Old School vs. today...you can't be serious

Collapse

Recommended Videos

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • PrettyT11
    MVP
    • Jul 2008
    • 3220

    #91
    Re: Old School vs. today...you can't be serious

    Exactly. Just looking at it from a simple math standpoint shows how crazy it would be. In 1967 (the last year Russell got 20 rebounds a night) the average shots per game by teams was 103 a game. Last year the league average was 81. So we are talking on average 44 less shots a game combined. Just that alone tells you the chances of that happening is beyond small.

    There is no way Russell would be able to get the same amount of rebounds with on average 44 less rebounding chances and having to deal with the bigger,faster, and stronger guys of todays game.
    Last edited by PrettyT11; 12-12-2011, 02:53 PM.

    Comment

    • AlexBrady
      MVP
      • Jul 2008
      • 3341

      #92
      Re: Old School vs. today...you can't be serious

      Originally posted by Dice
      I don't know AlexBrady. I'd have to agree that with the pace of the game today compared to the past generation that it would be almost impossible to average 20 rebounds a game. With more shots being put up back then, you have more opportunities for rebounds. Dennis Rodman, who I consider the greatest rebounder of all time, did come close with 18.7 per game in 1992. AND that's from the greatest rebounder of all time. So if he couldn't do it in the modern generation, I highly doubt Bill Russell would do it today.
      True, there were more shots put up back then. Although, a big reason for that was because Russell had total control of the game and his team ran out to a huge lead. With there not being a three point line, the opposing team had to take alot of catch up shots to try to close the gap.

      Also consider that Russell had to directly matchup with monster five spacers like Chamberlain and Thurmond about 15 times per season. Note the 20 times Russ had to go against 3 spacers like Willis Reed, Zelmo Beaty, and Jerry Lucas.

      Dennis Rodman is definitely up there with the great rebounders. However, Russell was 6'10, Chamberlain 7'1, and Thurmond 6'11. All three were stronger than Rodman was, which would lead to 3-4 more rebounds per game.

      Originally posted by PrettyT11
      Exactly. Just looking at it from a simple math standpoint shows how crazy it would be. In 1967 (the last year Russell got 20 rebounds a night) the average shots per game by teams was 103 a game. Last year the league average was 81. So we are talking on average 44 less shots a game combined. Just that alone tells you the chances of that happening is beyond small.

      There is no way Russell would be able to get the same amount of rebounds with on average 44 less rebounding chances and having to deal with the bigger,faster, and stronger guys of todays game.
      Howard and Love are the best rebounders in the game, three spacers. Griffin is on his way, but doesn't know how to use his butt, hips, and shoulders to fight for position. In fact, boxing out is all but extinct these days. Matching up with some of these phone booth rebounders today would be a piece of cake for Russell.
      Last edited by AlexBrady; 12-12-2011, 03:57 PM.

      Comment

      • OSUFan_88
        Outback Jesus
        • Jul 2004
        • 25642

        #93
        Re: Old School vs. today...you can't be serious

        Brady, you are saying that Russell would average 1/4th of the rebounds in an average game in today's basketball setup.

        There is no way Russell could average 20 rebound. Not saying his rebounding prowess wouldn't transfer, but there is no way anyone will average 1/4th of an average game's rebounds for an entire year. No way. Will not happen.
        Too Old To Game Club

        Urban Meyer is lol.

        Comment

        Working...