The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.

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

    Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.

    without a doubt, the 85-86 celtics team was the best ever in the nba.  those guys put up some ungodly home win percentage and it was plenty obvious that the lakers were ducking them when it came playoff time.  the lakers knew they were going to get blown out and so they dogged it in the playoffs.  the only surprise is that the rockets team actually won 2 games but then they had the advantage at center and sampson, wasn't totally useless.  after this team it would be the 65 celtics followed by the 67 sixers a lakers team and then the bulls.  why no love for the bulls?  the competition was pitiful and no one ever tried to lay some wood on his airness (except danny ainge in the finals with phoenix).  there was no other player for jordan to compete with. 
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from rangerous. Show rangerous's posts

    Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.

    In Response to Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.:
    s In Response to Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time. : Duke I thought the issue was about comparing the past as it existed vs the present. Why the need for a makeover?  Its like saying that the p-51 fighter of WW2 was equal to the f-16 fighter of the present.  Take the p-51 fighter, double its size,sweep back its wings, replace the old piston engine with a jet engine, rip out the old machine guns and cannon,replace with air to air and air to surface misiles, throw in modern radar,  and there you have it. The P-51 and the F-16 are equal. Are you suggesting that this is how it should be done? If so ,then remember, that the Mikan era of the early 50's would need to be adjusted to account for the White Genetics of his times vs the Black Genetics of the Russell years on to the present. Seems
    Posted by SeemsToMe


    obviously you can't compare how a person would be physically from one era to another and it's sort of the same way with the mental aspect.  i think i would be fine with russell at his era's playing weight as long as his psyche was the same. the man just refused to lose and he was blessed with some pretty good players around him.  on that score i doubt if you can recreate the talent concentration because there are too many teams.  back when russ played there were maybe 12 teams.  now there are 32.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from futbal. Show futbal's posts

    Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.

    Various thoughts on the theme of older players versus 80s on...On the old guys versus 80s on players try this on: Dave Cowens would dominate KG and Russell would dominate Cowens. Cowens beat Kareem and Russell beat everybody including Wilt. Wilt and Kareem are the best offensive players ever (yes, better than MJ); the sky hook remains the best shot ever, and Wilt scored 100 points and so on. And MJ never beat a great team in thier prime, his bulls lost to Boston, LA, and (a lot to) Detroit before finally winning against lesser teams including the (not great) 91 Lakers.
    And let's not forget that the ABA (67-76) siphoned off some awesome talent in DrJ, Moses, Ice Gervin, George McGinnis. When Philly got DrJ and Moses  and put them with Tony, Cheeks and Bobby Jones they won the 83 title with 70s style basketball; and dominated the playoffs with a 12-1 recrod and swept the Laker Fo-nothing in the finals. I remember Andrew Toney, the "Boston strangler." Kareem, Cowens, Unseld, Hondo, Jerry West, Ice Gervin, Dr. J, McGinnis, Moses, etc. Easy to argue that the best players were in the 70s and this was obscurred by the ABA/NBA rivalry.

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

    Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.

    In Response to Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.:
    Actually Seems, yes that is what I referred to......of course today's athletes are bigger, stronger, faster, etc....the four minute mile was broken long ago, the 100 yard dash, etc....offensive and defensive linemen in the pro's go 300+ lbs.....today's athletes are larger by nature....also they have the weight training, diet, supplements, etc....could Russ have played at 6-10 220...? well, I believe that he would naturally follow the same regimen as today's athletes....so while he might not be taller he would probably put on 20 lbs of muscle....if Russ could play Chamberlain back in the day (remember Wilt was at least 2-3 inches taller and outweighed him by 50 lbs) then yes, I think Russ could play today's game and be a star...of course it is all speculation...my contention has always been that, while todays athletes are better, today's game of professional basketball is a diluted product....a "star driven" league (see the Jordan rules).....they no longer enforce some of the basic rules....that is all I'm saying...
    Posted by Duke4

    Once again your changing Russ. I want the teams and the players to remain as they were during their playing days. Isn't that the only fair way to determine which teams from the different generations were the best? Sort of like, what you see and what you get of the 60's vs what you see and what you get of the 80's,90's,and presant. No makeovers allowed.  You also refer to the leaque being "diluted".  When did this 1st take place? What caused this "dilution".

    Seems
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from lakersavenger. Show lakersavenger's posts

    Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.

    In Response to Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.:
    the problem with this debate is that some posters think that comparing the generations doesn't also take into account genetic change...today's players are larger....but, if Bill Russell was a 22 year old today, since people today are generally larger beings than those of 50 years ago, it would suggest that he would probably gain an inch or so and also have a larger frame....so let's say Russ is 6-11 and weighs around 240-250.....with today's conditioning programs, the weight room, diet, and supplements, he would be easily ready for today's game.....now, keeping in mind that he would still have the incredible leaping ability and athletic skills, along with his mental toughness, the question becomes....would today's game be ready for him....? 
    Posted by Duke4

    What a stretch, duke. Size is a part of all generations and is a major factor that compares one era to another. Why not just say if Shaq would have played Russell back then, you'd have to envision Shaq 100 lbs lighter and 3 or 4 inches shorter, since nobody back then was genetically huge like today. Just a dumb issue to bring up, but that's you again, twisting and playing with ridiculous what-ifs to make your old forgotten heros seem superior to todays giant powerhouse players. Let's see, if Babe Ruth played today he would be a big fat 300 pounder since back then being fat like he was back then was rare, and with today's obese population, he'd be very, very obese. And don't forget, though the league was mostly white little grunts, today those white grunts would be all 7 footers and be able to compete today, right? And maybe evolution would make all those little whites 7 ft blacks today. Bottom line, Russell was great then, and so were many others of that era, but they were great in comparison to the players of that era. It doesn't make them bad, it just means that in every sport the succeeding generations just get bigger, faster and more skilled. That's especially true in BB, boxing (especially the heavyweights), baseball and football where size and speed is critical.They actually build on the skills of their predecessors. Wilt was perhaps the only player of the '60's who could still, with his skills and size being the same today and not factoring in genetic improvements, would still very much dominate today, maybe not as dramatic as he did then in terms of scoring and rebounding, but he'd be a 30-20 today. He would have been the only one to be able to check Shaq. Look at pitchers today, you almost have to be 6'7" to get on a roster and dominate. So do you say that all the pitchers of the '20's would be just as good because they would genetically be 6'7" today. All players from the past were what they were, and you admire and idolize for what they were and how they competed, but they are in the past and those days are gone. Players 30 years from now may all be mobile, agile, quick 7 foot guards and 7'5" centers who can all run and hit 3's. If history is an indicator, they will make today's players seem like amateurs. But that won't make them any less great for what they were.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.

    The  Greats transcend time, and it is an insult to them to say otherwise.  Ted Williams, Bobby Orr, Babe Ruth and Bill Russell would all be great whenever they played.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from videoburns. Show videoburns's posts

    Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.

    The dillution issue is an important one..   one alway's brought up in these arguments, and one that could be analysed if someone has a little time...   

    First   You need an estimate of the population of the potential player pool. That is in the years preceeding the team years you are considering...   like the number o US 18 and 19 year olds..  
    2009 8,615
    2008 8,492
    2007 8,338
    2006 8,102
    2005 7,559
    2004 7,701
    2003 7,533
    2002 7,907
    2001 7,985
    2000 8,045
    1999 7,991
    1998 7,902
    1997 7,510
    1996 7,376
    1995 7,198
    1994 6,946
    1993 6,594
    1992 6,535
    1991 6,664
    1990 7,064
    1989 7,361
    1988 7,294
    1987 7,160
    1986 7,095
    1985 7,204
    1984 7,428
    1983 7,819
    1982 8,023
    1981 8,115
    1980 8,160
    1979 8,214
    1978 8,153
    1977 8,151
    1976 8,148
    1975 8,024
    1974 7,822
    1973 7,649
    1972 7,462
    1971 7,231
    1970 6,958
    1969 6,677
    1968 6,587
    1967 6,358

    These are US census figures (in thousands) for civilian non-institutionalized population 18-19 years old...  so cut the numbers in half for male population and then divide by number of players in the NBA in a given year.

    the figures from 1967 would apply to the 1973-79 teams - assuming peak contributions  at age 25-30 

     notice the baby boom buldge... which increases talent pool for the teams of the 80s. I didn't get figures from earlier but they would be needed to evaluate "dilution"  factor for years previous to 73 or so.

    The player pool estimate could be fine tuned if data was available for high school sport participation rates..  and so on   but I think rates haven't changed much over the years.  

    I hope this inspires someone to dig up more of the data and come up with a 6 decade annual talent pool dilution index for the NBA.   


        

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

    Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.

    Nice list.  I would argue the '86 Celtics were the best all-time.  Bird at the absolute top of his game WITH a healthy Bill Walton.  That was a joy to watch.  Really wish the Lakers had beaten Houston that year, would have been better to beat LA..
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.

    take a look at futbal's last post....he sums it up nicly.....I will come back to this later today....suffice it to say that if Bill Russell could be effective against Wilt then I believe he could be effective today......look at baseball......Sandy Koufax almost 50 years ago could start 40 games and complete 25.....he could go 300+ innings and he would be a Cy Young candidate today....and there were plenty of those types pitching that way 50 years ago.....guys like Feller, Drysdale, Gibson, and Marichal....does anyone want to argue that they wouldn't still be 20 game winners?
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.

    Avenger, you make some good points.....what my argument boils down to is this....the players may be better athletically but I don't think they are better basketball players....the reason that Russ could be effective against Wilt was that Wilt had to play the game according to the rules.....Shaq is allowed to use force to back his opponent down..he basically bulls them over...if Wilt continually did that during a game there would've been a lot of charges called on him....notice he never fouled out of a game...?

    today we routinely see guys traveling all over the place...and what happened to "up & down"? ......if you caught a pass, dribbled a few times and went up for a shot, the shot had to be taken....now we see guys go up with the ball, come down, go up again for a dunk....that is a form of traveling that they just don't call anymore...palming the ball is rarely called....I never said that today's athletes aren't stronger and faster...my argument is that if they played back in the day and were forced to play by the rules, they would have to alter their games to fit into the system and to be able to play pure professional basketball at the level it was played...

    also, I believe Ali would dominate today's heavyweight division and Sandy Koufax would be dominant based on the fact that he had a tremendous fastball and curve, proved he could start 40 games and pitch 300+ innings....95-100 MPH is the fast regardless of the decade...

    Finally, I've even heard people say that Jim Brown wouldn't be the player he was because today's players are so much larger....so I pose the question....can a 6-2, 232 lb running back with power, speed, and moves play in today's NFL? ....absolutely.....he might not rack up 1800 yards in a 12 game season like he did....but in today's 16 game season?.....this guy is an all pro running back......at least in my opinion...anyway.....as always, I enjoy the input and the back & forth....good stuff fella's (and lady!)
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from lakersavenger. Show lakersavenger's posts

    Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.

    In Response to Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.:
    take a look at futbal's last post....he sums it up nicly.....I will come back to this later today....suffice it to say that if Bill Russell could be effective against Wilt then I believe he could be effective today......look at baseball......Sandy Koufax almost 50 years ago could start 40 games and complete 25.....he could go 300+ innings and he would be a Cy Young candidate today....and there were plenty of those types pitching that way 50 years ago.....guys like Feller, Drysdale, Gibson, and Marichal....does anyone want to argue that they wouldn't still be 20 game winners?
    Posted by Duke4


    No they wouldn't be 20 game winners because now you have fresh middle and late game relievers, specialists, who throw just as hard or harder than they did. In those days relievers were largely, with exceptions, former starters way past their prime. There were no designated hitters anywhere so when you couldn't run or throw anymore, you didn't play to 40. And on and on and on. As much as I loved Koufax, he would still be good today, but there are too many fireballers that he would one of many. Back then there was no such thing as Mario Rivera's to back you up, so you went as far as you could go. I liked it better back then because the game was a lot faster, but as a whole, those teams would be a major notch below today's. I am not stating my opinions as a Laker or L.A. fan but as a realist and I am not knocking or praising one team or players over others. Look at Elgin Baylor, and his at-the-time ability to hang, at 6'5" my hero would not be much of a factor because there a lot of players today who can do what he did and do it better and be close to or at 7 foot. That's just being realistic. It does not demean or belittle past greats, it just puts their accomplishments in perspective. The one player that kind of reminded me of Russell and his defense was Hakeem, but Hakeem was a hell of a lot better scorer and was 7 foot. When you compare players you have to compare what you had or got. Russell was 6'9" so you compare him at 6'9" to todays players as he was, not as, well he would be 7 ft too because of genetics. Chamberlain would be, what, 7'6" today since he was a monstrous 7'2". Because of his way-ahead-of-his-time size and strength he would could still dominate today. But if he was a 6'9" then you'd have to say he would likely not even be a starter today, or if he was, he would be quite average. Time marches onward and upward.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from JamLock. Show JamLock's posts

    Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.

    In Response to Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.:
    In Response to Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time. : You made some interesting comments and I will try to reply to a few.  Obviously my replies are my opinion and I probably am biased because I believe what I believe. When we are speaking of subjective type analysis, everyone will have their own bias.  1.  IMO Bill Russell was the greatest of all time.  I have not seen anyone come along since he left basketball that could control a game as well as he could.  He is the only player that other teams Consistently stopped moving ahead on a fast break when it was 2, 3 or 4 on 1 and Russell was the one. That is something that I have only seen on a consistent basis with Russell.  Unfortunately blocked shot stats were not kept when Russell played because that was a big part of his game every game.  Can you name a player now or since Russell retired where blocked shots were a significant part of his game, every game?  I can not!  Russell controlled the game he was in from the defensive end of the floor, but he also started the famed Celtic fast break by rebounding and getting the ball to the likes of Cousy, Jones, Havlichik etc.  Mainly it was Cousy until the Cooz retired. Russell was 6' 9 1/2" tall with very long arms and the best timing instinct of any player I have had the pleasure of watching the past 60 years. He was blessed with the ability to jump at the right time, and he jumped very high. No one has come along with his distinct abilities since he left the game.  Now is that Bias?  I consider it to be a knowledgeable opinion. You are certainly free to have your own opinion. However, unless you saw Russell play, I doubt that you can understand his true greatness.  For instance, if you tried to explain to someone who had never seen MJ play how great he was, they just might have some difficulty visioning it.  I can appreciate those, who through no fault of their own never saw Bill Russell play, having a difficult time agreeing with me. It is to be expected. On the other hand, I never actually saw babe ruth play baseball, but I have a strong feeling that he was one of the greatest baseball players of all time, if not the greatest. 2. IMO MJ's greatest opposition was Utah with Stockton and Malone. I do not consider that Utah team to be a great team, yet that team IMO was the main opposition MJ had. The Celtics in the 80's had Philly, Then LA then Detroit to compete with and they all were far superior to Utah of the 90's. 3.  Rules and Regualtions:  You may think that the officials of the 50's and 60's called games in a similar manner as they do today.  I can tell you for sure that if you feel that way you are wrong.  Bob Cousy, one of the greatest stars of the 50's, could not take two steps without being called for traveling.  Rondo gets a defensive rebound and many times takes 3 or 4 steps before putting the ball on the floor.  Call it what you want, but back in the 50's and 60's star power and calls were not what they are now.  Not even close!  Star power and ridiculous calls done by officials on a routing basis started in the 80's with King David Stern. The Celtics benefitted with Mchale being allowed to take an extra slip step because the league stated it was his patented move.  A patented move whereby he moved his pivot foot every time---that is traveling in any basketball game other than the NBA.  MJ got away with taking 3, 4 or in at least one case I saw and taped, he took 9 steps and put the ball on the floor just one time. He got the ball at just behind midcourt on the right hand side and ran to the top of the circle and then to the left corner and thyen ran under the basket and layed the ball up with his right hand whi9le the announcer stated, "I have never seen anything like that before" and the home crowd gave MJ a standing ovation.  I must agree, I had never seen anything like that before either--9 steps and the ball hit the floor one time. MJ's push off of Byrun Russell is one of the classic's of all time.  Any other player on the Chicago team who might have done that, including Scottie Pipen, the whistle blows and the foul is called and the basket is waived off.  In this case MJ is congratulated for hitting the winning and clinching shot, while his defensive opposition player is trying to get up off the court floor after being shoved done by MJ. I do agree with you that Kobe and James and some other so called super stars of today get the same kind of benefit of official calls.  I do not agree that Cousy, Russell, Jerry West, Oscar, Wilt, Bob Petit, John Havlichik, Dave Cowens, Willis Reed etc. etc. etc. ever got that same favorable treatment. I do agree with you about the recent fix jobs.  That is another David Stern Production through his officials.  David Stern was determined to increase the popularity of Pro basketball and he has been extremely successful. In so doing he created the Star system.  He also meshed some of the Harlem Globetrotter officiating with WWE activities somehow connected to basketball.  When you see Rondo thrown to the court, that is part of the WWE connection. I can not wait until Stern retires.  He has changed basketball to attract Yippees and thedrinking crowd, not for the benefit of pure basketball fans. All of the above is MY OPINION!  I have been watching pro basketball since the very early 50's. PS:  For those of you who think white players dominated the game in the 60's, you are absolutely wrong.  The Celtics started 5 black players in the first half of the 60's.  Havlichik was the 6th man.  They could all run and run fast.  They were not slow footed.  In fact, I wonder what player today could keep up with John (white man) Havlichik even if they were running with the ball?
    Posted by larry1717


    Agreed.  Great post!

    As Always,
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.

    Koufax had Perranoski who was a great reliever....but more importantly......Koufax didn't need a Rivera......he could finish like most great pitchers of the time could....take a look at the '63 WS between the Dodgers and the Yankees

    Game #!.....complete game by Koufax

    Game #2.....complete game by Drysdale

    Game #3.....I believe (off the top of my head) that Podres went maybe 8 innings and Perranoski finished

    Game $4.....complete game by Koufax

    this was accomplished 48 years ago.....

    and in the NBA.....you don't think Baylor (one of my all time favorites) wouldn't have game like Michael or Kobe...?  .....why??  he was ahead of his time....invented playing above the rim....I not arguing....but I am disagreeing...
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from SeemsToMe. Show SeemsToMe's posts

    Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.

    In Response to Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.:
    Avenger, you make some good points.....what my argument boils down to is this....the players may be better athletically but I don't think they are better basketball players....the reason that Russ could be effective against Wilt was that Wilt had to play the game according to the rules.....Shaq is allowed to use force to back his opponent down..he basically bulls them over...if Wilt continually did that during a game there would've been a lot of charges called on him....notice he never fouled out of a game...? today we routinely see guys traveling all over the place...and what happened to "up & down"? ......if you caught a pass, dribbled a few times and went up for a shot, the shot had to be taken....now we see guys go up with the ball, come down, go up again for a dunk....that is a form of traveling that they just don't call anymore...palming the ball is rarely called....I never said that today's athletes aren't stronger and faster...my argument is that if they played back in the day and were forced to play by the rules, they would have to alter their games to fit into the system and to be able to play pure professional basketball at the level it was played... also, I believe Ali would dominate today's heavyweight division and Sandy Koufax would be dominant based on the fact that he had a tremendous fastball and curve, proved he could start 40 games and pitch 300+ innings....95-100 MPH is the fast regardless of the decade... Finally, I've even heard people say that Jim Brown wouldn't be the player he was because today's players are so much larger....so I pose the question....can a 6-2, 232 lb running back with power, speed, and moves play in today's NFL? ....absolutely.....he might not rack up 1800 yards in a 12 game season like he did....but in today's 16 game season?.....this guy is an all pro running back......at least in my opinion...anyway.....as always, I enjoy the input and the back & forth....good stuff fella's (and lady!)
    Posted by Duke4


      Duke

      Your right about how the game of basketball has changed over the last 50 or so years. But so hasn't baseball and football and they will continue to evolve over the years.  But lets stick with basketball. I watched basketball as a 14 year old back in 1946. The changes since then have been unbelievable. Just a few major ones, would be rules that govern palming, traveling and what constitutes a foul. I loved the game the way it was played in the 50's and 60's but no more so than the way it is played now. They could have played in tuxedo's back in Russells day. There was a total lack of physical contact in those days. (If you think otherwise you should pick up the 4 Celtic tapes that are available of 1960's games). Over the years the game has changed but its still basketball. But as much as the game has changed its the players that have evolved the most. The skill level is so much higher now. When I watch my dvd's of those 4 games of the 60's I'm reminded of the difference in the skill levels between the generations. Only a few could shoot or were able to dribble with any consistency with there non shooting hand.
      And getting to the Rim -- The many white players in the league precluded that being a part of the game and even the black players had not added that to their repertoire.  As to the height differential!  I'll follow up this post with 2 printouts that will illustrate the difference 

    Seems
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from lakersavenger. Show lakersavenger's posts

    Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.

    In Response to Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.:
    Avenger, you make some good points.....what my argument boils down to is this....the players may be better athletically but I don't think they are better basketball players....the reason that Russ could be effective against Wilt was that Wilt had to play the game according to the rules.....Shaq is allowed to use force to back his opponent down..he basically bulls them over...if Wilt continually did that during a game there would've been a lot of charges called on him....notice he never fouled out of a game...? today we routinely see guys traveling all over the place...and what happened to "up & down"? ......if you caught a pass, dribbled a few times and went up for a shot, the shot had to be taken....now we see guys go up with the ball, come down, go up again for a dunk....that is a form of traveling that they just don't call anymore...palming the ball is rarely called....I never said that today's athletes aren't stronger and faster...my argument is that if they played back in the day and were forced to play by the rules, they would have to alter their games to fit into the system and to be able to play pure professional basketball at the level it was played... also, I believe Ali would dominate today's heavyweight division and Sandy Koufax would be dominant based on the fact that he had a tremendous fastball and curve, proved he could start 40 games and pitch 300+ innings....95-100 MPH is the fast regardless of the decade... Finally, I've even heard people say that Jim Brown wouldn't be the player he was because today's players are so much larger....so I pose the question....can a 6-2, 232 lb running back with power, speed, and moves play in today's NFL? ....absolutely.....he might not rack up 1800 yards in a 12 game season like he did....but in today's 16 game season?.....this guy is an all pro running back......at least in my opinion...anyway.....as always, I enjoy the input and the back & forth....good stuff fella's (and lady!)
    Posted by Duke4

    I see it the other way with the different rules. The game and the rules have progressed along with the players progression and athleticism and fan interest. The up and down rule became lax because it was much more exciting to allow the players to demonstrate ball handling skills. In comparing both eras, in a fantasy matchup, you'd have to use the current rules because the game has adapted to the factors I mentioned. To make a player today's play to the old rules is regressive and they would have to unlearn great skills, on the other hand you'd have to ask "could the past players have the physical and mental capabilities to adapt to todays fast, power game with the current rules"? Also, as good as Russell was on defense, team defense was weak then, compared to todays complicated schematics. I remember the old scores of 125-120 being the norm, that's part of the reason Wilt could score 50 a game. Then defenses got tighter and tighter all the way to the late '80's with all the hacking and put downs that brought about the flagrant foul rules. Detroit won with scores like 80-75 regularly, but it was getting a bit boring for the fans and now the league began experimenting with rules, like zone defenses and the circle under the basket, hand checking, etc. So now we linger in the 100 pt game era. The game is a lot more complicated today. I remember I used to know just about all the rules, now I dunno.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from SeemsToMe. Show SeemsToMe's posts

    Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.

    In Response to Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.:
    In Response to Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time. :   Duke   Your right about how the game of basketball has changed over the last 50 or so years. But so hasn't baseball and football and they will continue to evolve over the years.  But lets stick with basketball. I watched basketball as a 14 year old back in 1946. The changes since then have been unbelievable. Just a few major ones, would be rules that govern palming, traveling and what constitutes a foul. I loved the game the way it was played in the 50's and 60's but no more so than the way it is played now. They could have played in tuxedo's back in Russells day. There was a total lack of physical contact in those days. (If you think otherwise you should pick up the 4 Celtic tapes that are available of 1960's games). Over the years the game has changed but its still basketball. But as much as the game has changed its the players that have evolved the most. The skill level is so much higher now. When I watch my dvd's of those 4 games of the 60's I'm reminded of the difference in the skill levels between the generations. Only a few could shoot or were able to dribble with any consistency with there non shooting hand.   And getting to the Rim -- The many white players in the league precluded that being a part of the game and even the black players had not added that to their repertoire.  As to the height differential!  I'll follow up this post with 2 printouts that will illustrate the difference  Seems
    Posted by SeemsToMe


    Duke

    Heres some stats on the 62-63 celtics. Picked them becaused they are considered to be just about the best of the 60's Celtic. Also selected 6'8" as the minimum height number because centers at that time were often as short as 6'8".

     http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&type=per_game&per_minute_base=36&lg_id=NBA&is_playoffs=N&year_min=1963&year_max=1963&franch_id=&season_start=1&season_end=-1&age_min=0&age_max=99&height_min=80&height_max=91&birth_country_is=Y&birth_country=&is_active=&is_hof=&pos=&qual=&c1stat=mp&c1comp=gt&c1val=1550&c2stat=&c2comp=gt&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=gt&c3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&c5stat=&c5comp=gt&c6mult=1.0&c6stat=&order_by=height

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

    Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.

    In Response to Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.:
    In Response to Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time. : Duke Heres some stats on the 62-63 celtics. Picked them becaused they are considered to be just about the best of the 60's Celtic. Also selected 6'8" as the minimum height number because centers at that time were often as short as 6'8".   http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&type=per_game&per_minute_base=36&lg_id=NBA&is_playoffs=N&year_min=1963&year_max=1963&franch_id=&season_start=1&season_end=-1&age_min=0&age_max=99&height_min=80&height_max=91&birth_country_is=Y&birth_country=&is_active=&is_hof=&pos=&qual=&c1stat=mp&c1comp=gt&c1val=1550&c2stat=&c2comp=gt&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=gt&c3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&c5stat=&c5comp=gt&c6mult=1.0&c6stat=&order_by=height Seems
    Posted by SeemsToMe


     And here's Wilts, Bells and Russ's competition in 2010-11.

      http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&type=per_game&per_minute_base=36&lg_id=NBA&is_playoffs=N&year_min=2011&year_max=2011&franch_id=&season_start=1&season_end=-1&age_min=0&age_max=99&height_min=80&height_max=91&birth_country_is=Y&birth_country=&is_active=&is_hof=&pos=&qual=&c1stat=mp&c1comp=gt&c1val=1550&c2stat=&c2comp=gt&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=gt&c3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&c5stat=&c5comp=gt&c6mult=1.0&c6stat=&order_by=height
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from lakersavenger. Show lakersavenger's posts

    Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.

    A couple of major things that I have also noticed is with help defenses and mid-range shooting. It's getting more and more difficult to find an open man. When the Knicks of the early 70's moved it was great to watch and they always seemed to find somebody open, especially at the top of the key, but many teams today, if not most, have really had to learn and apply what they did and better just to get an open look. Never saw help defenses that tight in the old days. Also, the 3pt shot has just about made mid-range shooters obsolete. The mid-range is one area that I think the old guys ruled because they were all 2pts and they were much more skilled in that area, but if you make the old guys shoot today's 3's, forget it. It's all dunks, lay-ins or 3's. If guys are just under the 3pt line and open, they step back for the 3. I quit playing street ball about 10 years ago and I was a decent 3 pointer from high school or college distance, which is pretty far, but do you realize how far and how difficult it is to hit a pro 3? You almost have to heave it.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.

    OK guys.....good getting different perspectives on these things...I agree with some opinions, disagree with others, but I'm respectful of all of your opinions....I know Seems is 79....I'm going on 61....I hang with my age group and they are all sports fanatics....we have had literally thousands of discussions/debates over the years as we traveled together to visit different cities and different sports outings....many a campfire debate....all in all, most of these friends of my generation (ages 55-70) have a few things in common...

    they were and are still huge baseball fans but are turned off by the steroid era...the statistics have been skewed and stats are historically important to baseball fans...

    they all agree the NFL is unquestionably the #1 sport....

    they don't follow the NBA like they did say, up until the end of the MJ era....a few of us still pay attention...but the majority of my buddies don't follow the NBA game anymore...college basketball is king in their minds

    they all still love hockey (I'm not much of a fan...but I certainly appreciate the sport)

    none of us follow boxing (I was an enormous fan.....Ali was my guy)...or MMA

    we all love golf and auto racing

    ...times change.............games change.......but sports fans are in it for life.....we can always agree to disagree and be what I consider to be friends on this forum...

    peace guys (and gal)

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

    Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.

    In Response to Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.:
    The dillution issue is an important one..   one alway's brought up in these arguments, and one that could be analysed if someone has a little time...    First   You need an estimate of the population of the potential player pool. That is in the years preceeding the team years you are considering...   like the number o US 18 and 19 year olds..   2009 8,615 2008 8,492 2007 8,338 2006 8,102 2005 7,559 2004 7,701 2003 7,533 2002 7,907 2001 7,985 2000 8,045 1999 7,991 1998 7,902 1997 7,510 1996 7,376 1995 7,198 1994 6,946 1993 6,594 1992 6,535 1991 6,664 1990 7,064 1989 7,361 1988 7,294 1987 7,160 1986 7,095 1985 7,204 1984 7,428 1983 7,819 1982 8,023 1981 8,115 1980 8,160 1979 8,214 1978 8,153 1977 8,151 1976 8,148 1975 8,024 1974 7,822 1973 7,649 1972 7,462 1971 7,231 1970 6,958 1969 6,677 1968 6,587 1967 6,358 These are US census figures (in thousands) for civilian non-institutionalized population 18-19 years old...  so cut the numbers in half for male population and then divide by number of players in the NBA in a given year. the figures from 1967 would apply to the 1973-79 teams - assuming peak contributions  at age 25-30   notice the baby boom buldge... which increases talent pool for the teams of the 80s. I didn't get figures from earlier but they would be needed to evaluate "dilution"  factor for years previous to 73 or so. The player pool estimate could be fine tuned if data was available for high school sport participation rates..  and so on   but I think rates haven't changed much over the years.   I hope this inspires someone to dig up more of the data and come up with a 6 decade annual talent pool dilution index for the NBA.        
    Posted by videoburns


      videoburns
     
      I've been looking for population data on 18-19 year olds for some time now. Can you give me a link  for your below sourse?                               " These are US census figures (in thousands) for civilian non-institutionalized population 18-19 years old"

     Seems
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from videoburns. Show videoburns's posts

    Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.

    In Response to Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.:
    In Response to Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time. :   videoburns     I've been looking for population data on 18-19 year olds for some time now. Can you give me a link  for your below sourse?                               " These are US census figures (in thousands) for civilian non-institutionalized population 18-19 years old"  Seems
    Posted by SeemsToMe



    Table A-5b. The Population 18 and 19 Years Old by School Enrollment Status, Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin: October 1967 to 2009
    Excel (146k) | CSV (28k)

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Red-16Russ-11. Show Red-16Russ-11's posts

    Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.

    In Response to Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.:
    A couple of major things that I have also noticed is with help defenses and mid-range shooting. It's getting more and more difficult to find an open man. When the Knicks of the early 70's moved it was great to watch and they always seemed to find somebody open, especially at the top of the key, but many teams today, if not most, have really had to learn and apply what they did and better just to get an open look. Never saw help defenses that tight in the old days. Also, the 3pt shot has just about made mid-range shooters obsolete. The mid-range is one area that I think the old guys ruled because they were all 2pts and they were much more skilled in that area, but if you make the old guys shoot today's 3's, forget it. It's all dunks, lay-ins or 3's. If guys are just under the 3pt line and open, they step back for the 3. I quit playing street ball about 10 years ago and I was a decent 3 pointer from high school or college distance, which is pretty far, but do you realize how far and how difficult it is to hit a pro 3? You almost have to heave it.
    Posted by lakersavenger


    Don't know why you keep this up.  Makes no sense to me.  It is an "argument" you can't win.  You will never convince anyone, and no one can convince you.  I wish you boys would just stop your little game of tic-tac-toe and move on to other things - it's boring!
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from lakersavenger. Show lakersavenger's posts

    Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.

    In Response to Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.:
    In Response to Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time. : Don't know why you keep this up.  Makes no sense to me.  It is an "argument" you can't win.  You will never convince anyone, and no one can convince you.  I wish you boys would just stop your little game of tic-tac-toe and move on to other things - it's boring!
    Posted by Red-16Russ-11


    ...such a b*t*h! But that's ok.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Karllost. Show Karllost's posts

    Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.

    Athleticism certainly improves as time moves on but thats just one aspect. Putting the ball in the hoop or anticipating a move or pass is something much more than athleticism, its skill and acumen with some heart & desire mixed in.

    For that reason, you cant just discard other generations so easily.

    Some good points made here... What about little Dave Cowens who always had Kareems #.. Hows that possible according to the theories here? Could Cowens play center in todays NBA?  I know BBD does...

    As much as the muscle, speed & quickness may have improved, I dont think much else has other than defensive schemes and rule changes.

    If anything it should be easier today to score than the past... no handchecking, 3 point shot, threat of 3 point shot creating more space, liberal enforcement of violations like travelling and charging. With all that, why is it so hard for teams to score 100pts?

    I said this before... take away the 3 point shot, DUnks/layins & FT's and I wonder what percentage of points are being scored with what remains... For the most part I view todays players as 3 point wannabe sharpshooters or dunk/draw the foul espn highlight replays.

    ITs rare these days to get 3 or 4 trips up & down the court without several fouls called slowing the action. Other than a deep rooting interest, most games would be a bore.

    The Cowens/Hondo Celtics were so much fun to watch...always on the break, great passing.. some of their fast break streaks were remarkable.

    Same with Magic & the Lakers.... games moved along.... Today all we do is wait for the next whistle..




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

    Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.

    In Response to Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time.:
    In Response to Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time. : Table A-5b. The Population 18 and 19 Years Old by School Enrollment Status, Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin: October 1967 to 2009 Excel   (146k) |   CSV   (28k) http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/school.html
    Posted by videoburns


     videoburns,

     
      Many thanks for the link.

      Seems
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share