Sometimes it's fun to read other Blazer forums

[magnifier661]

Except that the pool of players is much larger than it was then. The population of the US is more than double what it was then, the number of college programs is much larger, and the number of NBA-caliber international players has increased dramatically. I'd be willing to bet that if you had a time machine half of the teams in today's NBA could win a series against the NBA champion teams from about 40 years ago.

And the fans today have better hair

 

[UncleCliffy'sDaddy]

And the fans today have better hair

And so do the players!

 

[UncleCliffy'sDaddy]

 

[ripcityboy]

Ahh. You friggin kids today with your Pac Man and your Mahongany Rush albums and your Cherry Phosphate! When are you going to learn that times don't change.......

 

[jlprk]

Oscar and Jerry would be the best two guards today in the NBA. In their 70s.

Wilt would be the best center. Even in his present condition.

 

[UncleCliffy'sDaddy]

Jordan would have averaged 80 points a game in 1964.

Subtract a zero. They actually used to call traveling back then......and the sheer physicality of the game back then would have reduced MJ to quivering jelly. Russell, Chamberlain, Thurmond and Bellamy would have hammered him into the ground...and gotten away with it. The rules have changed and that's not necessarily a bad thing. That's why it's is so difficult to compare generations. Plus everything always looks better from the vantage point of memory. That's why I argue so strongly for my position. But.....sorry BC, Jordan wouldn't have been a transcendent player had he played back in the '60s, merely a decent one. I genuinely believe that.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

But.....sorry BC, Jordan wouldn't have been a transcendent player had he played back in the '60s, merely a decent one. I genuinely believe that.

And I genuinely believe that not only would Jordan have been transcendent in any era, but many below average players in today's game--such as Gerald Henderson, for example--would have been all-stars, if not hall-of-famers, had they played in the 60's.

I guess neither of us will ever know definitively who's right.

 

[e_blazer]

And the fans today have better hair

Well, maybe as long as you exclude HCP.

 

[Draco]

And I genuinely believe that boy only would Jordan have been transcendent in any era, but many below average players in today's game--such as Gerald Henderson, for example--would have been all-stars, if not hall-of-famers, had they played in the 60's.

I guess neither of us will ever know definitively who's right.

Yeah I definitely agree with that. Henderson would've been an allstar with his athleticism, coordination, drives and dunks. Put Chris Kaman from a couple years ago back in the 60's and he would've been scoring 30+ppg. He has great moves inside but now every team has a 7 footer to defend him with. He would've been as dominant as George Mikan. In today's game he's a role player. The bad players now are much bigger, faster, stronger and more knowledgeable than players back then. They have teams of coaches and work year round. Back then professional athletes smoked, drank and worked jobs on the side for money. Now days players are far better shooters too. In the 2014-15 season there were 33 NBA players who shot 85% or more on FT's with 100 attempts. 50 years ago in 1964-65 there was ONE, Larry Costello.

Now you take some of the greats from back then and put them in a modern training environment it would've been interesting to see what that would've done. Those players didn't have the staff, trainers or coaches that modern players have. Especially players with injuries; there was no ACL reconstructions back then. If you got hurt you just had a bad knee and that was that. So modern players have the luxury of those advances.

There will never be an answer to these debates, but we all have our opinions.

 

[riverman]

Big difference playing in Converse All Stars with doubled up gym socks compared to Air Jordans...just one comparison

 

[SlyPokerDog]

http://cincinnati.craigslist.org/rnr/5160756616.html

 

[Voodoo]

http://cincinnati.craigslist.org/rnr/5160756616.html

Cool story bro.

 

[dviss1]

Subtract a zero. They actually used to call traveling back then......and the sheer physicality of the game back then would have reduced MJ to quivering jelly. Russell, Chamberlain, Thurmond and Bellamy would have hammered him into the ground...and gotten away with it. The rules have changed and that's not necessarily a bad thing. That's why it's is so difficult to compare generations. Plus everything always looks better from the vantage point of memory. That's why I argue so strongly for my position. But.....sorry BC, Jordan wouldn't have been a transcendent player had he played back in the '60s, merely a decent one. I genuinely believe that.

Bro you're trippin. Jordan was not a traveler. Not only was he the best ever but he was one of the most fundamentally sound players ever. I've seen PLENTY of Jordan. I was in HS during that era. You're just wrong on this one.

 

[ripcityboy]

Bro you're trippin. Jordan was not a traveler. Not only was he the best ever but he was one of the most fundamentally sound players ever. I've seen PLENTY of Jordan. I was in HS during that era. You're just wrong on this one.

I agree with what Magic said about Jordan. He was a guard but he had the strength of a center. He may have started out soft when he was a shoot first type but he ran into the Pistons. By 91, he was ripped and nothing could stop him. That Jordan would translate very well into the old NBA.

 

[dviss1]

I agree with what Magic said about Jordan. He was a guard but he had the strength of a center. He may have started out soft when he was a shoot first type but he ran into the Pistons. By 91, he was ripped and nothing could stop him. That Jordan would translate very well into the old NBA.

I think the younger Jordan would thrive too. There was no one who was his height that had his quickness, ballhandling, defense, and scoring ability.

 

[ripcityboy]

I think the younger Jordan would thrive too. There was no one who was his height that had his quickness, ballhandling, defense, and scoring ability.

Just curious. How do you think Charles Barkley would have adapted to the old time game? He is my all time favorite player by a country mile (and that includes Blazers too.) He was small for his position but was unlike anybody else. I doubt will see his like again.

 

[dviss1]

Just curious. How do you think Charles Barkley would have adapted to the old time game? He is my all time favorite player by a country mile (and that includes Blazers too.) He was small for his position but was unlike anybody else. I doubt will see his like again.

To be as small as Barkley was for his position, and to do the things he did, he would have been amazing too.

 

[UncleCliffy'sDaddy]

Yeah I definitely agree with that. Henderson would've been an allstar with his athleticism, coordination, drives and dunks. Put Chris Kaman from a couple years ago back in the 60's and he would've been scoring 30+ppg. He has great moves inside but now every team has a 7 footer to defend him with. He would've been as dominant as George Mikan. In today's game he's a role player. The bad players now are much bigger, faster, stronger and more knowledgeable than players back then. They have teams of coaches and work year round. Back then professional athletes smoked, drank and worked jobs on the side for money. Now days players are far better shooters too. In the 2014-15 season there were 33 NBA players who shot 85% or more on FT's with 100 attempts. 50 years ago in 1964-65 there was ONE, Larry Costello.

Now you take some of the greats from back then and put them in a modern training environment it would've been interesting to see what that would've done. Those players didn't have the staff, trainers or coaches that modern players have. Especially players with injuries; there was no ACL reconstructions back then. If you got hurt you just had a bad knee and that was that. So modern players have the luxury of those advances.

There will never be an answer to these debates, but we all have our opinions.

Very fair points. Just an aside, as your comments jogged my memory. I was fortunate enough during the 76/77 season to get tickets to watch the Blazers play the 76ers during the regular season. After a long stint on the floor, Gene Shue substituted for George McGinnis. McGinnis came off the floor, walked to the end of the bench and immediately lit up a cigarette! And did it at least twice more over the course of the game. But then, most everyone smoked, even in the arena during the games. Sometimes the fog of smoke was so bad it was hard to clearly see the action from the nosebleed seats. So yes, very different eras in many respects and comparisons are virtually useless. But it that doesn't make the memories ....or your observations.......any less valid. Again, good points.

 

[Wizard Mentor]

First of all, Screw Jordan. If you're going to back up the truck, back it up all the way.

He's an 8 year old in racist as hell in the 50s North Carolina.
He doesn't have access to 90s workouts/trainers.
The NBA doesn't pay jack.
The NBA calls traveling.
...

Does he even become a basketball player, let alone a star?

 

[BlazerCaravan]

I think the younger Jordan would thrive too. There was no one who was his height that had his quickness, ballhandling, defense, and scoring ability.

Jordan in the 60's would have been a PF-sized player. So basically, equivalent to a modern LeBron but Jordan's brain... can you imagine how good that player would be today? That's how good Jordan would be in the 60's.

 

[UncleCliffy'sDaddy]

Jordan in the 60's would have been a PF-sized player. So basically, equivalent to a modern LeBron but Jordan's brain... can you imagine how good that player would be today? That's how good Jordan would be in the 60's.

The prototypical PF back in those days were 6'8" - 6'9" and weighed roughly 220-240 lbs. I believe they call those "tweeners" these days. And I just can't help but believe that one venture by Jordan into the key against Bill Russell would have made him think very seriously about doing it again. Don't us geezers and our memory based opinions wear thin after awhile........? We just can't help it sometimes......

 

[Denny Crane]

Subtract a zero. They actually used to call traveling back then......and the sheer physicality of the game back then would have reduced MJ to quivering jelly. Russell, Chamberlain, Thurmond and Bellamy would have hammered him into the ground...and gotten away with it. The rules have changed and that's not necessarily a bad thing. That's why it's is so difficult to compare generations. Plus everything always looks better from the vantage point of memory. That's why I argue so strongly for my position. But.....sorry BC, Jordan wouldn't have been a transcendent player had he played back in the '60s, merely a decent one. I genuinely believe that.

Nuts.

Elgin Baylor played a similar game to Jordan and thrived. Also, Jerry West had remarkably similar season stats to Jordan over the years. Jordan's outside shot was as good.

 

[Denny Crane]

I think the younger Jordan would thrive too. There was no one who was his height that had his quickness, ballhandling, defense, and scoring ability.

He made entire defenses look like statues.

 

[magnifier661]

He made entire defenses look like statues.

I hated Jordan with a passion, but the dude was a baller. He was as efficient as Shaq in the post, posting up 15ft from the basket. There has never been a player like him. He's the best ever to play the game.

 

[Denny Crane]

I hated Jordan with a passion, but the dude was a baller. He was as efficient as Shaq in the post, posting up 15ft from the basket. There has never been a player like him. He's the best ever to play the game.

His game really evolved over the years. By the end, he was one of the best offensive power forwards in the league. His turn around jumper from the left or right block was unstoppable. If you guarded him with a PF, he'd go outside and score easily. If you guarded him with a SF, he'd feast from the block.

 

[Denny Crane]

^^^ not a single travel on any of those plays

 

[Denny Crane]

Look at how many of his shots in that video came from these spots:

 

[jlprk]

Back in the good old days, if you drove to the basket, the forward enforcer broke your nose and the center enforcer broke your rib. Skinny Jordan would have to gain 40 pounds. His game would become like Baylor's.

Chic Hearn used to say that West's nose had been broken 9 times...then Chic would list another 10 or so major events in West's injury history while West held his head in pain. Then West would keep playing, so Chic ran out of time to list the rest.

 

[BlazerCaravan]

The prototypical PF back in those days were 6'8" - 6'9" and weighed roughly 220-240 lbs. I believe they call those "tweeners" these days. And I just can't help but believe that one venture by Jordan into the key against Bill Russell would have made him think very seriously about doing it again. Don't us geezers and our memory based opinions wear thin after awhile........? We just can't help it sometimes......

There were a lot of 6'9" guys but they also played center (Wes Unseld was 6'8" and a C, Pettit at 6'9" was a PF/C too). There were a lot of SF/PF guys in the 6'6" - 6'7" range (Bailey Howell, Tom Heisohn, Dolph Schayes). I think young Jordan would have been a SF, and old Jordan a PF.

 

[UncleCliffy'sDaddy]

There were a lot of 6'9" guys but they also played center (Wes Unseld was 6'8" and a C, Pettit at 6'9" was a PF/C too). There were a lot of SF/PF guys in the 6'6" - 6'7" range (Bailey Howell, Tom Heisohn, Dolph Schayes). I think young Jordan would have been a SF, and old Jordan a PF.

Pettit and Schayes almost belong in the '50s career wise, but you make a good point about Unseld. However, he was considered short, even for that time period. What made him so effective (besides brain and skills) was that he was twice as wide as any two players in the league. It took half a day to get around him. Jordan would have disappeared into the void trying to drive on Wes. And since you jogged my memory, Lloyd Neal was only 6'7" and he too was a helluva center. When Walton went down during the 77/78 season, Neal stepped in at center and Portland barely missed a beat....till Neal went down also. Then the wheels really came off. But I digress again. I certainly do wish a way back machine really existed just so we could try all these scenarios out. How much fun would that be?