Old vs. New

[theintensifier 0]

I've always wanted to make a thread like this. A generational battle of superstars is what I want to discuss.

 

Basically, this is what we do:

 

On one side, we have (starting with basketball) a team from the 50's/60's/70's facing a team from the 80's/90's/00's.

 

Most teams have fifteen players, so pick fifteen for each side. You can also add in a coach if you desire.

 

Once everyone who wants to I guess contribute, we have have a discussion to determine the final "perfect" teams.

[theintensifier 0]

Before my time team:

 

Starting Lineup:

 

PG - Jerry West

SG - Oscar Robertson

SF - John Havlicek

PF - Bill Russell

C - Wilt Chamberlain

 

Sixth Man:

C - Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

 

Rest of the team:

 

PF -Elvin Hayes

SF - Elgin Baylor

PG - Hal Greer

PF - Bob Pettit

SG - George Gervin

PG - Dave Bing

SG - Pete Maravich

SF - Julius Erving

C - Artis Gilmore (The original A-Train)

 

Head Coach:

Red Auerbach

 

 

vs.

 

The guys I've grown up watching team:

 

Starting Lineup:

 

PG - John Stockton

SG -Micheal Jordan

SF - Earvin Johnson

PF - Karl Malone

C - Shaquille O'Neal

 

Sixth Man:

SF - Scottie Pippen

 

Rest of the Team:

 

PG - Jason Kidd

SG - Clyde Drexler

SG - Alvin Robertson (Who? http://basketballreference.com/players/pla...lkid=ROBERAL01)

SF - Dominique Wilkins

SF - Larry Bird

PF - Dennis Rodman

PF - Charles Barkley

C - David Robinson

C - Hakeem Olajuwon

 

Head Coach:

Phil Jackson

[Red Baron 0]

1950's Montreal Canadiens vs the 1970's Montreal Canadiens.

[alfdogg 0]

Here's my 50/60/70 team:

 

C: Wilt Chamberlain

PF: Bill Russell

SF: Elgin Baylor

SG: Oscar Robertson

PG: Bob Cousy

 

Bench:

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

Bob Pettit

Julius Erving

John Havlicek

Jerry West

Rick Barry

Walt Frazier

Nate Archibald

Pete Maravich

Willis Reed

 

And 80's/present.

 

C: Hakeem Olajuwon

PF: Tim Duncan

SF: Larry Bird

SG: Michael Jordan

PG: Magic Johnson

 

Bench:

Shaquille O'Neal

Charles Barkley

Karl Malone

Moses Malone

Scottie Pippen

Dominique Wilkins

Clyde Drexler

Isiah Thomas

John Stockton

Kobe Bryant

[razazteca 0]

Showtime Lakers

 

PG: Magic Johnson

SG: Byron Scott

C: Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

SF: James Worthy

PF Michael Cooper

6 man: AC Green

 

Bench:

Kurt Rambus

Vlade Divac

Kobe Bryant

Shaq

Nick Van Exel

Eddie Jones

Elden Campbell

Robert Horry

 

Coach: Pat Reilly

 

vs

 

Boston Celtic

 

Bob Cousy

Bill Sharman

Tom Heinsohn

Bill Russell

John Havlicek

Dave Cowens

Jo Jo White

Paul Silas

Bailey Howell

Sam Jones

Tom "Satch" Sanders

Don Nelson

Bill Sharman

Ed Macauley

Frank Ramsey

 

Coach: Arnold 'Red' Auerbach

[Guest Richard McBeef]

Any team of 80s/90s/00s NBA stars would completely and utterly beat the fucking shit out of 1950s/60s players. The quality of pro basketball has improved exponentially since the early NBA days.

[Prime Time Andrew Doyle 0]

Not to mention that the new generation would be better athletes, better trained and better prepared.

[Guest Richard McBeef]

Exactly. Those early Celtics and Knicks teams may have been great for their time, but the Jordan Bulls would absolutely steamroll anybody. And I don't even wanna know what the 1992 Olympic team would do.

[Coffin Surfer 0]

I don't think there's ever been better athletes to play basketball than Chamberlain, Havlicek and Oscar Roberstson and they played in the sixities. People always see the image of Chamberlain's time in L.A. when his health declined and forget how agile and quick used to be in his early days, puts any big man from today to shame in terms of physical ability; and it would be very scary to see what would happen if he peaked in an age where it would be illegal to triple team somebody before they touched ball. Overall, you may have a point but guys like that could excel in most any era. I'd say the NBA probably peaked in the 80s and early 90s in terms of skill/athleticism, and sheer number of great players.

[USC Wuz Robbed! 0]

Didn't we see this with the Showtime Lakers going down to the first Bulls championship team?

[Coffin Surfer 0]

Didn't we see this with the Showtime Lakers going down to the first Bulls championship team?

 

 

Those certainly weren't THE Showtime Lakers. The show closed a few years before this actually as the Bad Boys won the past couple titles, are you being serious?

 

Now if it was the 87 Lakers vs. 96 Bulls, things would be alot more interesting I believe.

[USC Wuz Robbed! 0]

Didn't we see this with the Showtime Lakers going down to the first Bulls championship team?

 

 

Those certainly weren't THE Showtime Lakers. The show closed a few years before this actually as the Bad Boys won the past couple titles, are you being serious?

 

Now if it was the 87 Lakers vs. 96 Bulls, things would be alot more interesting I believe.

 

Take a guess.

[Ripper 0]

Wilt Chamberlain would average 50 points a game in the NBA today. Those guys were better athletes. People say Wilt dominated because he was so much bigger than anyone else, but the truth is, he had some of the more unstoppable moves ever. His hook shot where he would just extend his arm and shoot it with only his wrist, UNBLOCKABLE by ANYONE. And he had the conditioning to do that night in and night out for a whole season while players to day get fatigued.

 

Plus the game was at like twice the pace back then than it is today. The guys in the 60's and 70's were WAY better conditioned and could run a good number of the teams today and in the 90's off the court with their high paced offense and dead eye shooting. Plus they didn't even have the 3 point line. There were guys in the 60's and 70's where that shot was LITERALLY a layup to them. As in they simply didn't miss it. They had to defend 30 feet from the basket because most guys would just pull up with some funky looking shot and it would drop.

 

I do believe that Dennis Rodman was the greatest rebounder ever and would average like 30 rebounds a game with a pace that up tempo and was in such great condition would hang with the oldschoolers. But I there aren't any NBA pointguards today that could deal with the raw strength and athletism of oscar Robertson. No big could stop Kareem or Wilt. Willis Reed could OWN th block. Bill Russell would still be a great rebounder (though I feel in todays basketball pace he would have averaged more like 15 to 16 boards and not those 24 boards per game that he used to do back in the day).

 

It would come down to bigs versus guards as the guards in the 80's and present are definately better, but there will never be big men as dominant as the ones in the early days of the NBA.

[theintensifier 0]

Czech killed my thread

[Brett Favre 0]

I think Ripper just saved it.

[theintensifier 0]

[Guest Richard McBeef]

Well, I disagree with Ripper. (obv) Hasn't the quality of pro sports done nothing but go up? Baseball, football, basketball, all of them? I'm not saying that Oscar Robertson and Wilt Chamberlain were scrubs, by any means, but I really can't fathom that the quality of NBA play was better in the 1950s than the 1990s.

[Coffin Surfer 0]

Well, I disagree with Ripper. (obv) Hasn't the quality of pro sports done nothing but go up? Baseball, football, basketball, all of them? I'm not saying that Oscar Robertson and Wilt Chamberlain were scrubs, by any means, but I really can't fathom that the quality of NBA play was better in the 1950s than the 1990s.

 

 

I haven't seen a great deal of the 50's to judge, but from the late 60s to mid 70s the overall quality was pretty incredible. People like to say they didn't play defense but the real reason for the inflated scores is that the offense and work rate was just that outstanding. Watch a guy like Havlicek, this guy is sprinting full force for an entire game(sometimes several overtimes), executing everything perfectly, dropping shots effortlessly, playing hard d, constantly moving. It's unreal. He would run circles around anybody today, anybody. Check out the Boston/Phoneix 76 finals series if you don't believe me, either team would dominate or at least raise serious havoc today. They would probably even give Jordan's Bulls a serious run.

 

The decline in the NBA can be traced to numerous things....poor work habits, the death of college development, over expansion. You name it.

[theintensifier 0]

Czach, I think you're missing a huge difference between the glory day players and the players today. Guys like Wilt and Oscar played because they loved the game of basketball, now look at the players today. "Who's gonna pay me?"

[TheOriginalOrangeGoblin 0]

The decline in the NBA can be traced to numerous things....poor work habits, the death of college development, over expansion. You name it.

I think Bill Simmons touched upon that pretty well in a recent column. So many teams and so many attempts at parity that it's nearly impossible to build a lot of deep and great team. I mean, for example, Phoenix and Detroit are amazing starting 5's in any era but in the 80's there was a handful of teams with that great starting 5 AND a deep bench whereas the Phoenix bench is 1 deep, maybe 2 on a good day.

 

I'll take Magic's Lakers or Bird's Celtics over any modern team without hesitating.

[theintensifier 0]

There's no doubt those two teams are legendary, but I don't think they hold a candle to the 72-10 Chicago Bulls.

 

Michael Jordan - greatest basketball player of all-time, bar none. Agreed?

[Guest Richard McBeef]

Czach, I think you're missing a huge difference between the glory day players and the players today. Guys like Wilt and Oscar played because they loved the game of basketball, now look at the players today. "Who's gonna pay me?"

I fail to see what difference that makes in a strictly hypothetical situation such as this, where any external motivations would ostensibly be out of the question; that is to say, these guys would just fire up the time machine and play for pride. That said, I'd have to think the '92 Dream Team has better athletes and better basketball players than any motley assortment of 50s/60s players. I'm sure even 'Melo and King James are capable of playing for the love of the game too.

[USC Wuz Robbed! 0]

And even then, why would playing for money make one a worse player than one that's playing for the game? Don't players perform a whole lot better in contract years than not?

[TheOriginalOrangeGoblin 0]

There's no doubt those two teams are legendary, but I don't think they hold a candle to the 72-10 Chicago Bulls.

 

Michael Jordan - greatest basketball player of all-time, bar none. Agreed?

MJ may be the greatest but I'd bet anything on either the Celtics or Lakers over his Bulls. There were no Luc Longley's or Ron Harper's starting in LA or Boston and their best bench player was not Toni Kukoc. The depth on those teams is unrivalled and MJ can't score every single point.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Czech killed my thread

 

If Czech is calling himself Mr. McBeef this week, then I'll help in this murder. I group "best of/who would have beaten who" talk in spans of 15 years or so.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

Stars vs. stars I don't know, but I'm willing to bet the average role/backup player today is far better than the backups of 20-30 years ago. That contributes to the dynasties and stats of guys like Wilt and Russell. They simply never faced the caliber of competition that today's players face. As for the game itself, I think the game becomes more refined, defenses become tougher to break as coaches enjoy modern videotape and strategy. The older leagues benefit in public opinion because you only see the highlights. Players fucked up all the time in the '80s.

[theintensifier 0]

Czach, I think you're missing a huge difference between the glory day players and the players today. Guys like Wilt and Oscar played because they loved the game of basketball, now look at the players today. "Who's gonna pay me?"

I fail to see what difference that makes in a strictly hypothetical situation such as this, where any external motivations would ostensibly be out of the question; that is to say, these guys would just fire up the time machine and play for pride. That said, I'd have to think the '92 Dream Team has better athletes and better basketball players than any motley assortment of 50s/60s players. I'm sure even 'Melo and King James are capable of playing for the love of the game too.

Granted, the '92 Dream Team is the greatest asortment of basketball players in history, minus, of course, Christian Laettner. The point I was making was simple, the legends of basketball like Wilt and Oscar played to play not to get paid, unlike the newer generation of "superstars". Surely the athleticism has increased over the years due to extensive training regimes, personal trainers, and as well as performance enhancing supplements. Its rare to see in this day in age to see that raw undaunting will to win, because the players will continue to get their outrageous salaries and overwhelmingly absurd contracts.

 

In the end, however great the pioneers of the sport were, the newer generation (80's/early 90's) would win the game or series in my opinion. Athletes like Jordan could outperform on a regular basis just about anyone on the other side of the court, he's proven it against younger and faster players when he was heading towards the end of his Hall of Fame career (like when Stackhouse said he'd shut him down and score 50, yeah, that happend!). The only problem the new generation team would face would be the big men on the old guys team, especially Wilt, Kareem, and Russell. Extremely agile, in shape, and able to cover the floor like a small forward, they'd run circles around Shaq, and the other dominating Centers and Power Forwards. The game would surely be a closely contested game, and each side has great talent and their own individual specialties.

 

The older generation is known for their amazing teamwork, better shooting, higher scoring, better rebounding, and defense would be on that list if blocks were counted as a stat when Wilt first started.

 

The newer generation is known for their amazing athletic ability, great defense (Jordan, Stockton, Pippen, Robertson, Akeem, Shaq), somewhat great teamwork (Stockton/Malone - Jordan/Pippen), good scorers, and decent rebounders among other things.

[Vern Gagne 0]

What are the rules for this game?

 

A quick change to college hoops. I was just looking at some of the results from the NCAA tournament in the 60s and 70s. You really had some high scoring games and teams. I'd venture to guess overall scoring was higher, than it is today.

[Guest]

I'll take Magic's Lakers or Bird's Celtics over any modern team without hesitating.

I'd take those two teams to battle over any other team that could possibly be assembled. You can't assemble a dream team unless their talent level is so far above the competition, like the '92 Dream Team. You have to be able to account for teamwork.

 

What's Elgin Baylor going to do when he comes in and Bob Cousy's on the court with him. Who's going to handle the ball? Who's going to put a body on Kareem, Russell or Wilt. And how are they going to play the run and gun game when they've got two guys that are clearly halfcourt players.

 

See my point?

 

The decline in the NBA can be traced to numerous things....poor work habits, the death of college development, over expansion. You name it.

You missed the two most important things.

 

1. The highlight. Every kid is looking to make the big play on their own.

 

2. Lack of fundamentals. In high school with the short 3 point line, all coaches are looking to get up the court, work the ball around the blocks and kick it out for the long bomb. The mid-range jumper is DEAD. High school coaches don't run plays for that shot, so that carries with players as they develop and take their game into the NBA. Same applies for college too. It's a 3 point shooting contest at the lower levels.

[razazteca 0]

The decline in the NBA can be traced to numerous things....poor work habits, the death of college development, over expansion. You name it.

Highschool kids getting drafted.