All Time NBA Team

SportsDoc · Post by **SportsDoc** » Sun May 31, 2015 2:46 pm

With all the Lebron vs. Michael talk, I was thinking who would be on the All Time NBA Teams. I'll go first. 5 positions only. Point Guard. Shooting Guard. Shooting Forward. Power Forward. Center. First and Second Teams allowed.

First Team:
PG: Oscar Robertson
SG: Michael Jordan
SF: Lebron James
PF: Bill Russell *
C: Kareem Abdul Jabbar

Second Team:
PG: Magic Johnson
SG: Kobe Bryant
SF: Larry Bird
PF: Karl Malone **
C: Wilt Chamberlain

* I believe he would be a forward in today's game.

** Only player without a Title, but his stats were off the charts though the Jazz couldn't get by the Bulls.

Johnny Carwash · Post by **Johnny Carwash** » Sun May 31, 2015 3:24 pm

Good topic. Mine would be pretty close to yours:

First Team:
PG: Magic
SG: Jordan
SF: LeBron
PF: Duncan
C: Chamberlain

Second Team:
PG: Robertson
SG: Kobe
SF: Bird
PF: Malone
C: Russell

Notes:
- I won't hide that going with Magic over Robertson on my first team reflects my bias growing up a fan of the 80's Lakers.
- My '80s bias also tempted me to go for Bird over LeBron at SF, but I couldn't quite do it. LeBron will likely finish his career as the second-best player of all time, if not the first.
- If you go strictly by players who played the role, PF is an oddly weak position in terms of historical greats prior to Duncan (who is inarguably great, but doesn't have the romantic aura of other stars). I almost picked Pettit for my second team due to my dislike of Malone.
- I went with Chamberlain over Russell at C due to Wilt's individual brilliance, but a team with Russell would probably win you more games in the end. This isn't meant as a snub to Kareem, who would be a close third.

Pruitt · Post by **Pruitt** » Sun May 31, 2015 8:16 pm

I'm only going to put out guys I've seen.

PG: Magic
SG: Jordan
SF: James
PF: Duncan
C: Olajuwon

DC47 · Post by **DC47** » Sun May 31, 2015 10:57 pm

First Team:
PG: Oscar Robertson
SG: Michael Jordan
SF: Lebron James
PF: Bill Russell * (I'll buy this, but I think he could play center today)
C: Wilt Chamberlain

Second Team:
PG: Magic Johnson
SG: Jerry West
SF: Larry Bird
PF: Tim Duncan
C: Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

Third Team:
PG: Isiah Thomas
SG: Kobe Bryant
SF: Rick Barry
PF: Karl Malone
C: Hakeem Olajuwon

Honorable mention: George Mikan, Elgin Baylor, Kevin Garnett, Charles Barkley, Shaquille O'Neal, Moses Malone, Bob Pettit

Someday, maybe: Kevin Durant, Steph Curry, Chris Paul

Woulda, shoulda: Pete Maravich, Bill Walton, Shawn Kemp, Ralph Sampson

govmentchedda · Post by **govmentchedda** » Mon Jun 01, 2015 6:19 am

Pruitt wrote:I'm only going to put out guys I've seen.

PG: Magic
SG: Jordan
SF: James
PF: Duncan
C: Olajuwon

Hard to argue with this, given your parameters.

Ryan · Post by **Ryan** » Mon Jun 01, 2015 7:08 am

I think Magic's the best point guard of all-time in a vacuum so he's the pick, but if I'm actually putting a team together and they might have to play other really great teams, I could talk myself into Chris Paul or Gary Payton. Stockton or Cousy off the bench when the swingmen start playing hero ball.

These are easy...

Jordan
Bird (LeBron's more talented but Larry would murder whoever passed on him)
Duncan

Center is painful. Olajuwon is my absolute favorite. Chamberlain and Russell are hard to judge across eras. I can't have any more FT liabilities so Shaq's out. Kareem wins and I just tell MJ and Larry to freeze him out.

Giff · Post by **Giff** » Mon Jun 01, 2015 7:17 am

Pruitt wrote:I'm only going to put out guys I've seen.

PG: Magic
SG: Jordan
SF: James
PF: Duncan
C: Olajuwon

Yup.

howard · Post by **howard** » Mon Jun 01, 2015 3:59 pm

I want Jerry West, Elgin Baylor, Julius Erving and Walt Frazier on a team, but it's mostly third or fourth I suppose. But I concur w/the other old guy, Jerry West > Kobe Bean.

DC47 · Post by **DC47** » Mon Jun 01, 2015 11:36 pm

The all-time best lists about the NBA are always fun. And always a bit absurd, because there is really no fundamental criteria regarding cross-era comparisons. So, for example, it's likely that if players were rated based on how they did against their peers, then George Mikan is the equal of Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.

Another fun way to play this game is to try to assemble a group of players (say a full rotation of 9 guys) who would win the most games in competition with other groups. Basketball is so much about chemistry and roles. So this is actually truer to the nature of the sport than trying to figure out if Elgin Baylor is 'better' than Larry Bird.

My team:

Bill Russell ......... Wilt Chamberlin
Tim Duncan ....... Dennis Rodman
Larry Bird........... LeBron James
Jerry West ......... Michael Jordan
Oscar Robertson

The Sybian · Post by **The Sybian** » Tue Jun 02, 2015 11:08 am

Johnny Carwash wrote: - My '80s bias also tempted me to go for Bird over LeBron at SF, but I couldn't quite do it. LeBron will likely finish his career as the second-best player of all time, if not the first.

Is LeBron really on Jordan's level? I have been meaning to ask since I heard someone on the radio say without hesitation that he is the best ever, and the co-host didn't react. I was an avid Knicks fan and followed the NBA from approximately 1985-1994, and watched/followed the playoffs through 1999, so I saw Jordan play for almost his entire career. I watched Sport Center daily, so I saw just about every Jordan highlight ever. He was an enormous cultural icon, and his products and commercials were everywhere. Without all of the entertainment options and the internet becoming what it is now, it was completely impossible to avoid seeing Jordan everywhere.

I have never seen LeBron play a single game, and I have only seen a handful of highlights, mostly ESPN clips with no volume while at the gym while I am half paying attention. The Decision was an unavoidable story, but beyond that, he doesn't seem to be remotely the public figure Jordan was. Is this a product of an oversaturated popular culture where it's impossible to be aware of half of what's going on, me disconnecting from sports or something else? In 1990, it was impossible not to see Jordan play, or understand his greatness. I hear about LeBron on the odd occasion I listen to sports talk radio, but I just have no concept of how talented he is or even what his game is.

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Tue Jun 02, 2015 11:21 am

The Sybian wrote:
Johnny Carwash wrote: - My '80s bias also tempted me to go for Bird over LeBron at SF, but I couldn't quite do it. LeBron will likely finish his career as the second-best player of all time, if not the first.
Is LeBron really on Jordan's level? I have been meaning to ask since I heard someone on the radio say without hesitation that he is the best ever, and the co-host didn't react. I was an avid Knicks fan and followed the NBA from approximately 1985-1994, and watched/followed the playoffs through 1999, so I saw Jordan play for almost his entire career. I watched Sport Center daily, so I saw just about every Jordan highlight ever. He was an enormous cultural icon, and his products and commercials were everywhere. Without all of the entertainment options and the internet becoming what it is now, it was completely impossible to avoid seeing Jordan everywhere.

I have never seen LeBron play a single game, and I have only seen a handful of highlights, mostly ESPN clips with no volume while at the gym while I am half paying attention. The Decision was an unavoidable story, but beyond that, he doesn't seem to be remotely the public figure Jordan was. Is this a product of an oversaturated popular culture where it's impossible to be aware of half of what's going on, me disconnecting from sports or something else? In 1990, it was impossible not to see Jordan play, or understand his greatness. I hear about LeBron on the odd occasion I listen to sports talk radio, but I just have no concept of how talented he is or even what his game is.

I don't think Lebron is Jordan. Jordan was absolutely the bigger cultural icon. He reshaped a league that Lebron now lives and works in.

I also think they are very different players and it is very hard to compare them. The league's style of play is also different now. Much more emphasis on 3 and D than isolation play, what with zone defense allowed now. Jordan was an all-around player for sure, don't get me wrong. If I were to make a "who's better" list, it would probably be

Scoring - Jordan (by a significant amount)
Passing - Lebron (but not by much)
Rebounding - Lebron (by a decent amount)
Defense - Jordan (especially since Lebron pretty much admitted he's coasting more on defense to save energy)
leadership - Jordan (willed his teammates better)
Killer Instinct - Draw (There are some studies that show Lebron is a killer down the stretch despite having a reputation that doesn't support it)
INtangibles - Jordan

I think the biggest difference may be that Lebron had to learn how to be a superstar in the 24/7 news cycle with no Dean smith to force him to be grounded. Jordan is the reason for that news cycle. But I think he would have issues with the coverage and social media being the way it is now had it been that way when he was playing. I'd wager (ha!) to say we'd have a few cell phone shots of Jordan with a floozy on his lap at a blackjack table had twitter been around.

I give Jordan the edge, but if Lebron were able to get to 4-5 titles, it would basically be a toss up because the one thing Jordan supporters always point to is 6 titles. And yes, he will always be 6/6, and Lebron can never do that.

Jerloma · Post by **Jerloma** » Tue Jun 02, 2015 11:22 am

I would say that he's equally as good at creating his own shot as Jordan, a slightly inferior shooter, a slightly better passer, a better rebounder, equally as good at drawing attention and thus making his teammates better, and an equally as good defender.

The people that think Jordan is so much better usually have an argument like "Game 7 of NBA Finals, down by 1 with 8 seconds to go....who do you want to have the ball? It's an absurd measure.

Jerloma · Post by **Jerloma** » Tue Jun 02, 2015 11:44 am

Just the fact that AB, a LeBron fan, can actually write that Jordan was a significantly better scorer than James (presumably with a straight face) tells you all you need to know about how the media idolatry of Jordan seeps into the public masses.

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Tue Jun 02, 2015 11:54 am

Jerloma wrote:Just the fact that AB, a LeBron fan, can actually write that Jordan was a significantly better scorer than James (presumably with a straight face) tells you all you need to know about how the media idolatry of Jordan seeps into the public masses.

I guess I'm just thinking that Jordan looked to score more often. Lebron looks to create equally, but yes, when he wants to get his shot, he gets it.

Rush2112 · Post by **Rush2112** » Tue Jun 02, 2015 11:58 am

Jerloma wrote:Just the fact that AB, a LeBron fan, can actually write that Jordan was a significantly better scorer than James (presumably with a straight face) tells you all you need to know about how the media idolatry of Jordan seeps into the public masses.

As a very casual NBA fan, I would argue that LeBron would have to change his attitude a lot to have been successful in the Jordan years. Jordan still got his when the Pistons were hammering him every inch of the court. LeBron seems to think that he should be allowed free passage to the basket.

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Tue Jun 02, 2015 12:00 pm

Rush2112 wrote:
Jerloma wrote:Just the fact that AB, a LeBron fan, can actually write that Jordan was a significantly better scorer than James (presumably with a straight face) tells you all you need to know about how the media idolatry of Jordan seeps into the public masses.
As a very casual NBA fan, I would argue that LeBron would have to change his attitude a lot to have been successful in the Jordan years. Jordan still got his when the Pistons were hammering him every inch of the court. LeBron seems to think that he should be allowed free passage to the basket.

I think if he played then it wouldn't have been an issue because it was part of the game and everyone adjusts.

Rush2112 · Post by **Rush2112** » Tue Jun 02, 2015 12:05 pm

AB_skin_test wrote:I think if he played then it wouldn't have been an issue because it was part of the game and everyone adjusts.

I don't know. Not saying that I'm an expert or anything, but Jordan seemed to have a fire that LeBron lacks. That whole going to Miami to have other players help with the burden thing, plus being lauded since he was in HS. He's worked, but perhaps not as much as he should?

The Sybian · Post by **The Sybian** » Tue Jun 02, 2015 12:12 pm

Rush2112 wrote:
AB_skin_test wrote:I think if he played then it wouldn't have been an issue because it was part of the game and everyone adjusts.
I don't know. Not saying that I'm an expert or anything, but Jordan seemed to have a fire that LeBron lacks. That whole going to Miami to have other players help with the burden thing, plus being lauded since he was in HS. He's worked, but perhaps not as much as he should?

Knowing even less than you, isn't basketball much more of a team game rather than individuals? In Jordan's day, isolated 1 on 1 situations was the norm. Does LeBron have the skill set to take on players? Based on the consensus that he can make his own shot opportunities I'd have to say yes. If he played in an era of isolation, I assume he would have been much better in these situations through focusing on taking on defenders.

Rush2112 · Post by **Rush2112** » Tue Jun 02, 2015 12:32 pm

The Sybian wrote:
Rush2112 wrote:
AB_skin_test wrote:I think if he played then it wouldn't have been an issue because it was part of the game and everyone adjusts.
I don't know. Not saying that I'm an expert or anything, but Jordan seemed to have a fire that LeBron lacks. That whole going to Miami to have other players help with the burden thing, plus being lauded since he was in HS. He's worked, but perhaps not as much as he should?
Knowing even less than you, isn't basketball much more of a team game rather than individuals? In Jordan's day, isolated 1 on 1 situations was the norm. Does LeBron have the skill set to take on players? Based on the consensus that he can make his own shot opportunities I'd have to say yes. If he played in an era of isolation, I assume he would have been much better in these situations through focusing on taking on defenders.

My question is if he could do what he can do now in an era where you could but hands on the ball-handler. From what I've seen LeBron doesn't do well when he's knocked about. How'd he do in a league where that didn't happen every 10th game, but EVERY game? Would he change his game? Maybe.

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Tue Jun 02, 2015 1:04 pm

Well. It is kinda hard to discuss it without people having seen it, but Lebron does fine with contact. He just whines about it afterwards. It's easily the least impressive part of his game. The whining that is.

And what I am saying is had he played in that era, the hand checking would have been so much more a part of it that he would have been fine. he's too talented not to do so. Just like Jordan would have found a way to be a superstar in todays game.

If you don't watch it enough then it's no different than a grandpa saying "Mike Trout is no Mickey Mantle! I don't need to watch to know that!"

I give Jordan an edge. I watched a fair amount of those Bulls teams because of WGN and the fact that when the playoffs were on there weren't a whole lot of other sports on basic TV. Jordan is Jordan and yes it is mythologized how he always made the clutch shot (He didn't, and Lebron is actually far and away better than his peers at it as well). But it's pretty damn close and Lebron is 30 - he's still got time to add to his resume. The basketball he has been playing this past month is insane.

yes, Lebron's lost more finals than he's won. That may indeed be the case when he hangs it up. You know who else came in second more than he won? Jack Nicklaus. being there counts for something.

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Tue Jun 02, 2015 1:10 pm

How much does the narrative change if Cleveland wins this year? Jordan never did it without Pippen.

DC47 · Post by **DC47** » Tue Jun 02, 2015 1:24 pm

I have no idea if Jordan or James are better. Different styles of play, different teams, different eras. But here are some observations:

- James is a fine defender. He coasts at times only to help his team when they can't put scorers next to him, which requires him to do more on offense. And he can credibly guard four positions. Jordan, three.

- There is no question about James working hard. He's changed his game and his body over time. He doesn't opt out of games or minutes.

- The different eras thing is a big deal. The game has changed so much over time. It's very hard to compare across eras.

- Jordan was certainly over-hyped, and helped by the officials. However, that still happens, and James is a major beneficiary.

- I wouldn't say Jordan or James are better than Oscar Robertson. They are comparable players in terms of their roles. What Jordan and James did in their eras, Robertson easily did in his. He averaged a triple double over his first five years, while scoring around 30 per game. In his prime, Robertson wasn't on teams that were as good, so he didn't win titles until traded in his twilight years to Kareem's Bucks. Ironically, he couldn't use free agency to move to a contender, but he made it happen with a lawsuit when he led the players association.

- Were any of them better than George Mikan or Wilt Chamberlain? I have no idea. The latter two played different positions and were in their primes at a time before the NBA got much time on TV. I imagine very few of us have ever seen 10 minutes of Chamberlain playing in his prime, and none of us saw Mikan dominate the league.

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Tue Jun 02, 2015 1:35 pm

mister d wrote:How much does the narrative change if Cleveland wins this year? Jordan never did it without Pippen.

If Cleveland wins this year without Love and with gimpy kyrie, he'll probably have to average 35-15-15...which sure would make the debate much more interesting.

Jerloma · Post by **Jerloma** » Tue Jun 02, 2015 1:38 pm

mister d wrote:How much does the narrative change if Cleveland wins this year? Jordan never did it without Pippen.

The Jordanless Bulls got within a game of the NBA finals. This idea that the Bulls were Jordan and a bunch of scrubs is ludicrous. If you hear anybody even casually allude to it, you can disregard their opinions on the NBA as well as hippie music, proper wine choices, and the dewey decimal system.

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Tue Jun 02, 2015 2:06 pm

Right. I don't know shit about the NBA but I'm well versed enough to know that his "supporting cast" was a good fucking cast.

Post by **Shirley** » Tue Jun 02, 2015 2:30 pm

Jerloma wrote:
mister d wrote:How much does the narrative change if Cleveland wins this year? Jordan never did it without Pippen.
The Jordanless Bulls got within a game of the NBA finals. This idea that the Bulls were Jordan and a bunch of scrubs is ludicrous. If you hear anybody even casually allude to it, you can disregard their opinions on the NBA as well as hippie music, proper wine choices, and the dewey decimal system.

One game from the Eastern Conference finals, not the NBA finals.

I don't think LeBron is as good as Jordan, but I don't think he's too far away either. With his size and strength, LeBron's actually more physically gifted, but Jordan just had that rare fire.

FWIW, Jordan had slightly higher offensive and defensive efficiency numbers for his career (which includes his sad Washington years) - http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... 4=&p5=&p6=" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Jordan's offensive rating was the same in the playoffs, but his defensive numbers went up slightly. LeBron's O and D both dip slightly in the playoffs.

Johnny Carwash · Post by **Johnny Carwash** » Tue Jun 02, 2015 2:38 pm

Am I wrong to assume Steph Curry is what Jerry West would be if he were born 50 years later with the same relative level of talent?

Jerloma · Post by **Jerloma** » Tue Jun 02, 2015 3:12 pm

Shirley wrote:
Jerloma wrote:
mister d wrote:How much does the narrative change if Cleveland wins this year? Jordan never did it without Pippen.
The Jordanless Bulls got within a game of the NBA finals. This idea that the Bulls were Jordan and a bunch of scrubs is ludicrous. If you hear anybody even casually allude to it, you can disregard their opinions on the NBA as well as hippie music, proper wine choices, and the dewey decimal system.
One game from the Eastern Conference finals, not the NBA finals.

Thank you.

howard · Post by **howard** » Tue Jun 02, 2015 4:12 pm

Johnny Carwash wrote:Am I wrong to assume Steph Curry is what Jerry West would be if he were born 50 years later with the same relative level of talent?

Close, but I don't think so. I think Curry gets to the basket easier than West, but I saw West in the second half of his career. Curry is a better shooter, but w/o a 3-point line there is a whole world of shots West never took. I am a huge Jerry West guy; that is how highly I regard Curry.

As far as getting to the hole, I think of Dave Bing when looking for old timey comparisons to Curry. And I see Chris Paul as more similar in style to West than Curry.

Rush2112 · Post by **Rush2112** » Tue Jun 02, 2015 4:53 pm

AB_skin_test wrote:
yes, Lebron's lost more finals than he's won. That may indeed be the case when he hangs it up. You know who else came in second more than he won? Jack Nicklaus. being there counts for something.

Or the weakness of one conference compared to the other.

He's the NBA's Jim Kelly!

Rush2112 · Post by **Rush2112** » Tue Jun 02, 2015 4:58 pm

Jerloma wrote:
mister d wrote:How much does the narrative change if Cleveland wins this year? Jordan never did it without Pippen.
The Jordanless Bulls got within a game of the NBA finals. This idea that the Bulls were Jordan and a bunch of scrubs is ludicrous. If you hear anybody even casually allude to it, you can disregard their opinions on the NBA as well as hippie music, proper wine choices, and the dewey decimal system.

Nice jump there Jerloma. Don't believe I've mentioned supporting cast once. My argument is more that Joran could dominate in today's NBA. Not sure if James could in the rough and tumble NBA of the 1990s.

Yes, LeBron is very good, I just think he's Jordan good.

Also, the Dewey Decimal System sucks. It's antiquated, shows Western bias, and is confusing. Library of Congress all the way.

Rush2112 · Post by **Rush2112** » Tue Jun 02, 2015 5:07 pm

Jerloma wrote:
Shirley wrote:
One game from the Eastern Conference finals, not the NBA finals.
Thank you.

Man they won a first round playoff series. Must be one of the all time greats!

Pippen is an all time great. Perhaps one could argue for Rodman based on his defense/rebounding. Other than that there was very little but role players or vets on the back side of their careers.

With talent that the Cavs had on their roster they really shouldn't have been under .500 40 games into the season.

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Tue Jun 02, 2015 5:14 pm

The Cavs won 42 less games when LeBron left. That's insane.

Ryan · Post by **Ryan** » Tue Jun 02, 2015 5:23 pm

If LeBron, who is basically a freakishly bigger version of Adrian Peterson, played in the rough and tumble 90s as his current self, he would have made Anthony Mason (RIP) piss his pants.

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Tue Jun 02, 2015 6:24 pm

mister d wrote:The Cavs won 42 less games when LeBron left. That's insane.

Heat didn't far too well either. Of course bosh being hurt didn't help.

DC47 · Post by **DC47** » Tue Jun 02, 2015 11:47 pm

howard wrote:
Johnny Carwash wrote:Am I wrong to assume Steph Curry is what Jerry West would be if he were born 50 years later with the same relative level of talent?
Close, but I don't think so. I think Curry gets to the basket easier than West, but I saw West in the second half of his career. Curry is a better shooter, but w/o a 3-point line there is a whole world of shots West never took. I am a huge Jerry West guy; that is how highly I regard Curry.

As far as getting to the hole, I think of Dave Bing when looking for old timey comparisons to Curry. And I see Chris Paul as more similar in style to West than Curry.

I like the Bing comparison. Best I've ever come up with for Curry was Steve Nash if he was told to look for his shot right from the start of his career and so became better at launching under pressure. The Bing comp might be more apt than is apparent as at some point he lost considerable vision in one eye due to a childhood accident (and no doubt poor medical care living in a poor part of D.C.) and later a detached retina. He was a great outside shooter -- but would have been greater for longer if he had normal vision. If he had played with a three point line, his stats would look more Curry-like. Further, I've always thought that Curry looks like Bing, both in terms of his body and his face. Because of when and where I grew up, I will never like a basketball player more than Dave Bing. But since that time, there's none I've enjoyed watching more than Curry. Due to Bing, I think I was primed to like him from the start.

Initially I thought the Paul and West comparison was way off. But on reflection, I see some similarities. After age 30 West shifted his style to be more of a facilitator, like Paul. And Paul can score, though he suppresses this a bit for the good of his team. Both are under-rated defenders; this is one of my favorite things about Paul. The biggest difference is that the young Jerry West was pretty much a Jordan clone. He scored his 28 to 30 points (with no three pointers) but was also a ferocious rebounder for a wing. He typically wasn't the point guard, and certainly wasn't just playing a finesse game on the perimeter. This best comp for the young Jerry West might be Jordan or Kobe Bryant. All three could do whatever was necessary, but were primarily scorers. Jordan was a bit different in that he had less of an outside game. All were basketball geniuses, and obvious first-team all-NBA players just about every year, in their primes and beyond.

The two eras of Jerry West was partly due to age. But a bigger part was one of the great coaching jobs of all-time. Bill Sharman took over a Lakers team with the classic problem off too many shooters and not enough balls. Chamberlain, Baylor (who soon was seriously injured and done), Jim McMillan (Baylor's replacement at small forward and a fine shooter), West, and the sharp-shooting Gail Goodrich were all ball-dominant players who had always scored. Sharman somehow got Chamberlain to focus on rebounding, defending, and passing. The man who averaged 30 to 50 (five-zero) points per game each year until he was 30 was actually last among starters in shots despite playing over 40 minutes per game. Sharman made the 6-foot tall Goodrich the shooting guard, and the bigger West -- a legendary scorer -- became the point guard with a mandate to move the ball and shut down the opponents toughest guard on defense. I would love to know how he sold these radical role changes to Chamberlain and West, who were obviously legends even when they were playing. I can't think of anything like this in the history of major sports.

The result of Sharman's magic and/or the willingness of Chamberlain and West to subordinate their games for the team was back-to-back finals appearances, where they split with the famous Knicks team of Reed, Frazier, DeBusschere, Lucas, Monroe, Bradley, et al. (with the et al. including the gawky forward Phil Jackson).

Red Holzman was rightly considered one of the greatest coaches of all time for what he did with these Knicks teams. But I have always thought Sharman was short-changed in the comparison. His teams had the bigger stars. But I think the job he did in getting his bigger stars to radically revise their games has never been matched in the NBA. If Phil Jackson had played for Sharman and not Holtzman perhaps he would have learned better how to handle a team with two gigantic stars and might have kept the Lakers astonishing Bryant-O'Neal tandem together for longer. The parallel with the West-Chamberlain Lakers is beyond obvious. It must have driven Jerry West insane to watch as the GM while Bryant and O'Neal blew up that team. To be fair, West and Chamberlain were experienced veterans who had already proven they were the best in the game, and presumably wanted desperately to win (Wilt had one championship with the 76ers and Jerry none). The much younger Bryant and O'Neal had won championships and (apparently) wanted to win without the other around in order to show their true excellence.

Enough reminiscing. For the moment. I do know that when I watch Curry and Paul (as well as any post-season game the Spurs play) I am not -- for the moment -- grimacing at the pathetic spectacle that the NBA has become. I am -- briefly -- taken back to a time when the players had tremendous mastery of the fundamentals and the very best could go beyond them to play with bold genius rather than mere flash. Curry and Paul would fit right into any game Bing or West were in, back in their days.

Trivia note: Dave Bing was the college roomate of Jim Boheim at Syracuse, and grew up playing ball in Washington D.C. with another guy who would become famous in Detroit. See below.

DC47 · Post by **DC47** » Tue Jun 02, 2015 11:55 pm

howard · Post by **howard** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 12:02 am

The height difference between West and Kobe makes me shy away from the comparison, but I think there are lots of similarities.

Spot on the praise for Sharman. One more shout out for those Laker teams - Happy Hairston, who was always happy to get his shot, and his double figures despite all those other scorers. The 71-72 team was NYC heavy: McMillian from Columbia, Hairston from NYU(!) and Leroy Ellis from St. Johns.

DC47 wrote: The result of Sharman's magic and/or the willingness of Chamberlain and West to subordinate their games for the team was back-to-back finals appearances, where they split with the famous Knicks team of Reed, Frazier, DeBusschere, Lucas, Monroe, Bradley, et al. (with the et al. including the gawky forward Phil Jackson).

But the Lakers did have a gangly, hairy answer to Jackson (much sharper dresser, though):

DC47 · Post by **DC47** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 1:38 am

howard wrote:The height difference between West and Kobe makes me shy away from the comparison, but I think there are lots of similarities.

I always struggle in comparisons between eras in basketball. Rules, style, three-point shots. Just so many things. And unlike baseball, the game is not primarily one-on-one. Team, roles, chemistry -- these things change everything. So you can't just run the stats through a computer to normalize them against the competition of that time. The game is just so different today than 40 or 50 years ago.

This extends even to physical size. Kobe is certainly bigger than West was. 6'6 vs. 6'3 or so. Much heavier. But in West's era he was long for a guard, he could jump, and he was aggressive. He was well into double digits in rebounds in college, and I believe in his early years in the NBA he was over 6. Not up there with the Big O, but certainly in Kobe's territory. Dave Bing was around West's size and over-lapped his years in the NBA quite a bit, but he never boarded like West. Same with Earl Monroe.

Spot on the praise for Sharman. One more shout out for those Laker teams - Happy Hairston, who was always happy to get his shot, and his double figures despite all those other scorers. The 71-72 team was NYC heavy: McMillian from Columbia, Hairston from NYU(!) and Leroy Ellis from St. Johns.

It's amazing that a team with such ball-dominant scorers as Chamberlain, West, and Goodrich could move the ball. But they did. So the other guys actually got to shoot it too. I remember McMillian as the west coast (as a pro) version of Bill Bradley. Same size, same role, same great jump shot. An early prototype of Silk Wilkes.

DC47 wrote:The result of Sharman's magic and/or the willingness of Chamberlain and West to subordinate their games for the team was back-to-back finals appearances, where they split with the famous Knicks team of Reed, Frazier, DeBusschere, Lucas, Monroe, Bradley, et al. (with the et al. including the gawky forward Phil Jackson).

But the Lakers did have a gangly, hairy answer to Jackson (much sharper dresser, though:

Man -- I forgot about the beard. He looks he just came off the Serpico set

Ryan · Post by **Ryan** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 6:45 am

The way professional athletes used to look will never not amaze me.