Who's Better - Today's Stars or Yesteryear's Stars?

[blue9]

Okay, the GSW has gotten out of control. Let's settle this.

Are today's top players as good as the top players of the '80s and 90's? If so, who are these players?

Here's a list of 80s/90s players off the top of my head, and I'm sure I'm missing 10-20 obvious names - especially the early 80s (throw out the missing names and I'll add them). I've loosely grouped these players into three tiers, with the third tier being role players because it was suggested that today's role players are clearly better than they use to be in decades past. Some of these names could probably be moved up or down I'm sure - I'm just going off gut instinct here (I don't have time or interest to delve into stats).

IMO there's a few players today that could hang with the first and second groups, and a larger handful that could hang with the third group. But there isn't the level or amount of talent today that can compare with:

Jordan
Pippen
Bird
McHale
Magic
Kareem
Stockton
Malone
Isaiah
Clyde
Barkley
Gervin
Erving
Robinson
Olajuwan
Ewing
Shaq

Kemp
Payton
Sprewell
Cassel
KJ
Porter
Worthy
Larry Johnson
Kidd
Rice
Webber
Mullin
Hardaway
Dumars
Reggie
‘Nique
Mourning
Sabas
Parish

Schrempf
Buck
Jerome
Hornacek
Majerle
Peja
Horry
AC Green
Rodman
Ainge
Laimbeer
Vinnie
Francis
Marbury
Richmond
Rider
Starks
Kerr

 

[Strenuus]

Starting a new thread is not going to end the discussion or arguments.

It's only going to lengthen them.

 

[blue9]

Starting a new thread is not going to end the discussion or arguments.

It's only going to lengthen them.

I thought a poll question would help, as consensus builds reality.
Also, I like organization - better to have it in an appropriately titled thread.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

So, you're taking players whose careers started at various points over a 25-year span (Kareem 1970 through Kidd 1994). We haven't even had 25 years since the last rookie year you're claiming in "yesteryear's" stars in order to cull a comparable amount of star-power/talent, let alone completed the players' careers in order to be able to adequately compare.

You're creating parameters that artificially tilt the scales in the favor of the argument you're trying to support. Weak sauce.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Cant argue with that.

Todays stars...

Curry
LBJ
Wade
Thompson
Cousins
Harden
Howard
Lillard
Horford
Bosch
Dirk
KD
Westbrook
C.Paul
D.Jordan
Drummond


I have to say today's players I think would be vastly outmatched. I don't see how these guys are better than your lists. MAYBE your third string...

 

[BBert]

You know who I miss watching play? Bernard King. That guy could score. He would really kill in today's NBA.

 

[Natebishop3]

The dream team would beat the shit out of any combination of stars from today.

 

[blue9]

You know who I miss watching play? Bernard King. That guy could score. He would really kill in today's NBA.

Totally missed him - I remember his name but don't have a clear memory of him as a player. Would you slot him 2nd or 3rd tier?

 

[Nate]

Cant argue with that.

Todays stars...

Curry
LBJ
Wade
Thompson
Cousins
Harden
Howard
Lillard
Horford
Bosch
Dirk
KD
Westbrook
C.Paul
D.Jordan
Drummond


I have to say today's players I think would be vastly outmatched. I don't see how these guys are better than your lists. MAYBE your third string...

Wtf are you talking about? Can't argue with that? I guess you've never heard of

Tracy mcgrady
Kobe
Allen Iverson
Vince carter
Shaq
Duncan
Jason Kidd
Yao
Roy
Nash
Gasol
Gasol
Marbury
Carmelo
Anthony davis
John wall
Kyrie
Amare
Aldridge
Paul George
Kawai
Pierce
Kevin Garnett
Ray Allen
Rondo
Tony Parker
Manu
Rose
Camby
Mutombo
Marion
And the list goes on... This argument is stupid as fuck. Just because you liked watching basketball more back then, than you do now, does not mean that players were more talented back then. It's ok to have an opinion, but you can't just deny logic in order to appease your own personal bias.
Actually you can, that just makes you a fucking idiot.

 

[blue9]

Cant argue with that.

Todays stars...

Curry
LBJ
Wade
Thompson
Cousins
Harden
Howard
Lillard
Horford
Bosch
Dirk
KD
Westbrook
C.Paul
D.Jordan
Drummond


I have to say today's players I think would be vastly outmatched. I don't see how these guys are better than your lists. MAYBE your third string...

Thanks for being the first to take a stab at listing today's stars! Here's how I'd break them out:

LBJ
Wade

Curry
Dirk
KD*
Westbrook*
CP3*

Thompson
Cousins
Harden
Howard
Lillard
Horford
Bosh
Jordan
Drummond**

*I understand if people would slot them in the first tier, but I personally don't think they belong. Eh, CP3 probably does. Westbrook certainly has the ability if a coach harnesses his talents, but as of now I slot him in the 2nd group.

**As much as I want Drummond on the Blazers I'm not sure I'd even put him in with the 3rd tier just yet - but I wouldn't be surprised if he gets into that 2nd tier when all is said and done.

 

[Nate]

I thought a poll question would help, as consensus builds reality.
Also, I like organization - better to have it in an appropriately titled thread.

Consensus does not build reality. In fact, it's scientifically proven that "group think" tends to lead to extremely stupid shit happening. Especially this type of group thinking that isn't based on any facts or science. On the contrary, this group thinking is going against science and facts.

 

[BBert]

Totally missed him - I remember his name but don't have a clear memory of him as a player. Would you slot him 2nd or 3rd tier?

Maybe the second list since he never won a ring. I don't remember his defense, but my god his offense. The guy had back-to-back 50 point games, led the league in scoring, just fun and amazing to watch. Had a devastating leg injury. He'd be a top 5 player if he were in his prime today.

At 6′7″ and 205 pounds, Bernard King epitomized the explosive, high-scoring NBA small forward of the 1980s. With his long arms and quick release, King was a tremendous scorer. Speed permeated his game, whether cutting to the hoop or finishing on the fast-break. King led the NBA in scoring in the 1984–85 season with 32.9 points per game and was selected twice to the All-NBA First Team and four times to the NBA All-Star Game.

 

[Nate]

So America, and the world in general, is making advancements in everything: science, medicine, mental health, technology, literally everything. Except basketball. Everyone got shittier. Right....

 

[Denny Crane]

The poll requires a 3rd option, IMO. Some stars today are as good as back when the talent was superior.

LeBron (for one) belongs in the discussion of the all-time greats, obviously. Like it or not, K*be, too.

 

[blue9]

Wtf are you talking about? Can't argue with that? I guess you've never heard of

Tracy mcgrady
Kobe
Allen Iverson
Vince carter
Shaq
Marbury
Ray Allen
Marion
Motumbo
Camby

Uhhhh...these guys are all retired, genius.

John wall
Kyrie
Amare
Aldridge
Rose

Third tier.

Pierce
Kevin Garnett
Tony Parker
Manu

All on the cusp of retirement, all made their impact for 1st/2nd tier 5+ years ago.

 

[blue9]

The poll requires a 3rd option, IMO. Some stars today are as good as back when the talent was superior.

LeBron (for one) belongs in the discussion of the all-time greats, obviously. Like it or not, K*be, too.

Agreed. But I was arguing that the talent level of the NBA, not an individual, doesn't stack up.
LBJ, Wade, Kobe (retired) all are 1st tier players, even if their current level of play isn't 1st tier.

 

[Nate]

Uhhhh...these guys are all retired, genius.


Third tier.


All on the cusp of retirement, all made their impact for 1st/2nd tier 5+ years ago.

That has nothing to do with the fact that they played their prime years in the 00's
Nice try.

 

[Nate]

Uhhhh...these guys are all retired, genius.


Third tier.


All on the cusp of retirement, all made their impact for 1st/2nd tier 5+ years ago.

And last time I checked, the gasol brothers are still playing... Genius.

 

[Denny Crane]

Jim Jackson
Mitch Richmond
Tim Hardaway
Chris Mullin
Mark Aguirre
Charles Barkley
Sidney Moncrief



Not over 25 seasons, that's just one.

 

[blue9]

Consensus does not build reality. In fact, it's scientifically proven that "group think" tends to lead to extremely stupid shit happening. Especially this type of group thinking that isn't based on any facts or science. On the contrary, this group thinking is going against science and facts.

Consensus and group-think are not the same thing. Based on this post of yours you need to take some philosophy and science classes.

 

[Nate]

Jim Jackson
Mitch Richmond
Tim Hardaway
Chris Mullin
Mark Aguirre
Charles Barkley
Sidney Moncrief

View attachment 9273

Not over 25 seasons, that's just one.

And that proves nothing...

 

[blue9]

And last time I checked, the gasol brothers are still playing... Genius.

I forgot to delete them as I was weeding through your list. An honest mistake.

 

[Nate]

Consensus and group-think are not the same thing. Based on this post of yours you need to take some philosophy and science classes.

Ok lol

 

[Denny Crane]

And that proves nothing...

Your assertion is unsupported.

 

[blue9]

Jim Jackson
Mitch Richmond
Tim Hardaway
Chris Mullin
Mark Aguirre
Charles Barkley
Sidney Moncrief

View attachment 9273

Not over 25 seasons, that's just one.

Care to slot the missing players into tiers so I can add them to the list?

 

[Nate]

Your assertion is unsupported.

So is yours... Do you guys really not understand that?

 

[Nate]

Group think leads to a consensus. Do you understand that? And group think is fed by fear. In this case, a fear of change.

 

[Nate]

If you had any legit evidence to prove your opinion, I would take it seriously. But you don't. Your opinion actually goes against logic.

 

[blue9]

Group think leads to a consensus. Do you understand that? And group think is fed by fear. In this case, a fear of change.

Consensus can be a result of group-think, but that's not the only path to consensus. What we consider to be fact today is nothing more than consensus. If new information that refutes those facts is discovered, and if there is consensus that the new information is correct, then our reality changes and we operate under a new set of facts.
We build our reality every day through consensus. Reality as we know it is a human construct, it is not an absolute and it is not static.

 

[Orion Bailey]

Edited. I lose when I argue with irrational people.