U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Basketball
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-29-2011, 06:04 PM
 
Location: Earth
3,653 posts, read 3,881,684 times
Reputation: 1802

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by rigas View Post
a lot more of the old school guys would be just fine today as athletic ability IMO doesnt get better, or was not worse but more the techniques and technology with which the players where trained and used have improved.
The technique and technology has led to enhanced athletic ability, that being said the fundamentals of the game hasn't necessarily improved with time. For example, I was watching an old Lakers-Knicks final game from 1972 with Wilt, Jerry West, Bill Bradley, Walt Frazier etc etc. What immediately stood out was how well everyone shot the mid-range game, even the bigger players. The in-between game seems to be a dying art as everyone nowadays seems to be either a 3point shooter or a dunk expert.

That's why I really hate the 'era' arguments which of course is going to come into play big-time once we discuss the teams indepth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-29-2011, 06:44 PM
 
Location: Cook County
5,288 posts, read 6,366,040 times
Reputation: 3070
Ill put together a discussion thread later tonight
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2011, 06:47 PM
 
Location: spring tx
7,912 posts, read 8,201,268 times
Reputation: 1982
here is the thing, mikan was 6'10" and going over every team in the 1954 season, they all had at least 1-2 guys 6'9" so its not like he was 7'2" and guarding a 6'6" guy. i mean he played against guys like bob pettit, and his brother ed mikan who was 6'8" and 10 lbs lighter, jim neal 6'11 245 lbs.. seems the only real "advantage" size wise that i can see was his weight, most guys where much lighter. i would say the average center/forward was about 220 lbs where as mikan was about 240.

outside of his weight advantage he was obviously more skilled. consider every other guy 6'9" + only averaged about 10ppg (or less) and less then 10 rpg. if his size was an advantage because he was playing against shorter guys then why is it a guy 6'11" 245 lbs only averaged about 8 ppg and 7 rpg?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2011, 07:21 PM
 
Location: Cook County
5,288 posts, read 6,366,040 times
Reputation: 3070
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orangeish View Post
Ill put together a discussion thread later tonight
What are your guys thoughts on this? Should I use "team A," "team B," etc or use our handles as the team name, make a poll and open it to discussion?

Am I safe to assume everyones starting lineup would be the first player they drafted at each said position?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2011, 07:33 PM
 
Location: spring tx
7,912 posts, read 8,201,268 times
Reputation: 1982
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orangeish View Post
What are your guys thoughts on this? Should I use "team A," "team B," etc or use our handles as the team name, make a poll and open it to discussion?

Am I safe to assume everyones starting lineup would be the first player they drafted at each said position?
well it would be all to easy for people to come here to this thread to see whos are whos.

i would not do a starting lineup but a 12 man team. i know for myself i would rotate guys in and out of starting depending on who i was up against.

i wonder if we could do sort of a playoffs format? say let everyone vote on them all for a week or so, then take the top 2 or 3 teams as voted and put them on a separate poll to be voted on for a "champion".

thats my suggestion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2011, 08:34 PM
 
8,266 posts, read 10,714,135 times
Reputation: 4774
Quote:
Originally Posted by rigas View Post
here is the thing, mikan was 6'10" and going over every team in the 1954 season, they all had at least 1-2 guys 6'9" so its not like he was 7'2" and guarding a 6'6" guy.
Surely you can see the difference between modern teams where front lines are usually 7 footer, 6'9 to 6'10 PF, and a 6'7+ SF compared to having 1-2 guys 6'9 on the team but the average players were much smaller. The rosters back then were littered with 6'3, 6'4, 6'5 forwards, obviously that gives someone 6'10 245 like Mikan a huge advantage in interior scoring and rebounding that he simply wouldn't have today.

You know who led the league in rebounding during Mikan's prime in 50-51? Dolph Schayes, at 16.4 rpg, compared to George Mikan at 14.1. That would be 6'7, 195 lb Dolph Schayes. That gives you an idea of the size and talent of the league at that time, as Schayes wasn't some rebounding specialist like Rodman he was just center/forward who could put up those numbers as part of his game.

Quote:
i mean he played against guys like bob pettit
Really? This is hardly significant, they only shared one season and it was Mikan's last where he only averaged 10.5 ppg and didn't even play that much. Jim Neal only played two seasons and averaged less than 5ppg, I don't know anything about the guy but he was probably just dead weight. Either way none of those guys spent any significant amount of time impacting George Mikan's accomplishments.

Quote:
outside of his weight advantage he was obviously more skilled. consider every other guy 6'9" + only averaged about 10ppg (or less) and less then 10 rpg. if his size was an advantage because he was playing against shorter guys then why is it a guy 6'11" 245 lbs only averaged about 8 ppg and 7 rpg?
Sure, he was more skilled than other big men that era, and no that doesn't mean he'd wouldn't get crushed against today's frontcourt players.

But I don't get the connection you are trying to make where his size not being an advantage. Are you seriously claiming that Mikan being bigger than almost everyone else in the league wasn't an advantage?

It would certainly be pretty strange logic to note that another tall guy from that era (who surely you know nothing about either) not doing well proves that size wasn't an advantage for anyone else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2011, 08:49 PM
 
Location: spring tx
7,912 posts, read 8,201,268 times
Reputation: 1982
the point is that you are trivializing his ability and his career by saying that he dominated solely on his size. this is blatantly not true. sure the fact that the average height of players was much shorter BUT its not like all of the "bigs" of the era where dominating like he was. you have made a point of mikan only being so good because he played against little guys. that would imply that ALL of the really tall guys should/would have been able to dominant the same way which is just not the case.

now that said, do i think mikan would be able to time travel to 1997, 1999, 2003 and be dominant the same way? not at all. on the other hand, if a guy like mikan where born in 1976, he might just be tim duncan, considering they are nearly identical is size, and from what i read/gather mikan was greatly fundamental as is duncan.

obviously we cant ever know just how he would have been but to trivialize what he accomplished by saying he was nothing but the tallest midget is absurd and ridiculous.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2011, 04:53 AM
 
Location: Earth
3,653 posts, read 3,881,684 times
Reputation: 1802
Don't forget, we need to randomize the order again, for coach pick...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2011, 06:24 AM
 
Location: Frisco, TX
7,559 posts, read 11,899,990 times
Reputation: 4519
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg1977 View Post
Don't forget, we need to randomize the order again, for coach pick...
That's right - we're not finished yet!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2011, 06:32 AM
 
Location: Frisco, TX
7,559 posts, read 11,899,990 times
Reputation: 4519
What do you guys think - group A or B?

Group A

C - Olajuwon
PF - Stoudemire
SF - Aguirre
SG - Wade
PG -Paul

Group B

C - Chamberlain
PF - McHale
SF - Dantley
SG - Allen
PG - Kidd

While Group B has more of a legacy, I think A is just plain nasty. I've also got Gervin and Shawn Kemp on the end of the bench.

Last edited by little elmer; 06-30-2011 at 06:42 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Basketball
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top