This is a tad over the top.

One year Jordan averaged 37 PPG in a league that allowed hand checking on the perimeter. That would be like scoring 45 PPG in this NBA.

LeBron won't beat the Spurs, and won't ever win another championship.

Spurs in 5.

In the irony of ironies, the Cavs could not be a better fit for LeBron at this point, especially if they pick Noel and he ends up being an athletic 5 who can alter shots and rebound.

Trivia: Who is the all-time NBA leader in scoring average for Game 7's?

The moment Jordan retired, everybody and their mothers biiiiiiiiitched and bitched and bitched and bitched about the quality of the league. No studs. No stars. Nothing to watch. Bunch of overpaid guys who don't try hard. Not even Shaq and Kobe were good enough for some people.

Now we've got a league with all kinds of budding stars, led by Lebron freakin' James, and people still aren't impressed?

Look, the NFL doesn't have Barry Sanders or Walter Payton, but it DOES have Adrian Peterson and Jamaal Charles. Sports change. They adapt to trends and new winning strategies. Players change. They train differently. They learn the game differently.

Get over it.

Lebron over MJ by .1 PPG if I remember the ESPN graphic correctly.

It's just nostalgia for an era gone past. In another 20 years, people will be looking back at this one in a similar way I'm sure.

no shit, I'd take that line

Not nostalgia the skill level has dropped off and there isn't that many super stars compared to when I was growing up.

Why the Spurs are clearly the superior team

But that's not LeBron's game...Jordan forced shots, LeBron doesn't

I'll bet you three months worth of thread starting privileges the Heat win at least three games.

I'm not sure the point you're trying to make here. When Jordan scored 37 PPG he was not a true perimeter player yet. Without handchecking he would've been unstoppable attacking the basket. His 37 PPG year he hit 12 threes the entire season, shot 48% from the field and attempted almost 1000 FTs. Imagine how many FTs he'd attempted if hand checking was a foul.

Jordan didn't flop.



He has that going for him, too.

I think Hootie is trying to say is Jordan always looked to score normally himself, LeBron always looks for the easiest way to score either through a shot or pass. LeBron has the Magic Johnson type apporach to the game.

I think there are plenty of good players and there's been a resurgence of talent. But I feel like some more guys need to take the next step and challenge LeBron. That's why Hootie's argument has some merit. I think at this point it's LeBron's league... but I'd never count out any team with Durant.

Part of it is probably the lack of big men. Robinson, Olajuwon... Shaq. Those guys would destroy this league today. Dwight Howard could be that good but he's too much of a headcase. Blake Griffin has the physical talent, but I don't know. The Clippers find a way to screw things up.

dude you're not going to hear me ever bash Jordan

he's my all-time favorite athlete ever

now...I wasn't exactly privied to anything but his highlights of his 80's career.

I remember him being larger than life when I was FIRST old enough to retain memories during the Portland series in 1992.

and then I have my 10-13 year old memories of his 'mature' years...

so you're right...I didn't really get to athletic freak of nature Jordan at the peak of his prime because I was too young.

All I'm saying is...whatever I'm seeing with LeBron is the most physically gifted basketball player I've ever seen...

and I've always said in regards to arguing the NFL that I don't argue about Terry Bradshaw and Joe Montana because I couldn't formulate my OWN opinion on those guys since I don't remember them playing (Montana I do, but not the REAL Montana).

I do know that all of the Kobe ballwashers on here are ****ing crazy and that Kobe isn't even in the same ****ing universe as either LeBron or Jordan.

I just watch LeBron play and his vision impresses me more than any other aspect of his game...

oh that and the fact he's 6'8" and one of the fastest ****ing players on the court...or quickest...or both

he'll see a fast break developing and he'll be behind the break and before you know it he's there and he's getting the ally oop

it's ****ing ridiculous

but yeah, back to the vision...like I said, I don't remember Magic in his prime...or Magic Magic

but if he had THAT vision...or better vision than LeBron? JFC

LeBron makes passes that are just marvelous. It's just amazing to watch. I hate LeBron and the decision...I thought it was the worst ****ing thing I ever saw and I loved him choking/them losing that first year...

but he worked his ass off and developed his post game and his three pointer...and now he's just amazing to watch

he literally makes basketball exciting...him, Steph Curry and Durant are truly fun to watch...but LeBron is in a league of his own...he brings me back to my youth/Jordan days

I hate Lebron with a passion, but I'm not gonna sit here and say he isn't one of the best athletes I've ever seen play the game. He's just a specimen.

That's right "JFC" Bird and Magic with their floor general skills were jaw dropping.

magic was an insane passer.

No disagreement from me. LeBron is one of the best specimens of an athlete to play any major sport ever. I'd agree he's more of a pass first guy than Jordan for sure. But he doesn't have Magic or Bird's court vision. But no one does. That's not fair.

Of course the guy who gets left out of these discussions is John Stockton, which is too bad. LeBron is probably closer to Stockton... at least in style of play. Although that's tough to compare, Stockton was amazing.

Stockton had 2 HOF careers. Malone should thank John Stockton every day for his career.

Ridiculous. Skill level is as high as it's ever been. The reason there aren't as many "stars" is that the differential in talent from the best players to the worst players is much closer today than it was during the time we were growing. Thus, it's more difficult to stand out as elite. Guys like Dave Corzine couldn't play in the NBA today, but was a starter for the Bulls early in Jordan't career.

that's another thing

today's athlete is no doubt (and a lot of this has to do with the popularity MJ had with these stars in today's NBA) better than the typical athlete Jordan was facing in Jordan's prime

and you can say that about the NFL, too

which makes it really hard to compare everything...almost to the point that comparing eras is just impossible and we might as well just appreciate MJ for being MJ and LeBron for being LeBron (which is 100 X better than Kobe Bryant)

That's a great example. I guess that's what I mean. There are definitely more good players today. But if guys like Drexler, Stockton, Ewing, Robinson, Gary Payton, etc. won titles you wouldn't have been shocked by it. They were amazing players on the floor. I think right now we're kind of in that waiting area to see if guys like Chris Paul, Griffin, Paul George, Derrick Rose can reach that level.

It also seems like maybe there are more second-tier stars today. Guys that aren't quite elite. I don't remember everything about the 80s and 90s, and certainly don't know a ton about decades prior to that. So don't quote me on that one lol.

It will be interesting to see if they put Lebron on Parker. Parker struggles against bigger guards. If Parker gets loose the Spurs tend to win. if you keep him in check, the Spurs will struggle. This has the potential to be an all time series. I won't predict a winner, but I predict 7 games. Spurs split in Miami, Miami wins 1 in San Antonio. Miami wins game 6...then anything goes in game 7.

that's what I said the last few days to my friends

**** it

put LeBron on Parker...I WATCHED with my own two eyes him shutdown MVP Derrick Rose when Derrick Rose was BEASTING through the playoffs...they put LeBron on him...and it was over. LeBron PWNED him.

Rose is quicker than Parker, so I know LeBron can do it. LeBron takes Parker out of this series? Heat win in 5.

What!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Dude, either you have alzheimers or are delirious , the athletes are the same but the relative skill level isn't. For Example the Real Dream Team in 1992, yeah a who's who in HOF talent on one team outside of Lattener

I'm sorry...

A LeBron led dream team right now with the right pieces around him could have beat that '92 dream team.

At the very least, it would have been a fight to the death.

Their only edge would have been Jordan's killer instinct. The only way they win a best of series was if THEN PRIMED Jordan just decided he wasn't going to lose no matter what.

The 92 dream team was special and elite no doubt. But we tend to over romanticize players from the past because well.....it's the past. I'll bet there will be plenty of Hall of Fame players from the 2012 dream team as well.

If you are comparing the 2012 team vs the 92 team I think the 92 wins mostly because the bigs of the 92 team would own the 2012 bigs.

If you look at the lineups it isn't romanticizing at all. This was the way back when I knew all the players stats up and down. That's how much impact that the players of yesteryear had on the game. Now, it's eroding new defensive rules like zone being allowed, and the lost art of making FTs that's where I notice it most when the basics are being ignored. Players aren't as mentally tough in comparison to the stated players.

Nostalgia again.

That's your rebuttal nice, name as many all-stars today that could take on the stars of the past on top of your head without looking it up.

Lebron said last night he might have to guard Parker but they are starting out putting Chalmers on him. Looking at it from a Heat perspective I just don't think you want Lebron chasing Parker all over the court

Let's not let emotion cloud true history. The Bulls got pushed to the brink a few times, and Jordan miss shots.


A lot of shots.

I was a huge Bulls fan, too.


I have been a Bulls fan since the Wooridge and Sellars days. Satellite TV was new to our house, and wild feed/unscrambled Chicago games were awesome.

No announcers, just Basketball and close-up shots of hot bitches in the crowd during TO's.


Most people have a hard time looking back and seeing how things really were.

Why would you put Chalmers on Parker? Parker will have 15 points in the first. I'd really consider starting Norris. He's 100% better defensively and his offense isn't that much worse than Chalmers.

Chalmers' D is significantly better than Norris Cole (http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/MIA/2013.html), but neither can guard Parker. If they actually want to have a chance at stopping him, LeBron will have to do it (and I'm sure he will at the end of the game).

I just ****ing put LeBron on him from the get go and say "game on"

it's the ****ing Finals

I 100% agree with you. That works both ways though. People act like 20 years ago guys were a bunch of slow stiffs who could not handle today's athleticism. It's not true. Someone like Hootie would go on about how John Stockton would get run over today... it's not true. They just don't understand the game. Go ask Gary Payton about that. He was one of the best defensive guards of all time, still would be today... and I've seen multiple interviews where he said Stockton was the toughest player he played against. And he guarded Jordan and Kobe. Those guys would hold their own. And I like Tyson Chandler and Kevin Love, very good players... but they would get beat up by a Barkley/Malone/Ewing/Robinson frontcourt. That'd actually be the real problem with a dream team matchup, not LeBron vs. Jordan.

The Spurs movement on offense will prevent LeBron from taking Parker completely out of the series.

dude that's fine...and I don't disagree

you have to understand...when I was 8-13 years old...the NFL was an afterthought for me...I used to watch every Bulls game on WGN and I'd get pumped for the weekend and the NBA on NBC...I'd ****ing sit in my living room and watch the games all day and shoot socks into a ****ing laundry hamper and pretend I was Michael ****ing Jordan

I'm just realistic. There were a billion black kids that would see MJ on TV from their shitty little projects and be like "holy ****" and now all of those kids have grown up (I'm 28) and the ones that wanted to emulate MJ and saw the NBA boom MJ caused have just turned into SUPER ****ING FREAKS...

I'm not saying the players today are better basketball players...fundamentally, it isn't close. I'm saying they are most likely far better athletes.

Again though...I think it's amazingly unfair to compare eras...and I don't like doing it. I appreciate the differences of both eras.

Don't know what I'm supposed to be looking at there but... http://www.nba.com/heat/news_recap/g...t-guarding-you

He's not going to guard him all game. He is going to get flat-out gassed. He could afford to do that with Rose because nobody else on the Bulls can score.

Jordan hit 50% of his buzzer beaters and in his peak, he averaged 34-35 points per game in the playoffs. And he did that against a loaded Eastern Conference in a league where he played elite defenders with loose handchecking rules.

Jordan's playoff performance is probably untouchable. If he didn't play college ball and didn't quit basketball, he could have won more championships and possibly 8 straight.

So do you guys think that Lebron will be above or below whatever his current average in this postseason is for points?

I'm pretty excited that Kawhi is going to get a chance to cover Lebron in the finals. Kawhi is my favorite player in the NBA and the only reason I have an interest in any team other than the Lakers...

DRtg and defensive win shares. Chalmers is significantly better in both than Cole (and has been the last two years). He's also the far superior offensive guard to him as well, so more minutes definitely should be going to him.

Not that either one of them has a chance at competing with Tony Parker this series.

About the same (26-27), I'm sure. Leonard will be no match defensively for LeBron (no shame in that, nobody is), but LeBron's best offensive games aren't always about how many points he scores.

What was cool was when LeBron couldn't stop Dirk from DESTROYING HIS WORLD.

http://uranus.ckt.net/~gochiefs/dirklebron.gif

I'm not arguing that the elite players from that era weren't great. They were, and they'd be great in any era generally speaking. However, their relative greatness has something to do with the fact that the depth of the league back then isn't close to what it is today. The bottom half of the league today is much better than it was then, so comparing the group of elite players is more difficult.

As for skill level, that's overhyped. Kids today, once they get to that level and spend a couple of years in the league, are every bit as skilled. The difference is that players back then spent more time in college than the elite players today, so the guys you're talking about were more mature to kick off their careers. Think about all the basketball junior high/high school guys play today - they get more coaching than ever. If anything, the league is more dependent on skills now than it was back then. This era expects their bigs to step out and hit perimeter shots, whereas big men back then sat on the block.

As has been stated, it's hard to compare eras for any number of reasons, but I've seen you talk about the league back then and it's clear dominance. While I give it the nod, I don't think the gap is what you think it is.

Remember when Queen James got his ass Kinged by Jason Terry?

http://nsa28.casimages.com/img/2011/...2930416927.gif

You are kidding me right, kids are one and done in college and expect to be Jordan and not polished at all. The depth and talent are all the same. I posted all the greats I named on top of head without looking from the 80's and early 90's without looking it up on the internet. You say the depth of talent isn't their but can machine gun all the modern day stars or as much as possible that could compete the guys of the past? People say well, the guys now would destroy the guys in the past because of competition. I immediately say name them all "right now" because I could name at least 20 on sheer memory that would still OWN the NBA.

Below. Kawhi's defense is stout. He won't stop LeBron but I don't think he'll be pulling more than one 35+ point game in the series.

Players in the 80's were awesome fundamental players who could play all facets of the game (your guards were tremendous passers, defenders, decent rebounders, and effective enough scorers. Your bigs were terrific defenders, rebounders, and very effective post players). The 90's had lots of tremendous talent that could easily play today, and most of them were very well rounded.

If anything, I think players have gotten worse. Too many key players who refuse to play defense or can't pass or rebound worth a shit. Too many players who hold onto the ball for a century before getting rid of it. It should be no surprise that the 4 best teams in the NBA were "fundamentals" teams versus a collection of superstars. Many teams in the 80's and 90's were built like the Spurs and Pacers.

If you think the depth and talent top to bottom is equal, not just the elite in each era (you've created a straw man here, I'm not arguing this point), then there's really no reason for us to discuss further.

In 5 to 10 years, when this "class" of players finishes their careers, you're going to find that the number of HOF players is going to be roughly equal to the era you're touting. Are we comparing 90's and 2000's? If I get the 2000's, I'll shotgun Duncan (best PF of all time), Kobe (top 10 all time), Shaq (arguably top 10 all time), LeBron (will be top 3 when he's done), Durant (sky is the limit), Paul (will be one of top 5 PGs all time), Garnett, Pierce, Ray Allen (best shooter all time), Wade, Dirk, Melo, Westbrook, Howard, Rose, Parker, etc. And there's plenty more young talent that could ascend like Curry, Kyrie, Love, Harden, George among others.

80s to early 90's and Shaq he'd be in my player range category

How about Magic? Was he a stout defender? Bird, great defender? Dantley, Gervin, Alex English, Dominique, Barkley.....??? There were plenty of premier players back then who weren't well-rounded, and defense was a rumor.

The biggest difference is that today's big guys aren't generally skilled as post scorers --- I'll agree on that point. But they're also generally more athletic and have the ability to hit perimeter shots. Karl Malone was considered a premier big man with his biggest weapon being the ability to consistently hit the 15 footer on the pick and pop. We have bigs today who are expected to consistently step out and knock down 20 footers. Guys like Garnett, Aldridge, Gasol, Dirk, etc. Just a bit different game in that respect.

You have a pretty loose standard for what a hall of famer should be. No offense, but the majority of those shouldn't be hall of famers. And a bunch of those guys were every bit a part of the 90's era as they were in today's.

Shaq played from 92 to 08

http://work.chiefsplanet.com/BB/show...postcount=3049

here's mine I won't name more because I've had more time to think about it.

yep still in my range, hell I was in 4th grade when Shaq came up

You are talking about the exception, not the rule. There were a hell of a lot better fundamentals guys, defensive players, and passers in the 80's and 90's than there are today.

You seriously going to judge their credentials as they stand today? I'm going to go ahead and make the leap that 24 year olds like Durant, Rose, Westbrook, etc. may do some things between now and when they retire that will warrant some consideration beyond what they've currently accomplished.

As for the players I included....only Shaq isn't still playing. It's the year 2013. TW is talking about the 80's and 90's. If a guy is still playing, I'm going to say he's in my group. TW is cherry picking with roughly 20 years, with every player having already finished his career (and thus we know what's been accomplished). My group has 13 years, and there's plenty of young guys who are just beginning to move into their peak years.

I picked from a top 20 list of the best players of the 1980's --- it's not as if I picked a bunch of no name guys. They weren't exceptions. Teams were generally offensive by nature in the 80's, and the best players of that decade make that clear.

It's a nice list of really good players. Give me 5 to 10 years when my list has also retired, and we'll see where we are. Many of the guys on your list are just guys, there's players in every era that match up. Daugherty, Price, Drexler, LJ, and Walton come to mind. Really good players, but not elite to the point that they stand above what came before or after them.

The irony here is that I guarantee nobody on this board watched more NBA games in the 80's and 90's than I did. I was an only child with cable television, a VCR and unhealthy love of sports. I have a profound respect and understanding of how good those players were. I just think people are undervaluing the quality of today's players.

way back when I doubt that

Duncan, Shaq, and Kobe aren't in this era. They are going to be in the HOF 10 years before most of the guys on this list. They are only on the list because they lasted a long time. More than anything, that's a testament. to superior rehab.

You are basing this entirely on PPG in an era where those stats are inflated by horrible defense and very strict rules on handchecking. Melo is not a hall of famer. He is our generation's Glen Rice. Wade and Pierce are borderline. They are the 90's version of Mitch Richmond. CP3... maybe, if he starts playing well in the playoffs. Ray Allen is not a hall of famer -- he is a worse version of Chris Mullen, who was a better scorer. Westbrook is this generation's version of Tim Hardaway. Howard is not a hall of famer. This era has some talent, but you're using a pretty loose standard for what constitutes a hall of famer. A good number of hall of famers will make it, but if you spread them out over when they are expected to retire, it's not like there's an unusual amount.

When you look at the hall of fame classes of the 90's and some of the really good snubs (Hardaway, Zo, Richmond, KJ, Aguirre, and more), there was plenty of talent in that era.

Three words:

Nikola.

****ing.

Pekovic.

Yep, Divac's old buddy who got shot and killed ( again on pure memory) correction that was Drazen Petrovich and just remembered that too

Two parts of Run TMC (Hardaway, Richmond), Mark Aguirre, Joe Dumars (incredible defender), Glen Rice (their version of Melo), Horace Grant, Kevin McHale, Iverson, Penny Hardaway, Grant Hill, Gary Payton, Shawn Kemp, Mutombo, Chris Webber, Sprewell,

Detlef Schrempf and Derek Coleman too

Shaq is arguable as he got started in the early 90's, but Duncan and Kobe had most of their success in the 2000's. How many years do I get to choose from.....5? You're pulling from 20-25 years?

As to your player comps, you're not making sense. When all is said and done, Melo will probably be this generation's Dominique Wilkins. Prime time scorer, never actually won anything. Their career stats are almost identical.

Wade and Pierce are borderline? Wade's career averages are 25/6/5/2/1 and he'll have at least four rings when all is said and done. Pierce is one of the greatest Celtics of all time.

Ray Allen is the best shooter the league has ever seen and has more 3's than anyone in history. Given his ring(s) and his stats through his peak years, he's a shoe in HOF guy. Oh, and go check the stats on Allen and Mullin at Basketball Reference and then get back to me.

CP3 does need more post-season success, but he's an historically elite PG who is still just 28.

Westbrook is Tim Hardaway? You have to be trolling at this point. Westbrook is 24 years old and he's already a better all-around player.

Well a team that I hate is going to win yet another Championship. Time to start looking towards next year.

Rockets looking like they are passing LA as the favorite for Dwight Howard. T-Rob trade didn't work out as planned, but he has to have some value still, right? Still only lost Patrick Patterson, so no big deal. If they manage to get T-Rob off the books and land Howard, maybe they trade Asik (who deserves to start somewhere) and the Rockets could get a quality 4 for next year.

My preference might be Asik for KG. This would allow Terrance Jones (21), Montiejunas (23), and Greg Smith (22) to continue their growth off the bench. They all showed flashes and combined for nearly 2,000 minutes last year, but none are yet starters on a team that will want to contend for a title. KG with 25-30 minutes/game and the rotation of bigs will do just fine.

They could explore getting another vet. min guard for the Lin/Harden/Beverley rotation, but I think James Anderson could fill this role. He could play a little SF too. He needs to improve his 3-point shooting a little bit, but I like him as a player if they ask him to expand his role.

10-man rotation

PG- Lin/Beverley
SG- Harden/Anderson
SF- Parsons/Anderson/T. Jones
PF- KG/T. Jones/Motiejunas
C- Howard/G. Smith


Plan B
Howard stays in LA or goes to Dallas or something

Sign Josh Smith (meh)
Trade T-Rob
Add another shooter

PG- Lin/Beverley
SG- Harden/Anderson
SF- Parsons/FA/T. Jones
PF- J. Smith/T. Jones/Motiejunas
C- Asik/G. Smith

Hard to judge these things by PPG averages. It's like measuring home runs hit in a juiced ball era or qbs in the loose PI rules era. Joe Montana isn't going to put up drew brees numbers during the 90s,but Montana would still be a hall of fame QB in our modern era. As would elway.

Scoring averages are much more meaningless. As is offensive dominance. You can't take a pure shooter like ray Allen and compare him to guys who are not only shooters, but terrific shot creators like bird, reggie miller, Glenn rice, and Mullin. Tim Hardaway in his prime was averaging 20 points, 10+ assists per game. Is not in the hall of fame. Pierce and wade are terrific, but their scoring averages are padded because they play in an offensive era and the reason you brought them up is to imply that these players are much better than the previous generation. With tighter hand checking rules, these guys would be on par with most fringe or barely made it hall of famers.

Your list does not include an overwhelming number of surefire hall of famers. They are mostly fringe hall of famers regardless of generation. Which doesn't prove that this is a far more talented generation. Like the previous generation, you have a few outrageous superstars like kobe and lebron, a few guys like garnett and Duncan who are terrific players and surefire hall of famers, and you have lots of fringe guys like Pierce and wade who are probably hall of fame but could easily be considered on the fringe.

You're making things up. I never said this group today is better than the previous generation. I refuted the claim from TW that this group couldn't hold the previous group's jock.

And I've never once referenced ppg as the only unit of measure. Feel free to compare rebounds, assists, percentages, etc. Everything I've said holds up. How can you say Reggie Miller and Glenn Robinson were shot creators? I have to question if you ever saw some of these guys play. They were pure gunners, plain and simple. I'm trying to figure out how Glenn Robinson has found his way into any conversation that compares the best players from any generation. Pierce and Wade are sure fire Hall of Famers, there's absolutely no doubt. I guess we won't agree, so I'm done....anything more would just be repetition.

I said Glenn Rice, not Glenn Robinson. Glenn Rice played shitty defense but was probably one of the best pure shooters of his generation.

Apart from that, I'm sorry dude. I ****ed up. You weren't saying one generation was better than the other. I misread it. Completely my bad.

Yeah, Rice was a nice player. Really fun to watch when he had it going. Maybe the best individual tourney I've ever seen, save for maybe Manning. TW said Glenn Robinson in an earlier post, so still had him on the brain.

David Robinson, never said Glenn