If the "modern NBA" started with the merger...

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

    Re: If the "modern NBA" started with the merger...

    ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmm..................huh............?  .....I have no clue what you are getting at................?
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from OC-CeltsFan. Show OC-CeltsFan's posts

    Re: If the "modern NBA" started with the merger...

    Duke, I think you need to put this TrajicMVP troll on ignore.  He cannot seriously debate you on these topics.  I'm willing to bet you anything this guy wears thick glasses, sits in front of his computer all day, and can't dribble a basketball let alone ever put on a jock strap.  He trolls this board reading Celtics fans' posts and then spends the next two days googling and then posting trivial stats and records to justify why his team's 11 titles are better than out 17 titles.  He's clearly a stat geek who doesn't see the context of a game beyond the numbers, yet, again, claims 11 or 16 is more than 17.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: If the "modern NBA" started with the merger...

    well Majic.....if you read my post, you would realize that I said "through the early '70's".....which meant that Unseld, Hayes, and Alcinder were already all stars...um...didn't Boston win again in '74 and '76?...and if Havlicek wasn't injured in '73 (I believe the Celtics had the best record that year)....and now..in this morning's news.....Kareem stated that the NBA, when Wilt averaged 50 PPG ('61/'62) was a much better league because there was more talent compared to the Jordan era....that is a hall of fame Laker backing our argument...more talent in the early '60's compared to the late '80's.....ONE OF YOUR OWN GUYS JUST SAID IT!!!!!!  .....I rest my case! 
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: If the "modern NBA" started with the merger...

    Oh, I almost forgot......Boston won 7-8 titles in the "bush league"?......yet you guys cling to the 5 titles the Lakers won many years earlier....before the shot clock era?....remember, as soon as the rules were changed Mikan was washed up....he retired...came back....and retired again because he couldn't play the game...he was 31 years old....
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from SeemsToMe. Show SeemsToMe's posts

    Re: If the "modern NBA" started with the merger...

    In Response to Re: If the "modern NBA" started with the merger...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: If the "modern NBA" started with the merger... : 1) You really have nerve to say that. Hayes, Alcindor and Unseld weren't there. Unseld was rookie of the year (and MVP) in 1969; Hayes was also a rookie that year. Alcindor entered the league in November 1969. By 1960? they were still in junior high. 2) The talent you keep mentioning was Russell, Oscar, Sam Jones and Elgin, as if these 4 players constitute the majority of the NBA jobs. In 1960, only 10% of the players were black (that was about 10 players in a league of 8 teams of ~100 players). It's obvious that it was a time of a very limited talent pool as most of the African American talents were ignored. Imagine the league right now has only 10% blacks (~40 players). Besides the obvious stars, where were the Tyson Chandlers, the Gerald Wallaces, the George Hills, the Jameer Nelsons, the Trevor Arizors? Even the fringe stars won't make it. 3) International talents. You can keep citing Vujovic, I can keep countering with Dirk, Manu, Scola, the Gasols, etc. 4) By mid-1960s, the Celtics have already won 7-8 championships. In other words, they built the majority of the dynasty on a very limited league talent pool that gave you only the players hang around your mouth all the time: Russell, Oscar, Wilt, Sam Jones, Elgin, but definitely no Ben Gordon, Jason Terry, Andrew Bynum, Andre Miller, Mo Williams, nor Dirk, Manu, Pau, Marc, Parker, etc. The current league "watered down"? There must be a new meaning of "watered down"...
    Posted by MajicMVP[/QUOTE]

    MajicMVP

    Actually, In the 1960 season, 93 players played at least 1 game.  23 of them were black. Thats 25%, not 10%.
    SeemsToMe
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: If the "modern NBA" started with the merger...

    In Response to Re: If the "modern NBA" started with the merger...:
    [QUOTE]Oh, I almost forgot......Boston won 7-8 titles in the "bush league"?......yet you guys cling to the 5 titles the Lakers won many years earlier....before the shot clock era?....remember, as soon as the rules were changed Mikan was washed up....he retired...came back....and retired again because he couldn't play the game...he was 31 years old....
    Posted by Duke4[/QUOTE]

    You said "the NBA was a great league by 1960", using your 8 players as justification.

    Yet out of your list of 8 players, only 3 of them played in the league in 1960, while the 4th (Jerry West) joined the league in October 1960 and played in 1960 for 2.5 months.

    So how do you conclude that 1960 was a great league from the players you listed?

    And yes, the Lakers won 5 championships in the pre-shot clock era. Now what?
    Was that part of the NBA or not?

    Let's not forget the Celtics won only 4 titles since the Golden era...

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: If the "modern NBA" started with the merger...

    In Response to Re: If the "modern NBA" started with the merger...:
    [QUOTE]well Majic.....if you read my post, you would realize that I said "through the early '70's".....which meant that Unseld, Hayes, and Alcinder were already all stars...um...didn't Boston win again in '74 and '76?...and if Havlicek wasn't injured in '73 (I believe the Celtics had the best record that year)....and now..in this morning's news..... Kareem stated that the NBA, when Wilt averaged 50 PPG ('61/'62) was a much better league because there was more talent compared to the Jordan era.... that is a hall of fame Laker backing our argument... more talent in the early '60's compared to the late '80's.....ONE OF YOUR OWN GUYS JUST SAID IT!!!!!!  .....I rest my case!  
    Posted by Duke4[/QUOTE]

    Yep, you can rest your case. You are talking about a league of 10% black players. That's more talent to the Jordan era?

    What is talent? Is it defined by God that only 100 players (as in the league size of 1960) were qualified as NBA talent in any era?

    Maybe you can tell me that the field of computer is better in the 1940s because there were probably only 50 people in the world knew about computer, and thus in the 2000s, the field is so watered down as many high-school kids can write a program...

    It is absurd for you and Kareem to think that the talent pool is a constant AT ALL TIMES, thus more people working in this field == watered down. But if you feel that you have to hang on him to reason, don't stop here...




     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: If the "modern NBA" started with the merger...

    In Response to Re: If the "modern NBA" started with the merger...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: If the "modern NBA" started with the merger... : MajicMVP Actually, In the 1960 season, 93 players played at least 1 game.  23 of them were black. Thats 25%, not 10%. SeemsToMe
    Posted by SeemsToMe[/QUOTE]
    any links?
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: If the "modern NBA" started with the merger...

    In Response to Re: If the "modern NBA" started with the merger...:
    [QUOTE]Duke, I think you need to put this TrajicMVP troll on ignore.  He cannot seriously debate you on these topics.  I'm willing to bet you anything this guy wears thick glasses, sits in front of his computer all day, and can't dribble a basketball let alone ever put on a jock strap.  He trolls this board reading Celtics fans' posts and then spends the next two days googling and then posting trivial stats and records to justify why his team's 11 titles are better than out 17 titles.  He's clearly a stat geek who doesn't see the context of a game beyond the numbers, yet, again, claims 11 or 16 is more than 17.
    Posted by OC-CeltsFan[/QUOTE]

    the Lakers won 11 titles? so who's the troll here?

    Did I say 11 or 16 is more than 17? You care to cite where I made such a statement? that's interesting...

     
  10. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: If the "modern NBA" started with the merger...

    IMO, the "modern NBA" began with the abolition of illgeal defenses. This took a chunk out of the dominance of Cs/PFs and shifted it to the 1s, 2s, and 3s. Today's NBA is now more of a collegiate style where the team with the best center doesn't always win.

    This is a good thing. A very good thing. It's the best decision the NBA ever made.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from SeemsToMe. Show SeemsToMe's posts

    Re: If the "modern NBA" started with the merger...

    In Response to Re: If the "modern NBA" started with the merger...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: If the "modern NBA" started with the merger... : any links?
    Posted by MajicMVP[/QUOTE]
    MajicMVP

    No links involved. Statement based on my memory and the use of "google" for photo identification of 2 of the players that I was not 100% sure of.  Used Basketball reference.com to determine the number of players that played that year.

    Seems
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Jump-ball-overtime. Show Jump-ball-overtime's posts

    Re: If the "modern NBA" started with the merger...

    Maybe, but a case could be made that the modern NBA started with Bird and Magic.

    The focus of the NBA on stars, created dominant star calls.

    The first modern NBA player is MJ with unlimited phantom calls.

    From that point, superheros were allowed to have super powers.

    MJ phantom calls

    Shaq, the ability to move people out of the way and crush them with dunks

    Kobe, the man who can commit flagrant fouls that are not fouls, and never fouls out. His phantom call ability was only second to MJ and Durant.

    Dirk, super elbows - allowed to create space with his elbows even if it knocks out opposing players, who foul dirk with their chins.

    Howard his super ability was to drive his shoulder into the center of the opposing player and drive them backward so he can hook or dunk.

    Lebron, His super power is to tuck the ball under his arm and run to the basket with his shoulder down to knock people out of the way while he runs to the basket. He even does broken field running from time to time with out a call.


    ...and there have been many others.


    The modern NBA ...where super powers happen.


     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from MajicMVP. Show MajicMVP's posts

    Re: If the "modern NBA" started with the merger...

    In Response to Re: If the "modern NBA" started with the merger...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: If the "modern NBA" started with the merger... : MajicMVP No links involved. Statement based on my memory and the use of "google" for photo identification of 2 of the players that I was not 100% sure of.  Used Basketball reference.com to determine the number of players that played that year. Seems
    Posted by SeemsToMe[/QUOTE]

    Since you rely on memory, I would rather believe in two more creditable sources.

    One was from the biography of George R Brown Jr., one of the first black players in the league:

    "Two things need to be emphasized at this point. First, the chances of an African American making the NBA, as Brown did, and remaining in the NBA were very unlikely. During the season of 1957-58, only 15 African Americans appeared in an NBA game, three of these 15 players did not play the entire season, and two of these three played fewer than five games (6)!

    [Note 6]. The following are the 15 African Americans to play in the NBA during the 1957-58 season: George Brown, Nat Clifton, Walter Dukes, Ray Felix, Ed Fleming, Bob Hopkins, McCoy Ingram, Sam Jones, Earl Lloyd, Willie Naulls, Worthy Patterson, Dick Ricketts, Bill Russell, Woody Sauldsberry, and Maurice Stokes. "

    The other one is Jon Entine's book in 2000: "Taboo: why Black athletes dominate sports and why we're afraid to talk about it"

    in it, he stated:

    "In the mid-1960s the racial breakdown in the National Basketball Association (NBA) was 80 percent white, 20 percent black; today it's almost exactly reversed - the NBA is more than 85 percent black."

    You can read that book in Google Books, the quote was from page 19.

    But no matter whether it's 15%, 20% or even up to the 25% you stated, it's still a far cry from the 85% in 2000. Now, based on the 1960 league size, you are talking about 50-70 jobs in the league that could have been held by African Americans. And yet defenders of the Celtic dynasty have the nerve to claim that the 1950s/1960s league were full of talents (because only the top 100 players can play in the league) while the 1990s/2000s were watered down?

    I mean, keep mentioning the exceptions (HOFers like Russ, Sam Jones, Oscar, Elgin, Wilt, etc.) aren't going to save the argument.
     
  15. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: If the "modern NBA" started with the merger...

    In Response to Re: If the "modern NBA" started with the merger...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: If the "modern NBA" started with the merger... : Since you rely on memory, I would rather believe in two more creditable sources. One was from the biography of George R Brown Jr., one of the first black players in the league: "Two things need to be emphasized at this point. First, the chances of an African American making the NBA, as Brown did, and remaining in the NBA were very unlikely. During the season of 1957-58, only 15 African Americans appeared in an NBA game, three of these 15 players did not play the entire season, and two of these three played fewer than five games (6)! [Note 6]. The following are the 15 African Americans to play in the NBA during the 1957-58 season: George Brown, Nat Clifton, Walter Dukes, Ray Felix, Ed Fleming, Bob Hopkins, McCoy Ingram, Sam Jones, Earl Lloyd, Willie Naulls, Worthy Patterson, Dick Ricketts, Bill Russell, Woody Sauldsberry, and Maurice Stokes. " The other one is Jon Entine's book in 2000: "Taboo: why Black athletes dominate sports and why we're afraid to talk about it" in it, he stated: "In the mid-1960s the racial breakdown in the National Basketball Association (NBA) was 80 percent white, 20 percent black; today it's almost exactly reversed - the NBA is more than 85 percent black." You can read that book in Google Books, the quote was from page 19. But no matter whether it's 15%, 20% or even up to the 25% you stated, it's still a far cry from the 85% in 2000. Now, based on the 1960 league size, you are talking about 50-70 jobs in the league that could have been held by African Americans. And yet defenders of the Celtic dynasty have the nerve to claim that the 1950s/1960s league were full of talents (because only the top 100 players can play in the league) while the 1990s/2000s were watered down? I mean, keep mentioning the exceptions (HOFers like Russ, Sam Jones, Oscar, Elgin, Wilt, etc.) aren't going to save the argument.
    Posted by MajicMVP[/QUOTE]

    MacjicMVP

    In 1960, when the Celtics won their 3rd championship, the NBA had less than 10% African Americans

    Based on your above statement I submitted numbers based on the  1960-61 season. Now you submit figures based on the 1957-58 season and the mid-60's. I can understand your prefering your sourse over my numbers.  However I did get to see those players actually play or at least I saw pictures of them during their playing days. If you wish I will post the names of the blacks so that you can verify their color on GOOGLE. By the way I was 28 years old in 1960.

     Over the past 4 years I have Spent considerable time researching and comparing the different generations in nba basketball. It is my opinion that the emergence of the Black basketball player as the overwhelming dominating
     force in the league took place in the late 1970's. This is a position they still have now. You mentioned the mid 80's as being dominated by Blacks. Here are some numbers to back your opinion. These numbers are for the 1985-86 season.There were 23 teams in the league. I used the top 115 scorers (that amounted to the top 5 scorers for each of the 23 teams) Based on color, the results were: 

     Total players--115,,,  Black--97 (84%)
                                   White--17 (15%)
                                   International--1 (1%)
     6'8" or taller--49 (43%)
    6'7" or shorter--66 (57%)
     Black--58 (88%)
     White--7 (11%)
     International--1 (1%)


     Compared to Russell's 1st year-- 1956-57--8 teams
    Total players--40
      Black--7 (18%)
      White--33 (83%)
     6'8" or taller--11 (28%)
     6'7' or shorter--29
         white--25 (86%)
         Black--4 ((14%)

      And the American White's role in the nba is even more diminished by 2009-10
    The game has become a speed and quickness game with the game of the 50's and 60's having fallen victim to Father Time.

    Seems 
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share