Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from SeemsToMe. Show SeemsToMe's posts

    Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA

    In Response to Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA :   Really? That's a rather bold statement. It just doesn't seem right to me. Let's do some research together. I'll stick with the guards. Ray Allen has a career field goal percentage of . 421 3pt is . 313 you're saying that hall of HOF players from the 50's and 60's have worse FG percentage than Ray's 3 point field goal percentage. Let's take a look. The following players have a better FG% than Ray Allen Walt Frazier . 490  Oscar Robertson . 485  Jerry West . 474   Sam Jones . 456 Hal Greer . 452 Tom Gola . 431 Bill Sharman . 426    These gentlemen have FG% below Ray Allens Bobby Wanzer . 393 Dick McGuire . 389 Bob Cousy . 375 Andy Phillip . 368 Bob Davies . 364 Slater Martin . 364 Al Gervi . 359 In fact I think it's safe to assume that no guard in the hall of fame who played in the 50's and 60's has a career FG% lower than . 313 It seems to me that maybe you should think before you type such an ill informed comment like you did.  
    Posted by RUWorthy[/QUOTE]

    RUWorthy
    Thanks for taking the time to research the subject matter. I always enjoy a disscussion with a person that is willing to spend some time doing a little research to back up his point of view. However there are some points that we disgree on.

    #1--According to Basketball Reference.Com. Ray Allen's Lifetime shooting percentage is .450,broken down as follows. 2 point shooting=.483 and 3 point shooting=.396.
    #2--I clearly stated that Allen's 3 point shooting percentage was better than "SOME" Hall Of Fame players of the 50's and 60's had for their career.
    #3--Your list of guards from the 50's and 60's verify my point in #2
    #4--If Allen's shooting percentage for 3 point shots is .396 then my statement is accurate.
    #5--You can add K.C.Jones(.387 ) to your list of guards. and also, according to Basketball Ref.com. Andy phillip has a nba career ave of .373 and Bob Davis has a career ave of .380.
     
    SeemsToMe
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedsGhost. Show RedsGhost's posts

    Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA

    A couple things. One- disagree with the premise that the Lakers had 5 championships during that era. There must be a distinction (though Laker fans won't like it) between the LA Lakers and the Minniapolis Lakers. The LA LAkers have 11 titles and the Minn Lakers have 5. When Atlanta won the World Series, Bostonians didn't run around claiming the championship and having World Series parades. If Oakland, SF and the La Dodgers win a championship then certainly you would'nt see Philadelphia, NY and Brooklyn having World Series parades in their respective cities. When Indy won the SB, you didn't see Baltimore celebrating, so all this logic applies to the Lakers as well. LA lakers have 11 championships
    2nd- the QUALITY of play fell during the mid to late 70's, athleticism grew, quality fell. Two different era's but both exciting.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedsGhost. Show RedsGhost's posts

    Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA

    In Response to Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA : Rajon Why don't you take a shot at addressing the validity of my statement rather than playing the "ageism" card ? SeemsToMe
    Posted by SeemsToMe[/QUOTE]

    Nawww...think Rajon had the correct point it's just that you would prefer that posters ignore your ageism comments so you can continue stirring the pot. Your comments stirred up "ageism" so why don't YOU address the validity of THOSE statements?
    Gotta side with Rondo on this one.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedsGhost. Show RedsGhost's posts

    Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA

    In Response to Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA:
    [QUOTE]Duke4 Based on the top 5 players on each team that were 6'7" or shorter (that would be the positions other than center) and would represent those positions where speed and quickness dominate. Russell's first year in the nba (1956-57) whites held 86% 0f those positions.  In the 60's the whites held about 50% of those positions. In 1985 whites held 11% of those 4 positions.The number of whites this past year dropped to 3%. That doesn't say much for the American white basketball player. Also, compare the shooting percentages of the 50's and 60's with the players of the 80's on to the present. Many of the stars of the late 50's and early 60's were barely able to hit 40%. For the most part its a black man's game-something the white players of the 50's and 60's were about to learn. SeemsToMe
    Posted by SeemsToMe[/QUOTE]


    ????? And the point of this entry is.....????
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedsGhost. Show RedsGhost's posts

    Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA

    So let's follow the line of progression here.
    1) Duke starts an interesting thread, afterall that's why I clicked on it, about the advent of the 24 second and the start of the modern era and....

    2)  by the 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th comment ( someone posted their statement 3 times to keep the discussion towards the top ), the thread was hijacked and changed to a Black/White 50's/70's race discussion so....

    3) If posters wanted to discuss black/white, 50's/70's, why didn't he/they start their own discussion rather than hijack this one?
    Thanx Duke for trying to start a discussion. Sorry the "young'uns" were so rude and disrespectful.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from RajonRondowski. Show RajonRondowski's posts

    Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA

    In Response to Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA : Rajon Why don't you take a shot at addressing the validity of my statement rather than playing the "ageism" card ? SeemsToMe
    Posted by SeemsToMe[/QUOTE]

    You're asking me to address the validity of this statement?

    "Duke shares a common bond with most other "Old Timers", believing that what happened back in the distant past set the standard for greatness. Commonly known as " The good old days" its a phase in life that most people encounter in their their senior years, including Laker fans.

    SeemsToMe"

    These is no validity to your statement, it is insulting, condescending, and seems more like a personal attack than an argument.

    I stand by my earlier assessment.  I did not play any "ageist card"  just responded to your remarks for what they are:  low class and insulting to older people.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA

    Thanks Rondo.....if I could find my cane and get out of this rocking chair I'd really......err......I forget....
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from hedleylamarr. Show hedleylamarr's posts

    Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA

    In Response to Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA:
    [QUOTE]Thanks Rondo.....if I could find my cane and get out of this rocking chair I'd really......err......I forget....
    Posted by Duke4[/QUOTE]

    I'm with you on that one!
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from RajonRondowski. Show RajonRondowski's posts

    Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA

    In Response to Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA : I'm with you on that one!
    Posted by hedleylamarr[/QUOTE]

    Duke's not even 60 and some JoLo is calling him senile and "Old Timer".

    Man, there are some Tools in this world that need to be put to work.  LoL.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from RUWorthy. Show RUWorthy's posts

    Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA

    In Response to Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA : RUWorthy Thanks for taking the time to research the subject matter. I always enjoy a disscussion with a person that is willing to spend some time doing a little research to back up his point of view. However there are some points that we disgree on. #1--According to Basketball Reference.Com. Ray Allen's Lifetime shooting percentage is .450,broken down as follows. 2 point shooting=.483 and 3 point shooting=.396. #2--I clearly stated that Allen's 3 point shooting percentage was better than "SOME" Hall Of Fame players of the 50's and 60's had for their career. #3--Your list of guards from the 50's and 60's verify my point in #2 #4--If Allen's shooting percentage for 3 point shots is .396 then my statement is accurate. #5--You can add K.C.Jones(.387 ) to your list of guards. and also, according to Basketball Ref.com. Andy phillip has a nba career ave of .373 and Bob Davis has a career ave of .380.   SeemsToMe
    Posted by SeemsToMe[/QUOTE]

    My bad, My stats were taken from Allen's all star averages sheesh. Huge error on my part. Statistically I agree with your point! 

    Standing embarrassingly corrected. Plus it's she not he :)


     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from RUWorthy. Show RUWorthy's posts

    Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA

    In Response to Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA : You're asking me to address the validity of this statement? "Duke shares a common bond with most other "Old Timers", believing that what happened back in the distant past set the standard for greatness. Commonly known as " The good old days" its a phase in life that most people encounter in their their senior years, including Laker fans. SeemsToMe" These is no validity to your statement, it is insulting, condescending, and seems more like a personal attack than an argument. I stand by my earlier assessment.  I did not play any "ageist card"  just responded to your remarks for what they are:  low class and insulting to older people.
    Posted by RajonRondowski[/QUOTE]

    Senior Years comment is bad form. 

    I think generally we look back at stages of life which are 'good' in the past. And the more distance we travel from that time in our lives the better it becomes. 

    I look back at grade 3 and grade 4 at Collingwood with growing fond memories, but my parents remind me that at times I really disliked it. So memory has way of improving the past.

    I look at footage of the 80's in the NBA and I believe it's the best basketball I've seen. I don't know if this is correct or not form an historical perspective. But I like it. I know that no team ever will come as near to my heart as the Lakers side from 2000 to 2002. Because these wins occurred when I was much younger, they seem to be somehow bigger and better than the last two titles.

    Technically I still think the 86/87 Lakers would smash our current roster. As would the 85/86 Celtics. 

    Looking back and having the mind tell us that something in the past was 'better' is a common thing for everyone. Calling someone an old timer in that respect is pretty rude. 

     

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA

    Worthy is wise beyond her years.....she is able to respond to any and all posters  using dignity and respect...... and she is able to back up her posts....very impressive!!  ....as an "old timer" I see the changes in sports.....in my opinion, baseball and basketball are not as quality a product as had been seen in earlier years.....rules changes, free agency, million dollar contracts, expansion, steroids.....the sports are watered down......these days there is the five man rotation.....guys are on pitch counts....why?  ................m o n e y.......look back to the 50's-early '70's....winning 25 games, starting 40 games, going 250-300 innings was commonplace......during the younger NBA there were other leagues competing (the ABL and Eastern League just to name two)....these leagues had some very good players that were not able to make the NBA.....many of today's players lack basketball skills and fundamentals....great athletes, yes.....but great basketball players? .....no
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from RUWorthy. Show RUWorthy's posts

    Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA

    Lauren Jackson has better basketball fundamentals than most of the guys in the NBA. She's one of the the best basketball players I've seen.

    I actually think you get better shooting and a team game in the WNBA. I don't have figures to back this up. But I think the lack of athleticism when it comes to dunks, driving to the basket and power plays makes the players rely more on shooting, passing and general fundamentals.  

    That doesn't just count for WNBA but for womens basketball in general. 
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA

    You are absolutly right......go back to the late '60's.....the NCAA banned the dunk from the game for a few years...so Big Lou (Kareem) developed the almost unstoppable "sky hook"......most pro athletes over six feet can dunk....it's not as easy shooting the ball with a hand in your face....
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from RUWorthy. Show RUWorthy's posts

    Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA

    Indeed, outlawing the dunk actually improved Kareem's game no end. Leading to the development of his signature shot. 

    Michael Jordan improved over time as well. He always could hit a jump shot, but relied a lot on his athletic game. But as he got more mature he became a more well rounded player. I don't know if a guy like Lebron is capable of that, he may be but the jury is still out. 

    I enjoy watching athletic guys, but these days I appreciate the skills of guys who can't dunk like Mike and Lebron, but use other skills to dominate a game. That was one of the amazing things about Larry Birds play, his intelligence and basketball IQ were off the charts. Very rare thing.





     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from KB24RULZ. Show KB24RULZ's posts

    Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA

    In Response to Re: Celtics, Lakers and the Modern NBA:
    [QUOTE]You are absolutly right......go back to the late '60's.....the NCAA banned the dunk from the game for a few years...so Big Lou (Kareem) developed the almost unstoppable "sky hook"......most pro athletes over six feet can dunk....it's not as easy shooting the ball with a hand in your face....
    Posted by Duke4[/QUOTE]


    Lou? Oh Lew! Gotcha, like RUPotapenko I get mixed up with you're version of history.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share