Re: Lakers universally acclaimed as the NBA'S greatest franchise
posted at 8/26/2011 9:25 AM EDT
In Response to Re: Lakers universally acclaimed as the NBA'S greatest franchise
[QUOTE]The title of this thread, started by a Laker fan, is...."universally acclaimed as the NBA's greatest franchise..... So it all comes down to the history of each franchise....from the time they entered the league to the present.....there is no "bush league" in NBA history.....if there was, it would be the years prior to the shot clock....hmmm....the Lakers owned that era....then didn't win a championship for another 18 years under the new rules... to quote: ...."the bush league before Magic and Bird".....? I don't know how old you are but if you really believe that you must not have seen the greats that played in the '60's and '70's....but here is a random sample.... Boston: Bill Russell Sam Jones John Havlicek JoJo White Dave Cowens Los Angeles: Elgin Baylor Jerry West Wilt Chamberlain Gail Goodrich Adrian Dantley other teams: Oscar Robertson Elvin Hayes Wes Unseld Nate Thurmond Willis Reed Bill Bradley Earl "the Pearl" Monroe Walt Frazier Walt Bellamy ....the list goes on and on....check out how many great athletes are on this "short list".....check out how many were all stars and/or Hall of Famers.....these guys could all play today's game because they were great basketball players...were fundamentally sound.....had college careers to hone their skills.... to say the the NBA was a bush league before the 1979/80 season is an outrageous statement....I assume that you must feel the same way about the NFL and MLB......just unbelievable.....but you are entitled to your opinion the Celtics have the most titles and have dominated the head to head match up with the Lakers.....this thread is comparing the overall greatness of the two franchises....we could both take a look at multiple factors to make our point (which you continue to do).....but really, those two are at the top of the list...
Posted by Duke4[/QUOTE]
Yeah, these guys "could all play in today's game"? Boy, that's humble? You are talking about the HOFers here. They could merely play in today's game?
If I say "Jordan, Pippen, Shaq, Duncan, Kobe, KG, etc." I wouldn't say that could play in yesterday's game. I would say "Jordan, Pippen, Shaq, Duncan, Kobe, KG, etc. would destroy the 1950s/1960s NBA".
Your list show nothing. Every era has its all-stars, all-league (which eventually turned into HOFers). The 1900s MLB had HOFers. The 1930 NFL had HOFers. So what? Are you telling me the 1920/1930s NFL was as competitive as the 2000 NFL? Why not? there were Thorpe, Nagurski, Hutson, Nevers, Pollard, Baugh, Battles, Chamberlain, Clark, Driscoll, Hein, Friedman, etc. All HOFers from that era.
That's why your cohort DoctorCO claimed that only the SB era "matters".
Show me an era that there weren't HOFers, I'll tell you that the league didn't exist in that era.
So what do your list prove? It means they were the best player in that era, it doesn't tell us the relative merits of that era vs the current era.
To begin with, the era you want to build your case (the Celtic dynasty era) have no talent from the international pool, and African Americans only made up ~20% of the league. The pool of talent was very limited, as the league wasn't a big money league that attracted the best athletes. Your camp have always been bragging about the Russells, Baylors, West, Oscars, Wilts, etc.
I can always counter with the players they feasted on: Willie Jones, Jackie Moreland, Lee Shaffer, Dave Gambee, Bill Bridges, Chico Vaughn, Mike Farmer, Jim Barnes, Em Bryant, Ray Felix, Carl Braun, Charlie Tyra, Si Green, Joe Graboski, etc. What legend!!!
This "bush league NBA" not comparable to the big-time NBA has a lot more credibility than your comparison of east vs west. Look no further than your thought that the Eastern Conference was tough (due to the Celtics domination) that blocked the Celtics from making more finals. What a joke!!!