Better prime between LeBron and KAJ

[Pg81]

60s/70s players look a lot less athletic driving to the basket mainly because they had to actually dribble the ball, modern athletics carry and walk pretty much every drive. Doesn't mean modern athletes aren't greater, just that this isn't a reasonable way to compare as there were different rules.

Modern athletes have the benefit of weight work and PEDs, modern footware, and decently padded floors as well. All add to this aura of athleticism as well but the rules changes are the biggest difference maker.

LMFAO

Coming from a mod too. So you're saying players carry or travel EVERY time?

Modern athletes are more athletic on average, its not a question.

Data shows this. Kareem is on another level than these guys by a mile.

Which data shows "this"? And yes by late 60s and 70s standards they do carry the ball like 90% of the time. Back then you were not allowed to move your hand away much from the top of the ball.

[nzahir]

60s/70s players look a lot less athletic driving to the basket mainly because they had to actually dribble the ball, modern athletics carry and walk pretty much every drive. Doesn't mean modern athletes aren't greater, just that this isn't a reasonable way to compare as there were different rules.

Modern athletes have the benefit of weight work and PEDs, modern footware, and decently padded floors as well. All add to this aura of athleticism as well but the rules changes are the biggest difference maker.

LMFAO

Coming from a mod too. So you're saying players carry or travel EVERY time?

Modern athletes are more athletic on average, its not a question.

Data shows this. Kareem is on another level than these guys by a mile.

Which data shows "this"? And yes by late 60s and 70s standards they do carry the ball like 90% of the time. Back then you were not allowed to move your hand away much from the top of the ball.

What data shows that athletes are quicker?

Huh, maybe quantitative measures such as running times, weight lifting, swimming times, vertical jumps...

Even looking at avg body compositions and you can see big differences

Athletes in the past 20-30 years are much better than athletes in the 60s and 70s

[penbeast0]

LMFAO

Coming from a mod too. So you're saying players carry or travel EVERY time?

Modern athletes are more athletic on average, its not a question.

Data shows this. Kareem is on another level than these guys by a mile.

Which data shows "this"? And yes by late 60s and 70s standards they do carry the ball like 90% of the time. Back then you were not allowed to move your hand away much from the top of the ball.

What data shows that athletes are quicker?

Huh, maybe quantitative measures such as running times, weight lifting, swimming times, vertical jumps...

Even looking at avg body compositions and you can see big differences

Athletes in the past 20-30 years are much better than athletes in the 60s and 70s

I decided to check this out and looked at the world record for the 100 meter since you were responding to a question on quickness. From 68 to 83, there is little change (slight improvement in 83 but it was also appreciably more wind aided), then a steady improvement up through Bolt's records in 2009 and none since. This doesn't back up your claim very well. I am sure that it might be possible to check out other records and some will show jumps and some wont but I don't think you are going to find big differences in quickness. (I don't think weight lifting and vertical jumps qualify as quickness). Body type, maybe, though not so much for sprinters. But, yes, PEDs and modern weight lifting technique have produced more sculpted bodies with less work. But the idea that the 60s and 70s were unathletic and the 80s and 90s were suddenly superathletic is pretty counterintuitive. It's just that no one is willing to say a guy like Michael Jordan that they have seen do ridiculous, amazing things many times on film is the product of an unathletic era whereas earlier era guys when the league was less popular are easier to make silly statements about.

[nzahir]

Which data shows "this"? And yes by late 60s and 70s standards they do carry the ball like 90% of the time. Back then you were not allowed to move your hand away much from the top of the ball.

What data shows that athletes are quicker?

Huh, maybe quantitative measures such as running times, weight lifting, swimming times, vertical jumps...

Even looking at avg body compositions and you can see big differences

Athletes in the past 20-30 years are much better than athletes in the 60s and 70s

I decided to check this out and looked at the world record for the 100 meter since you were responding to a question on quickness. From 68 to 83, there is little change (slight improvement in 83 but it was also appreciably more wind aided), then a steady improvement up through Bolt's records in 2009 and none since. This doesn't back up your claim very well. I am sure that it might be possible to check out other records and some will show jumps and some wont but I don't think you are going to find big differences in quickness. (I don't think weight lifting and vertical jumps qualify as quickness). Body type, maybe, though not so much for sprinters. But, yes, PEDs and modern weight lifting technique have produced more sculpted bodies with less work. But the idea that the 60s and 70s were unathletic and the 80s and 90s were suddenly superathletic is pretty counterintuitive. It's just that no one is willing to say a guy like Michael Jordan that they have seen do ridiculous, amazing things many times on film is the product of an unathletic era whereas earlier era guys when the league was less popular are easier to make silly statements about.

2009 is this era. I was talking about last 20-30 years compared to guys in 60s-70s.

Athleticism has to do with strength as well, not just speed.

Of course modern techniques, nutrition, and new equipment have helped. That is why I am saying on avg people are more athletic now than before. This isn't even an argument, I don't even even know why I should have to argue this

[HeartBreakKid]

60s/70s players look a lot less athletic driving to the basket mainly because they had to actually dribble the ball, modern athletics carry and walk pretty much every drive. Doesn't mean modern athletes aren't greater, just that this isn't a reasonable way to compare as there were different rules.

Modern athletes have the benefit of weight work and PEDs, modern footware, and decently padded floors as well. All add to this aura of athleticism as well but the rules changes are the biggest difference maker.

LMFAO

Coming from a mod too. So you're saying players carry or travel EVERY time?

Modern athletes are more athletic on average, its not a question.

Data shows this. Kareem is on another level than these guys by a mile.

Yes....? Do you know what a real dribble looks like? It isn't just hitting the ball with your hand, there are actual rules to what confine a dribble - but the NBA ignores them now to make the game more loose.

[penbeast0]

2009 is this era. I was talking about last 20-30 years compared to guys in 60s-70s.

Athleticism has to do with strength as well, not just speed.

Of course modern techniques, nutrition, and new equipment have helped. That is why I am saying on avg people are more athletic now than before. This isn't even an argument, I don't even even know why I should have to argue this

If all you are saying is that modern techniques, nutrition, and new equipment (and don't discount PEDs, probably the second most significant contributor to the body type evolution next to weight room work) are the main difference, sure. No problem.

If you are arguing that there has been a significant improvement in the athleticism of the average NBA caliber athlete outside of this, I would argue that it has but it has been incremental at best and I see no reason why the degree of improvement from year to year has increased from the 60s/70s to the 90s as opposed to the 90s to now.

I'm not nearly as sure about the improvement of the average man with the decrease in testosterone and the increase in obesity in the general population. In the 60s, kids were sent outside to play as long as it was light; today, they are kept inside to play video games or limited to supervised play or regulated team sports to a large degree. Yes, some kids then read a lot, some watched TV, but generally there was a larger amount of physical activity when the body was developing than in the average kid today. Serious athletes are probably the exception to this rule, however, and so it shouldn't apply to the population of potential NBA players to any serious degree.

[Tracymcgoaty]

Casuals have no place in a basketball debate anyway.

Then why are you here?

Because im not a casual and I dont need to prove a thing to you.

Then why should the ''casuals'' have to prove anything to you? Who are you to say who gets to take part in a discussion. Some of you guys talk like you're the grand wizards of basketball..You're a regular **** dude just like the rest of the people in this forum stop it with this crap.

[Tracymcgoaty]

Overall for me personally Kareem is the Best player to ever lace them up. He won at every level. The dude had 17 straight seasons averaging over 20pts.

12 seasons averaging 20/10

But man Prime against prime Lebron was a damn beast on both ends. I'd take Kareem just because i feel he doesn't get the respect he deserves.

Watch on YouTube

I know you cant use a youtube video to show how good someone is on defense but these are great highlights.

[OdomFan]

Kareem > Lebron

[iggymcfrack]

2009 is this era. I was talking about last 20-30 years compared to guys in 60s-70s.

Athleticism has to do with strength as well, not just speed.

Of course modern techniques, nutrition, and new equipment have helped. That is why I am saying on avg people are more athletic now than before. This isn't even an argument, I don't even even know why I should have to argue this

If all you are saying is that modern techniques, nutrition, and new equipment (and don't discount PEDs, probably the second most significant contributor to the body type evolution next to weight room work) are the main difference, sure. No problem.

If you are arguing that there has been a significant improvement in the athleticism of the average NBA caliber athlete outside of this, I would argue that it has but it has been incremental at best and I see no reason why the degree of improvement from year to year has increased from the 60s/70s to the 90s as opposed to the 90s to now.

I'm not nearly as sure about the improvement of the average man with the decrease in testosterone and the increase in obesity in the general population. In the 60s, kids were sent outside to play as long as it was light; today, they are kept inside to play video games or limited to supervised play or regulated team sports to a large degree. Yes, some kids then read a lot, some watched TV, but generally there was a larger amount of physical activity when the body was developing than in the average kid today. Serious athletes are probably the exception to this rule, however, and so it shouldn't apply to the population of potential NBA players to any serious degree.

The NBA was pretty bush league in the ‘60s and ‘70s. It was a new league with middling popularity that didn’t pay a lot and got very little exposure overseas. The Bird/Magic rivalry, the global popularity of Michael Jordan, and the ultimately the Dream Team all made big jumps forward for the player pool the NBA had to choose from even putting aside the natural improvement of athletes in all sports. (Seriously, look at any world record, there are more from the last 10 years than the rest of human history.) In general, I’d say the talent has increased sharply at least up until 10 to 15 years after the Dream Teamers first went to Barcelona. In general, from watching video and looking at relevant data, I’d say that the further back you go, the quicker the growth with the possible exception of the 70s split league era where the talent might have dipped slightly from where it was previously.

So it’s something like: 2010s > 2000s >> 1990s >>> 1980s >>>>> 1970s pre-merger = late 60s >>> early 60s >>>>>>>>>> 50s >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 40s

[Jiminy Glick]

Overall for me personally Kareem is the Best player to ever lace them up. He won at every level. The dude had 17 straight seasons averaging over 20pts.

12 seasons averaging 20/10

But man Prime against prime Lebron was a damn beast on both ends. I'd take Kareem just because i feel he doesn't get the respect he deserves.

Watch on YouTube

I know you cant use a youtube video to show how good someone is on defense but these are great highlights.

Thanks for showing this video.

[penbeast0]

The NBA was pretty bush league in the ‘60s and ‘70s. It was a new league with middling popularity that didn’t pay a lot and got very little exposure overseas. The Bird/Magic rivalry, the global popularity of Michael Jordan, and the ultimately the Dream Team all made big jumps forward for the player pool the NBA had to choose from even putting aside the natural improvement of athletes in all sports. (Seriously, look at any world record, there are more from the last 10 years than the rest of human history.) In general, I’d say the talent has increased sharply at least up until 10 to 15 years after the Dream Teamers first went to Barcelona. In general, from watching video and looking at relevant data, I’d say that the further back you go, the quicker the growth with the possible exception of the 70s split league era where the talent might have dipped slightly from where it was previously.

So it’s something like: 2010s > 2000s >> 1990s >>> 1980s >>>>> 1970s pre-merger = late 60s >>> early 60s >>>>>>>>>> 50s >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 40s

This popularity you speak of takes about a half a generation (5-10 years) to kick in plus you are ignoring the effects of the massive expansion of the league. That and the basic pool of extra tall athletes and inner city black men that made up most of the NBA through the 90s was all seriously looking at basketball by the early 60s or mid 60s at the latest. This combination makes the effect of player pool on the talent level look a lot more like:

2010s (Yao Ming and other non-American born stars popularity fuel young players all over the world)>2000s (Michael Jordan worldwide popularity influences a generation) > 90s (Bird and Magic's popularity kicks in, first influx of foreign players mainly bigs) = 60s (mainly preexpansion but still racism issues) > 80s (expansion but money) > 70s (Wilt/Russell popularity massive expansion) > 50s (mainly segregated league).

You grossly underestimate or ignore the effect expansion, one of the two main factors affecting the quality of the average NBA player as well as the degree to which people 6-5 and over were being funneled into basketball as early as the 50s.

This is just my estimate of player pool effects, ignoring sports medicine, development of coaching (jump shot v. 2 handed set shot, etc.), and other effects that make the athletes able to perform better relative to prior generations.

[penbeast0]

double post

[penbeast0]

Then why are you here?

Because im not a casual and I dont need to prove a thing to you.

Then why should the ''casuals'' have to prove anything to you? Who are you to say who gets to take part in a discussion. Some of you guys talk like you're the grand wizards of basketball..You're a regular **** dude just like the rest of the people in this forum stop it with this crap.

All of you, dial it down. We have everyone on this site from preteen kids to guys who do statistical analysis for NBA teams and we are all here for one reason, we are fans who like to talk basketball. Those seemingly casual fans may grow and learn and be the next generation of superstar posters who we all watch for and learn from so don't dismiss them, share what you know and try to keep an open mind.

Thank you

[Johnlac1]

2009 is this era. I was talking about last 20-30 years compared to guys in 60s-70s.

Athleticism has to do with strength as well, not just speed.

Of course modern techniques, nutrition, and new equipment have helped. That is why I am saying on avg people are more athletic now than before. This isn't even an argument, I don't even even know why I should have to argue this

If all you are saying is that modern techniques, nutrition, and new equipment (and don't discount PEDs, probably the second most significant contributor to the body type evolution next to weight room work) are the main difference, sure. No problem.

If you are arguing that there has been a significant improvement in the athleticism of the average NBA caliber athlete outside of this, I would argue that it has but it has been incremental at best and I see no reason why the degree of improvement from year to year has increased from the 60s/70s to the 90s as opposed to the 90s to now.

I'm not nearly as sure about the improvement of the average man with the decrease in testosterone and the increase in obesity in the general population. In the 60s, kids were sent outside to play as long as it was light; today, they are kept inside to play video games or limited to supervised play or regulated team sports to a large degree. Yes, some kids then read a lot, some watched TV, but generally there was a larger amount of physical activity when the body was developing than in the average kid today. Serious athletes are probably the exception to this rule, however, and so it shouldn't apply to the population of potential NBA players to any serious degree.

The NBA was pretty bush league in the ‘60s and ‘70s. It was a new league with middling popularity that didn’t pay a lot and got very little exposure overseas. The Bird/Magic rivalry, the global popularity of Michael Jordan, and the ultimately the Dream Team all made big jumps forward for the player pool the NBA had to choose from even putting aside the natural improvement of athletes in all sports. (Seriously, look at any world record, there are more from the last 10 years than the rest of human history.) In general, I’d say the talent has increased sharply at least up until 10 to 15 years after the Dream Teamers first went to Barcelona. In general, from watching video and looking at relevant data, I’d say that the further back you go, the quicker the growth with the possible exception of the 70s split league era where the talent might have dipped slightly from where it was previously.

So it’s something like: 2010s > 2000s >> 1990s >>> 1980s >>>>> 1970s pre-merger = late 60s >>> early 60s >>>>>>>>>> 50s >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 40s

The talent level didn't decrease in the seventies. I saw basketball from both eras, and there were definitely better athletes on average in the seventies than in the sixties.
Expansion and the ABA meant many more players who were shut out from playing in the sixties either because of a lot less teams or in the case of black athletes not allowed to play at many major colleges in the sixties attending major colleges in large numbers in the seventies meant that the athleticism and general level of play in the seventies was better than that in the sixties.

[penbeast0]

I think it was more style than athleticism as the ABA brought in a more free flowing modern game where the 60s were more post focused which has less opportunity to show off your run and jump except in the fast break.

[Baski]

Kareem. I don't care how much people try to say Lebrons n the same class as MJ I'll never believe that because he hasn't earned it. He lost waay too much to be in that kind of company hence why I wouldn't even take him over Duncan who was a far better leader and player.

How can you say LeBron lost too much to be ahead of Kareem? Kareem lost way more! When LeBron had a terrible supporting cast from 2007 through 2010 at ages 22-25, he went:

50-32, NBA Finals (at age 22!)
45-37, lost 2nd round
66-16, lost 3rd round
61-21, lost 2nd round

When Kareem had a weak supporting cast (but still better than LeBron’s) from ages 27-31 from when Oscar retired to when Magic came into the league, he went:

38-44, missed playoffs
40-42, missed playoffs
53-29, lost 2nd round
45-37, lost 1st round
47-35, lost 2nd round

If you look at their entire primes listed for this exercise, we have

LeBron
-3 rings
-6 runner up finishes (one as a 22-year old carrying trash, and 3 against impossible odds facing Golden State)
-1 3rd round conference finals loss
-2 2nd round losses

That’s a total record of 34-9 in playoff series

Kareem
-3 rings
-1 runner up finish
-2 second round conference finals losses
-2 second round losses before the conference finals
-2 first round losses
-2 years missing the playoffs altogether

That’s a total record 15-7 in playoff series, again with 2 years missing the playoffs in his prime. How can you look at that and say that Kareem was a better winner?

Because Rings. It was just an attempt to say 3-6/6>3 without really saying 3-6/6>3.

[iggymcfrack]

If all you are saying is that modern techniques, nutrition, and new equipment (and don't discount PEDs, probably the second most significant contributor to the body type evolution next to weight room work) are the main difference, sure. No problem.

If you are arguing that there has been a significant improvement in the athleticism of the average NBA caliber athlete outside of this, I would argue that it has but it has been incremental at best and I see no reason why the degree of improvement from year to year has increased from the 60s/70s to the 90s as opposed to the 90s to now.

I'm not nearly as sure about the improvement of the average man with the decrease in testosterone and the increase in obesity in the general population. In the 60s, kids were sent outside to play as long as it was light; today, they are kept inside to play video games or limited to supervised play or regulated team sports to a large degree. Yes, some kids then read a lot, some watched TV, but generally there was a larger amount of physical activity when the body was developing than in the average kid today. Serious athletes are probably the exception to this rule, however, and so it shouldn't apply to the population of potential NBA players to any serious degree.

The NBA was pretty bush league in the ‘60s and ‘70s. It was a new league with middling popularity that didn’t pay a lot and got very little exposure overseas. The Bird/Magic rivalry, the global popularity of Michael Jordan, and the ultimately the Dream Team all made big jumps forward for the player pool the NBA had to choose from even putting aside the natural improvement of athletes in all sports. (Seriously, look at any world record, there are more from the last 10 years than the rest of human history.) In general, I’d say the talent has increased sharply at least up until 10 to 15 years after the Dream Teamers first went to Barcelona. In general, from watching video and looking at relevant data, I’d say that the further back you go, the quicker the growth with the possible exception of the 70s split league era where the talent might have dipped slightly from where it was previously.

So it’s something like: 2010s > 2000s >> 1990s >>> 1980s >>>>> 1970s pre-merger = late 60s >>> early 60s >>>>>>>>>> 50s >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 40s

The talent level didn't decrease in the seventies. I saw basketball from both eras, and there were definitely better athletes on average in the seventies than in the sixties.
Expansion and the ABA meant many more players who were shut out from playing in the sixties either because of a lot less teams or in the case of black athletes not allowed to play at many major colleges in the sixties attending major colleges in large numbers in the seventies meant that the athleticism and general level of play in the seventies was better than that in the sixties.

If you look at what I said, I just said the talent in the 70s was about the same as it was in the late 60s while still being better than the early 60s. I agree that the talent was improving so fast then with a new league that was just fully starting to embrace the black athlete that even massive expansion stretched into a whole extra league could only just keep pace.

[70sFan]

NBA wasn't really "new league" during Wilt's prime and especially not during Kareem's prime. But I won't debate this again, we can have different opinions about that one.

[G35]

Kareem. I don't care how much people try to say Lebrons n the same class as MJ I'll never believe that because he hasn't earned it. He lost waay too much to be in that kind of company hence why I wouldn't even take him over Duncan who was a far better leader and player.

Heres another hot take lol

Lost as in what? The finals? So its better that MJ kept losing in rd 1 and 2 instead of dragging his teams (like Lebron has continuously done) to the finals?

So its better that Lebron didn't lose in the finals this year? This backwards way of thinking is for casual fans who boil things down to just Finals lost vs won with ZERO context

The guy has beaten tougher finals teams than MJ has ever beaten. MJ never beat the super team. Lebron did.

MJ never could carry a team like the 07 cavs to the finals. And you know how we know that, because he never did.

MJ would never be in a finals game 6 vs GS without 2 of his top 3 guys in 2015 like Lebron.

Ahhh finally, some context!

Here are some examples of great players doing things Lebron has not been able to replicate or be the first one to do:

Kareem as a rookie took an expansion team to the conference finals and improved the team by +29 games. Lebron's impact is nowhere near that as a young player, not just a rookie.

Kareem won the championship in his 2nd season with the addition of Oscar; it is the only championship in MIL history. It took Lebron leaving and coming back to accomplish his goal of bringing a title to CLE.

Lebron has never been able to carry a team on his back despite injuries. We have seen other ATG's experience an injury to a great player and elevate their game:

Magic in G6 vs the Sixers playing out of position and having perhaps THE historical game of all time in the finals...as a rookie.

Kobe playing on an injured ankle, and Shaq fouling out of the game and Kobe willing the team to victory.

Hakeem Olajuwon winning the NBA title as a 6th seed and being the underdog/road team throughout the playoffs

Tim Duncan winning the title and beating ATG players, without any all star on his team (2003)

Dirk Nowitzki winning the title and beating Lebron/Wade/Bosh in their primes without an All Star player (2011)


These are examples of other greats doing things that either has never been done before or are under difficult circumstances they had to overcome. Lebron has always needed at least two all star level players to get the job done. If there are injuries, then he has not been able to come up with the fortitude to overcome the obstacle.

Furthermore, what Lebron has never done is shown the ability to lead or even be a part of an ATG great anything like other greats:

Kareem's 1971 Bucks have the best SRS of all time

Kareem was a part of the Lakers all time great offenses

Duncan led some of, if not greatest defenses all time

Magic led some of the greatest offense all time

Steph Curry is leading some/if not greatest offenses all time

12-1 we know that as the 1983 76ers who at the time had the greatest playoff run ever

15-1 we know that as the 2001 Lakers having the most dominant playoff run ever

72-10 we know that as the best record for a team that also won the title 1996 Chicago Bulls

Greatness.....undisputed greatness....

But in your post and you talk about context, we don't hear about how great Lebron's teams are....that is nowhere to be found.

You know what makes Lebron great to Lebron fans? How he has to play against great teams, how he has to drag terrible squads in the playoffs. How he is the only thing keeping these teams from being the worst in the league.

Lebron's greatest achievement is beating the Warriors 73-9 team...which means his greatness is contingent on the Warriors greatness. Lebron fans have to boost up the Warriors in order to make Lebron seem even more impressive.

Then all you hear is how this is the greatest era for talent and athleticism...but then all we hear is how noncompetitive the NBA is because Durant ruined it. What we will remember is how much this era coined the phrase "tank commander" and "tanking".

The problem for Lebron fans is that his legacy is insecure....its based on what his competition was, while when you think of Jordan you think about how he crushed the league and he could have had eight titles if not for retiring.

You think of the 80's and how two ATG Celtics and Lakers teams went back and forth beating each other, but you think of the 10's and you think of how Lebron went 3-5 in the finals and the Warriors crushing his dreams.

You think of 1980 and the Kareem is the MVP and along comes Magic Johnson and they don't necessarily get along. But eventually they do learn to respect each other and build something on the court.

Kind of like in 2015 when Lebron and Kyrie build something on the court....but it certainly isn't respect and it certainly doesn't last.....