopez]

did he shoot those free throws granny style?

[RoundMoundOfReb]

Fringe weak era. Doesn't count.

[navy]

did he shoot those free throws granny style?

[Marchesk]

did he shoot those free throws granny style?

http://youtu.be/_k1ZM_K5L8g?t=15s

And Shaq should have too.

[ArbitraryWater]

*rank

[Marchesk]

Barry > Lebron in the finals [color=white](so far anyway)[/color]

[Marchesk]

*rank

I'm sure this exists on ISH. Has anyone done a finals ranking thread, without cutting it off for "weak era" bullshit? I mean a single finals performance, not 6/6 or 11/12 stuff.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

But it WAS a weak era. I bet you think that Floyd Mayweather is the greatest boxer of all time simply because he has dominated a weak era. Floyd is a great fighter, by far the best of his generation...but he isn't the GOAT...as the decline in popularity for boxing has lead to a much weaker pool of fighters/era. The opposite is true for basketball: As the sport grew in popularity, more and more kids grew up wanting to play in the NBA and thus the quality of the product has increased drastically.

[Marchesk]

But it WAS a weak era. I bet you think that Floyd Mayweather is the greatest boxer of all time simply because he has dominated a weak era. Floyd is a great fighter, by far the best of his generation...but he isn't the GOAT...as the decline in popularity for boxing has lead to a much weaker pool of fighters/era. The opposite is true for basketball: As the sport grew in popularity, more and more kids grew up wanting to play in the NBA and thus the quality of the product has increased drastically.

I don't care. We can't time travel dudes, so we're stuck with evaluating players relative to their competition. And Barry was amazing in the two finals he was in. That 75 finals is really great because he had no sidekick.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

I don't care. We can't time travel dudes, so we're stuck with evaluating players relative to their competition. And Barry was amazing in the two finals he was in. That 75 finals is really amazing because he had no sidekick.

So Mikan is the GOAT then? If we're gonna completely ignore era strength then you must have Mikan top 3 if not GOAT. He dominated his era like nobody ever did. Of course it was a pathetically weak era....but hey "we can't time travel dudes"....

[Marchesk]

So Mikan is the GOAT then? If we're gonna completely ignore era strength then you must have Mikan top 3 if not GOAT. He dominated his era like nobody ever did. Of course it was a pathetically weak era....but hey "we can't time travel dudes"....

I don't know, maybe so? Seems like most people draw the line after the shot clock was introduced. Or when Wilt and Bill entered the game in the late 50s.

If someone honestly wanted to argue that, I'd be okay with it. His impact on the game would be one of the biggest ever.

Anyway, 75 is a couple decades removed from Mikan in a league fully integrated. Barry proved he can span eras dominating in a finals in 67 and 75.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

I don't know, maybe so? Seems like most people draw the line after the shot clock was introduced. Or when Wilt and Bill entered the game in the late 50s.

If someone honestly wanted to argue that, I'd be okay with it. His impact on the game would be one of the biggest ever.

Why some arbitrary cutoff? Why not the 3 point line? Or introduction of zone-defense? Or how about when people actually started giving a **** about basketball?

40 years from now if curling is the most popular sport in the world, would you seriously say curlers from today were better than the one's 40 years from now? Obviously not.

[Marchesk]

Why some arbitrary cutoff? Why not the 3 point line? Or introduction of zone-defense? Or how about when people actually started giving a **** about basketball?

I wasn't asking who would be a better 1 on 1 player, or who you would pick in their prime to start a team today. I asked how Barry's finals performance (the 75 one in particular) ranked against some of the all-time great ones acknowledged on ISH, such as Wade's 06. It looks to me like Barry is close.

40 years from now if curling is the most popular sport in the world, would you seriously say curlers from today were better than the one's 40 years from now? Obviously not.

I don't know what all goes into curling. I think at least the best players from previous eras would translate, unless their game and/or physique was only suited to that era. The thing to remember with improvement in athletics is that technology plays a big role. There is a TED talk where the speaker claims that Bolt's Olympic record would only be .1 seconds faster than Owen's, once you factor out all the advances in technology since then (starting blocks, track surface, shoes). You go from a .7 or .8 difference to just .1. That would mean Owens would be an contending Olympic sprinter today without PEDs or sports science.

Anyway, if you have Wade swap places with Barry in 75 (or 67), he has to play by that era's rules and limitations.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

I don't know what all goes into curling. I think at least the best players from previous eras would translate, unless their game and/or physique was only suited to that era. The thing to remember with improvement in athletics is that technology plays a big role. There is a TED talk where the speaker claims that Bolt's Olympic record would only be .1 seconds faster than Owen's, once you factor out all the advances in technology since then (starting blocks, track surface, shoes). You go from a .7 or .8 difference to just .1. That would mean Owens would be an contending Olympic sprinter today without PEDs or sports science.

Anyway, if you have Wade swap places with Barry in 75 (or 67), he has to play by that era's rules and limitations.

You're making an argument that i'm not. I'm not saying human evolution has caused the increase in level of play. Note in the boxing analogy i used i called the CURRENT era a weak era. My argument has nothing to do with technological advances.