1970 NBA Finals Game 7 breakdown - Jerry West sucks

[Obama=ROY]

My god, it took Frazier six games in that series to finally figure out that West could not dribble with his left hand? Because before that sixth game, West was TORCHING him, by averaging 33 ppg against him. And don't forget that Frazier was a first-team defender.

And, evidently, West was able to get by his ENTIRE HOF career without being able to dribble with his left hand, too.

Exactly why it was a weak era.

How do we explain Kareem, at age 39, and WAY past his physical peak, pouring in games of 35, 42, and 46 points (on 21-30 shooting) against Hakeem in the 85-86 season? Or shredding Ewing in the same season with a 40 point performance, while holding Patrick to 2-16 shooting? Of course, maybe the OP doesn't consider Hakeem a HOF center, either. BUT, if he doesn't, then what do we make of Shaq, whom many claimed that Hakeem outplayed in the '95 Finals (I am not one of them BTW)?

Now consider the fact that a statistically prime Kareem struggled mightily against Thurmond in his last two playoff series (11 games) and only shot .405 and .428 against him in those two series (and in his '71 playoff series against him, he only shot .486.) Or that Wilt held Kareem to .464 shooting in their 28 H2H games? And, that both Thurmond and Wilt were well past their primes (and Wilt played the last 27 games against Kareem on a surgically repaired knee)?

Rick Barry averaged 35.6 ppg in the 66-67 season, on .451 shooting, and then averaged 30.2 ppg on .464 shooting in the 74-75 season...or nearly a decade later, and against a new crop of players...many of whom would go to dominate players that played in the 80's.

MJ, in his 40's, was able to score over 50 points in a game in the 2000's. Does that mean that the players of the 00's were much worse than those of the 90's?

Anyone can have a few hot games. Of course, there are also some guys who would still be good by today's standard like Wilt or even Rick Barry.

[jlauber]

It has gotten so bad in TODAY's NBA, that a 6-9 WHITE center is easily leading the league in rebounding. Who would have ever believed it?

[Dwade305]

It has gotten so bad in TODAY's NBA, that a 6-9 WHITE center is easily leading the league in rebounding. Who would have ever believed it?

[jstern]

I remember watching this game on Classic Sports back in like 96. It felt so old, yet a game from like 1985 wouldn't feel that old.

They did show West dribbling with his left hand, I believe the complaint was that he wasn't dribbling with his left hand in a situation where most coaches now a day would have the player dribbling with their left. But though it was way before my time, I believe the style was different, and players tended to protect the ball more with their body when they were coming down, so the dribbling style was different. It wasn't as free as today, and the carry rules not as strict, which would definitely alter the style. Yesterday I saw an image of Wade dribbling, and I actually thought what they would think of it if he went back in time, because it looked as if he was carrying it. Imagine if suddenly the rules were a little more strict, how much different his style would look when he has to keep that in mind. (I like the way it is now much better, when it comes to dribbling, because it doesn't hinder athleticism, though I hate the no hand-checking.)

[Psileas]

Not really. Not able to dribble with his left was a pretty basic flaw. No one's perfect, but there are requirement to make today's NBA that weren't the standards then. Especially make it as a superstar. The standard is higher today.

Not using a type of dribbling does not equal to not being able to do it. Stockton did not do crossovers and rarely did Magic, either. Doesn't mean they weren't good enough to perform it, especially after knowing that good dribbling is a skill that even a 10 year old with no serious basketball knowledge can quickly master after some serious practice. I guess there were a lot of tougher things that West did learn than use his left hand a lot. After all, if you see enough of West's games, you'll notice him use his left hand at times. But I know you won't. Reminds me of the "Baylor couldn't move to his left" myth that some tried to spread, whereas there is a Youtube clip, with a lot of plays showing Baylor doing exactly this.

About future NBA, assumptions is just assumptions. that implication is only in your head.

These aren't random assumptions, like saying "in a few years, I'll have a beautiful wife and a smart kid". They are based on patterns that we are seeing all the time and are very likely to be repeated in the future.

College basketball is far weaker than NBA but many still care about it.

That's an argument that I can use as well in favor of the old NBA.

Exactly why it was a weak era.

Rather exactly why NBA players are human and not supermen who can exploit at will their opponents' weaknesses. Drexler and Dr.J almost never drove to their left, yet nobody could figure out how to make them do this. D.J dribbled the ball at chest level yet nobody could figure out how to steal it from him all the time. Nash is less athletic than maybe 99% of today's NBA's guards, yet he can take any shot he wants and convert at a high rate without getting blocked. Shaq sucks at the FT line, yet, in crucial 4th quarters, his opponents are not able to "hack a Shaq" every time he touches the ball. Real life is much less entertaining and hilarious than NBA Live and players have real, not artificial intelligence and logic. Knowing these things, I extremely doubt that West would face the slightest problem in playing great in today's NBA because he rarely used his left hand in his time. He never showed that he lacked something really fundamental and difficult to learn. The things that he probably couldn't do even if he was raised today, like dunking from the FT line or dribble with the speed of Iverson are not important to be an all-time great. If you were talking about some guy of the time without some good shooting touch or without good defensive instincts, like Guy Rodgers, you'd have a point. But then again, there's a reason he wasn't an all-time great and West was.

[Batz]

It has gotten so bad in TODAY's NBA, that a 6-9 WHITE center is easily leading the league in rebounding. Who would have ever believed it?

Love is 6'10-6'11. Besides, he is 10x better than the white guys in Wilt's era. So don't flatter yourself, sir.

[PHILA]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UsLn9IjEhc

5:12 mark

Great drive with his left hand against an excellent defender in Siegfried.

[PHILA]

Love is 6'10-6'11. Besides, he is 10x better than the white guys in Wilt's era. So don't flatter yourself, sir.

[jlauber]

Love is 6'10-6'11. Besides, he is 10x better than the white guys in Wilt's era. So don't flatter yourself, sir.

Jerry Lucas was 6-8 and could easily outshoot the vast majority of the current NBA PF's (if not all of them) from 20+ ft. And, BTW, he was grabbing over 20 rpg in league's with Thurmond, Bellamy, and Russell.

Wilt faced Dave Cowens, who 6-9 and is deservedly in the HOF. Chamberlain was the best rebounder of his era, in leagues that included Cowens, Kareem, Lanier, Hayes, Unseld, as well as Lucas, Reed, Russell, and Thurmond. After Wilt retired, Cowens nearly beat Kareem for the rebounding title in the 75-76 season. Oh, and while Wilt didn't face Walton, Walton didn't rebound any better than Cowens did. Chamberlain alos crushed Tom Boerwnkle, who was 7-0, 270 lbs and was considered one of the strongest players in the league at the time. AND, for the stat-heads, Boerwinkle had 20+ rebound rates in the Wilt era.

Someday we might suggest that Love is on the level of Lucas, Cowens and Walton, but NOT today.



As for his height...someone here posted that Love was barely 6-8. I won't take the time to look it up now. In any case, Wilt DID face centers that were more athletic, stronger, bigger, and taller than Love.

[StillKill24]

basketball before 90's is like watching a bunch of high schoolers, lol at all these old timers defending a weak era.

[jlauber]

Love is 6'10-6'11. Besides, he is 10x better than the white guys in Wilt's era. So don't flatter yourself, sir.

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/kevin-love-1062/

Love is listed at 6-9, 255 lbs.

[Niquesports]

So, you gave a kind of an answer to your question. He was a great player. Doesn't mean he was great everywhere.



No, the main reason they weren't superstars is that simply they weren't overall great enough at basketball to be. They weren't great shooters, they weren't overly athletic (although prime DJ was pretty athletic, and he was a multiple-time All-Star), Jackson wasn't anything special defensively, they weren't versatile enough to play multiple positions, they didn't have a scorer's mentality, a will to dominate (by "dominate", I don't necessarily mean "dominate the ball"), etc.



Unless knowledge and technology for some reason stop or start going backwords or people stop dealing with basketball, it's a pretty safe assumption to make.

DJ not an all star ? Finals MVP in which he did dominate. Also would't u call a player that's gonna be a HOFer an All Star?

[Tez62]

Yes, Kevin Love was under 6'8'' w/o shoes

[jlauber]

Yes, Kevin Love was under 6'8'' w/o shoes

BTW, I was being somewhat facetious when I brought up Love leading the NBA in rebounding (and by a good margin.) He is an exceptionally skilled rebounder-passer-shooter.

But, if I told the young posters that Jerry Lucas would be a great rebounder in today's game, they would laugh me off the board. The fact was, Lucas, (who was also 6-8 BTW), is the only non-Wilt player to have two 20-20 seasons, was a powerful and intelligent rebounder. BTW, he is one of a small handful of NBA players with a 40 rebound game.

And, for those that marvel at Love's 3pt shooting, ...they would have to see Lucas' shooting to believe it. I have mentioned this before, but I actually attended a Warrior-Knick game in the 72-73 season, and in the pre-game shoot-around, Lucas made something like 20 straight shots from between the circles (probably 25+ ft)...and virtually every one swished.

I just get so sick-and-tired of these threads which disparage the players who played in the 60's (or as one poster above noted...anyone before the 90's.) Rick Barry was not only a great shooter (albeit, his FG% was more like an Iverson), he was a truly gifted passer. Connie Hawkins was doing wind-mill dunks back in the 60's. 6-6 Gus Johnson was shattering backboards in the 60's (THREE of them.) Oscar was an exceptional all-around guard, who was not only 6-5, but a solid 225 lbs. Most posters have never heard of Tom Boerwinkle, but he was an incredibly strong 7-0 270 lbs, who had some solid "rebound rate" seasons in the 60's and 70's. And yet, Chamberlain, who was FAR stronger, just crushed him on the glass in their H2H meetings in the post-season in '72 and '73.

And the 60's had Havlicek, Sam Jones, Greer, Elvin Hayes, Unseld (who was a more skilled Ben Wallace), Baylor, Russell, West, Bellamy, Reed, Frazier, and many others, including Thurmond, who would give Kareem fits. In fact, Alexanbren ran a post in which Nate faced Kareem some 61 games, and I believe Abdul Jabbar's high game was something like 36 points. In the vast majority of those games, Kareem failed to shoot 50%. In the 71-72 and 72-73 playoffs, Kareem shot .405 and .428 against Kareem. Chamberlain not only held Kareem to about 100 points lower than his career FG% in their 28 H2H meetings, as well as outrebounding him in the most of them, he abused Kareem in his one H2H meeting before his leg injury in 1969.

Then you had the players of the 70's, like Lanier, Cowens, Gilmore (yes, Chamberlain schooled him in their one H2H meeting in an NBA/ABA All-Star game), and McAdoo (who could shoot from anywhere on the floor, and who had two 30+ ppg seasons on well over 50% shooting)...and Wilt pounded all of them. He had a 30-30 game against Lanier, and well past his prime in the 71-72 season. Against Thurmond, in the mid-60's, he had a game in which he outscored Nate, 45-13, as well as several 30+ point games. In their three playoff series, Wilt never shot less than 50% against Thurmond (with a high of .560), and Nate never shot as high as 40% against Wilt (with a low of .343 .) Chamberlain had two 50+ point games against Reed (with a high of 58.) He also had THREE 60+ point games against Bellamy. Of course, Chamberlain had 24 40+ point games against Russell, including FIVE 50+ point games, and a high game of 62 (on 27-45 shooting.) Even in his final season, he put up a 24 point game on Kareem, on 10-14 shooting, outscoring Kareem, who shot 10-27 in that game.

And yet, Kareem, at age 39, and well past his physical prime, was able to hang games of 35, 42, and 46 points (on 21-30 shooting) on Hakeem in the 85-86 season. On top of that, in the same season, he poured in 40 points on Ewing, while holding Ewing to 2-16 shooting.

So, how can anyone come to the conclusion that the players of the 60's were set-shot shooting, clumsy, uncoordinated, nerds that would be destroyed by the players of today?

Jerry West was an incredible ATHLETE, who had a perfect jump shot, and who could run the floor with anyone in today's game. And great players from the early 70's, like Maravich, Dr. J, David Thompson, Charlie Scott, Havlicek, Barry, Hayes, Gilmore, Lanier, Wicks, Cowens, Unseld, Goodrich, Frazier, Archibald, McAdoo, Thurmond, Kareem, and Wilt, were as gifted, and as skilled, as anyone in today's game.

As for the clown who posted that the players before the 90's were some primitive basketball players...how about Bird and Magic, both of whom were every bit as great as MJ in the 80's?

[Round Mound]

80s was the Best Era Ever.

90s: the one i lived most off wasn`t as good.

Even i admit to this