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.
To expand on my earlier point about the way talent is distributed now: If you removed half the teams in the league ( let's for simplicity take the bottom 15 teams record-wise) and made it a 15 team league, you'd have every team with at least 3 stars in the starting lineup, and benches full of players who are considered competent starters nowadays. Alot of guys who warm the bench today wouldn't even be in the league.
That's what expansion has done to the NBA. While the players themselves are more advanced and all that, relative to prior eras the teams are more diluted. Look at the Lakers, for example. You've got Kobe, Bynum, Gasol, and then a HUGE dropoff in talent. Such occurrences would be minimized in a 15 team league.
I think it's expansion and also poor management. Some teams draft bad players and some teams get potentially good players, but never develop them. The issue has as much to do with management as it does with talent. It is a combination of the two that has diluted the product. I mean look at some of the ridiculous contract that have been given out over the years and tell me do you think management doesn't deserve blame for keeping certain players in the league that have no business being there.
As far as the main topic. I believe just from what I know, I believe Kobe's was more impressive. This is nothing against Wilt, but he was much larger than anyone else that he went against. He had a decisive advantage and he played a position that allowed him to get a lot of high percentage shots. Kobe went against players that are at least capable of making things more difficult for him (even though they didn't). He also had to rely on shooting a lot of jumpers (he hit 7 threes) and he had to do all this while playing with one of the worst Lakers teams in the past 20-30 years, which meant that he was the only real scoring threat (Odom didn't play well that year). I would challenge anyone to try to score that amount of points while being a jump shooter. It's very tough and deserve props for it.
Anyone not understanding how hard it is to make historical comparisons....visualize Kobe trying to score even 60pts in a game against the Piston's teams of 20 years ago.
hand check-hand check-push-bump- drive to the hoop .>>>>>>>knocked to the floor hard.
Seriously, it's was a HUGE feat by Kobe but what he did would have been impossible 15 years earlier given the pace of the game and what was allowed on defense. So sorry, it's just not something that can be compared to Wilt or vice versa.
I think it's expansion and also poor management. Some teams draft bad players and some teams get potentially good players, but never develop them. The issue has as much to do with management as it does with talent. It is a combination of the two that has diluted the product. I mean look at some of the ridiculous contract that have been given out over the years and tell me do you think management doesn't deserve blame for keeping certain players in the league that have no business being there.
I think it's expansion first and foremost. Less teams means less room for lesser players to be in the league period, let alone be given ridiculous contracts. With 15 teams, you'll see several with 3 all-stars, a few really good 'on the cusp of stardom players' like a Rudy Gay, and superb benches. Guys who currently sit on the bench as 9th-12th men, won't sniff the NBA. The only reason they do now is because there's enough teams in the league to give them an NBA job. Most teams have a handful of scrubs that you never see except in blowouts. Odds are players at that level would be doing something else other than playing NBA ball in a 15 team league.
Seriously, it's was a HUGE feat by Kobe but what he did would have been impossible 15 years earlier given the pace of the game and what was allowed on defense. So sorry, it's just not something that can be compared to Wilt or vice versa.
Which brings me to this point: if you look at the majority of Kobe's high scoring games, few have come against teams with really stellar defenses. Remember when Jordan went off for 54 in the 93 playoffs against the Knicks? I don't think Kobe has ever scored that much against that bruising a defensive team. I stand to be corrected, of course.
On the subject of expansion and the talent pool, think about this, if the nba only had 10-12-15 teams sooo many players would never make it. On my spurs, there would be no manu, or Parker. No scola, and so on. I can't imagine how many solid to great players would never get a chance. Manu arguably the 3-4-5th best sg of the last 3-5 yrs would likely never make it in the league to become the player he is.
On the subject of expansion and the talent pool, think about this, if the nba only had 10-12-15 teams sooo many players would never make it. On my spurs, there would be no manu, or Parker. No scola, and so on. I can't imagine how many solid to great players would never get a chance. Manu arguably the 3-4-5th best sg of the last 3-5 yrs would likely never make it in the league to become the player he is.
No, I think guys like Manu and Parker would still be around, they're very good/great players whether the league was 15 or 30 teams. They may not be all-stars in a 15 team league, but they'd still be in the NBA. Manu and Parker are both top 15 at their position, hell top 10, so in a 15 team league both of them would be starting for someone.
Wilt also didn't have the luxury of a 3 Point shot.
The other impressive part about wilts game, he was a terrible ft shooter yet when the other team tried a hack-a-wilt it ended up him shooting 28-32.
Bottom line it was wilts night, he was going nuts. The box score doesn't show it But wilt more then likely had 20+ rebounds 10+ blocks and who knows how many assists. He very well could have gone quad-double in half his games, we don't know.
Yeah because he was taller than everyone and only had to turn around and put it in the basket every time with being challenged
I think it's expansion first and foremost. Less teams means less room for lesser players to be in the league period, let alone be given ridiculous contracts. With 15 teams, you'll see several with 3 all-stars, a few really good 'on the cusp of stardom players' like a Rudy Gay, and superb benches. Guys who currently sit on the bench as 9th-12th men, won't sniff the NBA. The only reason they do now is because there's enough teams in the league to give them an NBA job. Most teams have a handful of scrubs that you never see except in blowouts. Odds are players at that level would be doing something else other than playing NBA ball in a 15 team league.
In my opinion having only 15 teams would make the league less exciting and also kill the excitement of free agency. You would have a lot of teams that would be very close in talent and would not give players much of an incentive to leave their current teams. To me you could have about 24 teams, build a better product and give a better chance for talent to be re-arranged. Free agency is a major part of the modern era, look at how much attention The Decision got.
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.
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.
