And the best team of all time is....

[1Rose]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

You can when you decided that you want to compare, because the players at Russells time were not awarded certain things players today use as advantages

Thats one reason why cross comparing is wrong. You have too many variables to consider.

What exactly are you referring to?

[The15thunter]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

What exactly are you referring to?

weight training, supplements, rigorous training regimens, personal trainers, chefs, luxury flights, specialized coaching, etc.

pretty much everything that makes a modern athlete modern.

[1Rose]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

Weight training I don't think you can really include. There were still ways players could of gotten stronger and faster. I just don't think it was viewed as something that benefitted the game of basketball though. It was more of a finesse game at the time.

Obviously, with research and such, we have been able to finely tune our bodies, but to say that they didn't have access to weight training and ways to become better athletes and to use that to their advantage is a bit ridiculous.

[23]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

Dude stop it... point is those players didnt use any of the stuff todays players use, and as it stands its more of an advantage today

All of the new technologies and machines and things they use to treat injuries did NOT exist. Same goes for medicines, doctor training, scouting reports, on and on and on

You can't just bring up a player and discount those things because its a major part of the sport whether you want to admit it or not.

Had kobe busted up his knee like he did back in the 60's there would be no fast surgery, fast rehab going on.

[Dice]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

Howard's strength wouldn't be that advantageous. Russel was 225 but played alot bigger than that. He would indeed beat Howard to his favorite spots and make him catch further than he wanted to. Howard has only three moves a running right hook, a quick spin for a lefty layup, and the offensive rebound. It will take more than that to shake Russ. Howard stronger than Wilt? No, and Wilt's moves were more reliable than Howard's. Shaq has the mass and the reliable moves to score on Russell though.

The 67 Sixers had four tremendous one on one scorers in Wilt, Greer, Walker, and Cunningham. They were all explosive enough to carry the load. If Wilt was being fouled for profit and Greer was being locked up by MJ then they would turn to Cunningham or Walker. You say Pippen is going to guard Cunningham? Who is going to guard Walker then, Kukoc? Not a prayer.

Walker was probably a bit better than Aguirre. His offense was extremely physical and eventually wore opponents down. There are lesser players than Chet that are already in the Hall. Issel was a no substance scorer for pedestrian teams. Gervin was charmin soft and he couldn't understand team basketball. GG's ineptitude in every other area practically canceled out his scoring prowess.

Pippen was a very good one on one defender but he truly specialized in team defense. Besides, Walker was too physical to be denied by Pippen. A sweep of the 67 Sixers would be almost impossible.
Bird couldn't defend one on one so Walker would have his way against his defense. Offensively, Bird would score his points against Chet for sure. McHale was the Celtics only power player so this match would be yet another volleyball game on the glass for the Sixers. And McHale would still score but he would be bodied by Jackson or Wilt. The Celtics' lack of power would be their downfall.

Magic was the only power player on the 87 Lakers squad and they relied on their fast break offense to score. The Sixers would control the boards and not allow their running game to really get started.

I see you like to dance around a lot of my points.

But let me clarify some of my points and get to yours.

Howard stronger than Wilt? Well, you picked Wilt and I picked Howard. Of course, neither one of us cannot prove one way or the other. But one advantage that I do have is that Howard 'looks' a lot more muscular than Wilt. Howard's arms are massive. His body is chiseled. YEAH, I know. It doesn't prove who's stronger. BUT it's better than using stats.

And as far as the Cunningham-Kukoc match-up? I'd take my chances. If Cunningham scores 25 and Kukoc scores 22, I'd live with that. BUT Pippen is locking down Chet Walker and Chet would have to live with Pippen getting his dubious 19 points, 7 reb, 6 asst, 3 steals and 2 block game. And Walker couldn't do anything about it.

You still haven't answered my question of what can I say about Chet Walker that makes me say he's one of the best all time at _______? Like I said, Gervin was soft and his defense was non-existent BUT he's one of the best scorers of all time.

And your going to have to be more than physical to beat Pippen. Remember, Pippen used to succumb to the physical play early in his career. BUT after 1994, I didn't see Pippen get physically beat like he used to. Matter of fact, Pippen had grew a pair of balls and actually like physical play afterwards. So no, Chet's 'bruising' style would have had not effect and Pippen would still lock him down.

And your telling me that the 86 Celtics (a team with probably the best front line in the history of basketball) would get beat on the inside by Wilt and two non-hall of famers? Come on now? That doesn't even sound right.

And did you not ignore the size factor against the 87 Lakers? And you talk about controlling the boards against the 87 Lakers, well, the Lakers back then weren't a great rebounding team to begin with. They were probably a little less than average as far as boarding. BUT they still lead the league in fast break points and highlights. So the working on the boards theory doesn't work. And don't think your going to stop LA's offense if your stopping their fastbreak. They had half court offense in Magic, Worthy and Kareem.

[Jistic]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

Kukoc didn't even start on that team, it was Ron Harper.

[AlexBrady]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

I see you like to dance around a lot of my points.

But let me clarify some of my points and get to yours.

Howard stronger than Wilt? Well, you picked Wilt and I picked Howard. Of course, neither one of us cannot prove one way or the other. But one advantage that I do have is that Howard 'looks' a lot more muscular than Wilt. Howard's arms are massive. His body is chiseled. YEAH, I know. It doesn't prove who's stronger. BUT it's better than using stats.

And as far as the Cunningham-Kukoc match-up? I'd take my chances. If Cunningham scores 25 and Kukoc scores 22, I'd live with that. BUT Pippen is locking down Chet Walker and Chet would have to live with Pippen getting his dubious 19 points, 7 reb, 6 asst, 3 steals and 2 block game. And Walker couldn't do anything about it.

You still haven't answered my question of what can I say about Chet Walker that makes me say he's one of the best all time at _______? Like I said, Gervin was soft and his defense was non-existent BUT he's one of the best scorers of all time.

And your going to have to be more than physical to beat Pippen. Remember, Pippen used to succumb to the physical play early in his career. BUT after 1994, I didn't see Pippen get physically beat like he used to. Matter of fact, Pippen had grew a pair of balls and actually like physical play afterwards. So no, Chet's 'bruising' style would have had not effect and Pippen would still lock him down.

And your telling me that the 86 Celtics (a team with probably the best front line in the history of basketball) would get beat on the inside by Wilt and two non-hall of famers? Come on now? That doesn't even sound right.

And did you not ignore the size factor against the 87 Lakers? And you talk about controlling the boards against the 87 Lakers, well, the Lakers back then weren't a great rebounding team to begin with. They were probably a little less than average as far as boarding. BUT they still lead the league in fast break points and highlights. So the working on the boards theory doesn't work. And don't think your going to stop LA's offense if your stopping their fastbreak. They had half court offense in Magic, Worthy and Kareem.

Howard has bigger biceps but Wilt generated more power throughout his body. And if Howard is so strong how come he was so thoroughly pushed around by Jason Collins and Kendrick Perkins in back to back playoff appearances? Cunningham would probably have a bigger point advantage than three against Kukoc.

Walker wouldn't be locked down by Pippen. I like the power versus quickness matchup for Chet. For sure, Scottie would record nice offensive stats. Chet Walker is one of the best of all time at using his body to create space, in devestating fashion i might add. Gervin was a very good finesse scorer but his lack of long range shooting keeps him out of the inner circle of elite scorers.
A total shutdown of Walker wouldn't be possible. Too determined and too strong. Only Rodman could limit him but that would open up the boards even more.

The Celtics couldn't control the boards against the Sixers. Parish had long arms but Wilt was longer. McHale and Jackson is a wash (as far as board/overall power). Bird was stronger than he looked but give Walker the power edge. Walker and Jackson not being enshrined in the Hall of Fame is a moot point.

When it comes to the Lakers, the Sixers power would trump their height. Plus, whoever Worthy, Magic, and Scott guarded would have little difficulty scoring. Their running game was their everything. Without it, they would be in big trouble. Their half court offense was basically playing off Kareem in the post.

[1Rose]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

Dude stop it... point is those players didnt use any of the stuff todays players use, and as it stands its more of an advantage today

All of the new technologies and machines and things they use to treat injuries did NOT exist. Same goes for medicines, doctor training, scouting reports, on and on and on

You can't just bring up a player and discount those things because its a major part of the sport whether you want to admit it or not.

Had kobe busted up his knee like he did back in the 60's there would be no fast surgery, fast rehab going on.

In any way did I mention these things?

I was rebutting the notion that players back then didn't have access to becoming strong and faster which is not true.

[The15thunter]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

In any way did I mention these things?

I was rebutting the notion that players back then didn't have access to becoming strong and faster which is not true.

no one said they didn't have any way to become stronger or faster. we did, however, provide you with a list of distinct advantages that today's players have over those 50 years ago.

did weights exist in the 1960's? yes. was it interwoven into the fabric of the competitive athletic landscape like it is today? no. that's a big difference.

[1Rose]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

Yes someone did say that...

You can when you decided that you want to compare, because the players at Russells time were not awarded certain things players today use as advantages

Thats one reason why cross comparing is wrong. You have too many variables to consider.

Which he later cited weight training as one of those "advantages."

I agree with you though, in that it wasn't a part of the game at the time and wasn't deemed as a necessary part, if you read my post a page or two back. But saying that it wasn't available to them is the point was rejecting.

[jfsolo]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

Its hard to argue against those 95-96 Bulls, but I lean toward that 86-87 Laker team. Too many weapons for the Lakers on offense, Scott had the worse shooting percentage out of the starters and he shot 49%. My own personal believe is that no team in NBA history could stop them from scoring, and they would be able to get just enough stops to win any series.

Mike would need to go 45+ every game, and he was no longer that player after the baseball stint.

[23]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

Yes someone did say that...



Which he later cited weight training as one of those "advantages."

I agree with you though, in that it wasn't a part of the game at the time and wasn't deemed as a necessary part, if you read my post a page or two back. But saying that it wasn't available to them is the point was rejecting.

and again, do you really believe they had the same equipment or even methods developed today as they do now?

Having weights is one thing, how about all of the facilities, the pools, the bands, the trainers, the machines, and that doesnt even get into the medicine part, nor the scientific advances.

There is no contest.. so in short these things today are a huge part of what makes todays players what they are.

[1Rose]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

Its hard to argue against those 95-96 Bulls, but I lean toward that 86-87 Laker team. Too many weapons for the Lakers on offense, Scott had the worse shooting percentage out of the starters and he shot 49%. My own personal believe is that no team in NBA history could stop them from scoring, and they would be able to get just enough stops to win any series.

Mike would need to go 45+ every game, and he was no longer that player after the baseball stint.

I would have to refute that. He just had a better team around him during those years. He still averaged 33ppg in the 97 Finals. He still had it in him to score at will.

[Jistic]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

I would have to refute that. He just had a better team around him during those years. He still averaged 33ppg in the 97 Finals. He still had it in him to score at will.

His game was actually more well rounded. He wasn't quite the slasher, but he could still get to the basket, and still get to the line, and his post game was deadly in his later years. Something LeBron should study is Jordan's post game.

[slimm44]

Re: And the best team of all time is....

Sweet Baby James, the season is only a few days removed and these threads are getting VICIOUS.

I may get into it a little later, but for now, the best team I've ever seen were the 1996 Bulls.