PDA

View Full Version : Real talk about Oscar Robertson, Wilt, Bill Russell, Kareem...



TTgTF
06-07-2011, 12:48 PM
No disrespect, but how many of you have actually sat down and watched them play? When people talk about how great they are for all time...I wonder about that. Did you see their highlights? No disrespect, but Oscar's shot looks soft as hell. In college, the NCAA actually banned dunking because of Kareem Abdul Jabbar (I guess he was the only one who could do it, or the tallest one out there). I heard when Bill or Wilt were playing, they only had eight teams in the league. Also if you are the tallest one out there and dunking is rare, it's so much easier to be dominant.

The pace of the game seemed alot slower. You didn't see the explosive fast breaks we are accustomed to seeing now. And "in you face dunks", ankle breaking crossovers, double & triple team defense? None of that seemed to exist. No disrespect, but alot of those old games looked more like something you'd see at a YMCA than the NBA.

Heck, Rick Barry was doing the granny shot. When I think of G.O.A.T, I don't just think stats. I picture, if this person was in their prime, how would they compete against others in their prime? That's probably why its dangerous to compare eras because so much has changed.

From the clips I saw, I'd take Isiah Thomas or Iverson any day over Oscar Robertson if they were all in their prime. And where does Dr. J rank? Comparing eras is just bad...because you'll sound disrespectful if you are honest.

iheardaboutthat
06-07-2011, 12:50 PM
Agreed

BertDiggler
06-07-2011, 12:52 PM
Agreed

SwayWay
06-07-2011, 01:16 PM
You could say the exact same thing about every era over the previous one. The players of today are more well rounded/stronger/athletic than 90's. Sports evolve.

scubapro1
06-07-2011, 01:19 PM
Agreed. I think its a respect thing nomsayin

Proteinzz
06-07-2011, 01:22 PM
You argue that you shouldn't compare across eras, but your post is pretty much based around the premise of comparing across eras.

Of course you can't take an exact replica of Jerry West, take his game from the 60s, and compare it to today and say he would get dominated. That isn't how it works. You have to look at how each player dominated there particular era. Which is why players like Wilt get so much respect.

chlaxman
06-07-2011, 02:00 PM
You argue that you shouldn't compare across eras, but your post is pretty much based around the premise of comparing across eras.

Of course you can't take an exact replica of Jerry West, take his game from the 60s, and compare it to today and say he would get dominated. That isn't how it works. You have to look at how each player dominated there particular era. Which is why players like Wilt get so much respect.

This.

You have to think that if someone like Robertson played today he'd also have the training and practice habits of today.

rsnnh12
06-07-2011, 02:12 PM
Well no shi t, of course they aren't as purely talented as players are now. Would Babe Ruth be able to hit a prime Pedro? Would Jim Brown run all over the Ravens/Steelers defenses? Probably not. But they WERE the best of their era, the most dominant alive during their time... can't discredit them for that.

Oh, and you heard wrong... Russell was average/slightly below average height for centers during that time (6'9"-6'10", depending on your source, average C height being 6'10"). Wilt was bigger than most guys, but there's still a long list of guys 6'11"+ from his years. Something like 25 guys played 3+ years in the league and were that height or taller, in addition to Wilt. Its not like they were playing solely against 6 footers...

wtcforever
06-07-2011, 02:28 PM
Lettuce be reality Big O was the pioneering all-around guy, Bill Russel averaged 22.5 boards with players like Wes Unseld, Wilt, George, etc. And obviously today's player would look better because people like lebron, dwight and kg are freaks of nature

lllBoneZlll
06-07-2011, 02:30 PM
agreed

Ecnewyx
06-07-2011, 02:35 PM
You could say the exact same thing about every era over the previous one. The players of today are more well rounded/stronger/athletic than 90's. Sports evolve.

Yup. Which is also why MJ gets GOAT recognition, because no one has come out in the post-MJ period that is better (at his position). Kobe has come the closest and you all know how much derision Kobe gets for it.

TTgTF
06-07-2011, 02:41 PM
Ok, so for all of you who are talking about how much the player contributed to their era, and that determines GOAT, let me ask you this:

Do you consider the Atari 2600 to be the GOAT when it comes to systems?
What about the Nintendo 8 bit with original Mario?
Was the original Bell phone GOAT?
How about the first boxing champ, first Olympic Gold medalist, etc.?

All I was saying is, I think another term should be used when talking about what you contributed to an era because "Greatest" implies "Greater than" others. And side-by-side that simply isn't true.

Greatest for that era, (GFTE) sure.
Greatest contributor/innovator/pioneer? sure
Greatest of all time? wha...?

Be_Easy_25
06-07-2011, 02:42 PM
they didnt grow up with the same technology/ training methods....it's not exactly fair to say that a player now is better than them.

just because a player now can beat them doesnt mean that they are greater than them.

TTgTF
06-07-2011, 02:46 PM
they didnt grow up with the same technology/ training methods....it's not exactly fair to say that a player now is better than them.

just because a player now can beat them doesnt mean that they are greater than them.

Read my latest response above your post

Ecnewyx
06-07-2011, 03:00 PM
Ok, so for all of you who are talking about how much the player contributed to their era, and that determines GOAT, let me ask you this:

Do you consider the Atari 2600 to be the GOAT when it comes to systems?
What about the Nintendo 8 bit with original Mario?
Was the original Bell phone GOAT?
How about the first boxing champ, first Olympic Gold medalist, etc.?

All I was saying is, I think another term should be used when talking about what you contributed to an era because "Greatest" implies "Greater than" others. And side-by-side that simply isn't true.

Greatest for that era, (GFTE) sure.
Greatest contributor/innovator/pioneer? sure
Greatest of all time? wha...?

GOAT is a combination of all of those. (Opinion).

The 2600 merits consideration because it pioneered the home console market but it also lacked competition and a software library. The Nintendo/Famicom has a legitimate argument. As does the SNES/Super Famicom, and the PSX/PS2. The later consoles had extensive software libraries and were in a market that was highly competitive.

I'd probably give it to the PSX, personally. First successful disc-based console and pretty much killed the cartridge, stomped out all the competitors including Sega, Nintendo, Panasonic, Phillip, Atari, etc., the Playstation became a household name, first major non-videogame entrant into the market (Sony), massive game lineup and life (1996-2006), and so on.

TTgTF
06-07-2011, 03:09 PM
GOAT is a combination of all of those. (Opinion).

The 2600 merits consideration because it pioneered the home console market but it also lacked competition and a software library. The Nintendo/Famicom has a legitimate argument. As does the SNES/Super Famicom, and the PSX/PS2. The later consoles had extensive software libraries and were in a market that was highly competitive.

I'd probably give it to the PSX, personally. First successful disc-based console and pretty much killed the cartridge, stomped out all the competitors including Sega, Nintendo, Panasonic, Phillip, Atari, etc., the Playstation became a household name, first major non-videogame entrant into the market (Sony), massive game lineup and life (1996-2006), and so on.

...and yet the Wii has sold the most units, with Nintendo/Famicom in second place (I think)

see what I'm saying?
And technology will continue to advance until you are physically inside the game in true full body virtual reality. I just think GOAT is a shaky term...not descriptive enough to be accurate

2Burnt
06-07-2011, 04:04 PM
you compare players to other players in their era. there is no other way to figure out how one would fare against another in another time.