How good would Prime Jerry West and Walt Frazier be now ....

JordansBulls · Post #1 » by **JordansBulls** » Sat Feb 9, 2008 2:14 pm

How good would Prime Jerry West and Walt Frazier be if they played in the NBA in the 2000's?

Would they be All First Team NBA and Defense? Would they be the best in the league?

farzi · Post #2 » by **farzi** » Sat Feb 9, 2008 2:35 pm

Talent wise yes, however, I think that they would be over powered by many of the starters in the league these days.

thamadkant · Post #3 » by **thamadkant** » Sat Feb 9, 2008 4:41 pm

illogical comparison...

most athletes today are under 8% body fat percentage, have high muscular frames, with supervised/monitored diet for maximum energy exertion...

Talent, skills and knowledge wise Jerry West and Walt will run circles around most of todays athletes.

If you mean, translate/convert Jerry West and Walt and somehow alter their builds (10 years of nutrition and gym) then they will be up there with MVP candidates.

Phil Jackson · Post #4 » by **Phil Jackson** » Sat Feb 9, 2008 5:51 pm

Jerry West would be the 2nd best shooting guard after Kobe Bryant or the best point guard.

Kobay · Post #5 » by **Kobay** » Sat Feb 9, 2008 6:11 pm

This is like saying if you put white people from 1900s in todays world and society. Will they still hate blacks? You don't know maybe maybe not.

Post #6 » by **bleu** » Sat Feb 9, 2008 6:16 pm

Phil Jackson wrote:Jerry West would be the 2nd best shooting guard after Kobe Bryant or the best point guard.

Dude, You're such a homer its not even funny.

NetsForce · Post #7 » by **NetsForce** » Sat Feb 9, 2008 6:19 pm

They would both be good enough to come off the bench behind Kobe.

andykeikei · Post #8 » by **andykeikei** » Sat Feb 9, 2008 6:48 pm

What? We are talking about prime...
If West is playing, he would be the best SG in the league.
Frazier is one of the best defenders of all time and he would be a prime candidate for DPOY.

jab · Post #9 » by **jab** » Sat Feb 9, 2008 6:58 pm

farzi wrote:Talent wise yes, however, I think that they would be over powered by many of the starters in the league these days.

jab · Post #10 » by **jab** » Sat Feb 9, 2008 7:00 pm

thamadkant wrote:illogical comparison...

most athletes today are under 8% body fat percentage, have high muscular frames, with supervised/monitored diet for maximum energy exertion...

Talent, skills and knowledge wise Jerry West and Walt will run circles around most of todays athletes.

If you mean, translate/convert Jerry West and Walt and somehow alter their builds (10 years of nutrition and gym) then they will be up there with MVP candidates.

EiRON · Post #11 » by **EiRON** » Sat Feb 9, 2008 7:08 pm

farzi wrote:Talent wise yes, however, I think that they would be over powered by many of the starters in the league these days.

+1

TheKingOfVa360 · Post #12 » by **TheKingOfVa360** » Sat Feb 9, 2008 7:45 pm

West would be the best SG in the league talent wise
Frazier would be the best PG talent wise and win DPOY

Post #13 » by **tsherkin** » Sat Feb 9, 2008 7:57 pm

Walt Frazier would threaten for the DPOY and would be a fine player. I still think he'd find a backseat to a few of the other PGs in the league but he would be the best defensive guard in the league and among the best point guards. He had a wicked mid-range game and was an outstanding passer.

Jerry West would be among the best shooters in the game, was an aggressive slasher and a gifted passer. He'd be outstanding and himself one of the best defensive guards in the league.

They'd be up there, definitely guys who were annual All-Stars and hugely effective. West would maybe be more effective on account of the three-point shot; he took enough shots from out there to begin with, so that might help make up for any era-related differences.

I don't know how far up the list they'd go, though, there are some pretty special guys in the league right now.

If you consider both PGs, you have to strongly consider Deron, Paul, Nash and Kidd but I think at the very worst, one of them (probably West) would be top 5 and the other top 8 (again, at worst). That's pending how you look at Iverson; if you still look at him as a shooting guard because of the volume of shots he's taking in Denver, then it stands. If you characterize point guards irrespective of shot volume, then Iverson's a point guard and deserves top-5 recognition because he's having a stellar year alongside Melo. IIRC, he's splitting his time about evenly between the positions, so it's a tough call, but I thought I'd mention him because I traditionally rip on Iverson and he deserves a little recognition for this season, at least until the playoffs come around; he's playing at a very high level.

If you consider West a SG, I can only think of Kobe and Wade (and again, AI if you call him a 2-guard this year) as those who would challenge West, so top 3 or 4.

farzi · Post #14 » by **farzi** » Sat Feb 9, 2008 9:42 pm

jab wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

What's funny about that? Those players have an immense amount of talent, and are better than the majority of players at those positions these days. However, todays athlete is much larger both in height and muscularity (is that a word?)

Bgil · Post #15 » by **Bgil** » Sat Feb 9, 2008 9:43 pm

vainsake wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Dude, You're such a homer its not even funny.

I know! There's no way Jerry West would be a better PG than Magic.

prekazi · Post #16 » by **prekazi** » Sat Feb 9, 2008 10:55 pm

They won't be even in the league. Maybe in Belgium National Basketball League but that's it. Stop comparing 60's guys to this era.

Post #17 » by **TrueLAfan** » Sat Feb 9, 2008 10:56 pm

Jerry West had a 39-inch sleeve. That would give him a wingspan of around 6'7" or 6'8". He'd measure close to 6'4" in shoes. He was, perhaps, the toughest player in NBA history...I'm talking about a guy who would crash the boards and gut pummeled, and go right back in. (Nine broken noses...think about it.) His scoring would drop because of pace--but go up because he'd have the three and was one of the great long range shooters of all time. The two things would probably balance out. his rebounding would drop to around 4 or 5 a game; his assist totals would probably rise slightly, since assists were awarded on substantially fewer possessions in the past. They started keeping track of blocks and sreals in West's final year, when he was old and tired. He got a steal every 12 minutes, which is better than any players in the league can currently manage. He got a block every 41 minutes, which is more than any starting guard in the NBA today can manage. that was when West was old. In his prime, he would have had more. Much more. He would need modern training and supplements like Jack the Ripper would have needed an Uzi.

So...what? Outside of his rookie and final season, West had 12 consecutive seasons where he averaged 28.2-5.7-6.9. Drop the rebounds by 25%, and you get a guy who would average 28 points, 4.4 rebounds, and 7 assists a game...along with something like 3 steals and a block. He'd be universally respected. He'd be an MVP candidate every year he played over 60 games. I always figure West's effectiveness like this. If Dwyane Wade could shoot 38% from three and was a better defender, his impact would be about even with West's.

Frazier is a tougher nut. He was so fundamentally skilled. His peak value would be more like Jason Kidd's. Kidd is a better passer and slightly better rebounder; Frazier is a much better shooter and is far more efficient on offense. Pretty equal defensively. Similar in size. Because of his leadership, I'd give the nod to Frazier's peak over Kidd's. Kidd was in the top 10 of MVP voting 5 times (and was 11th once), and made the top 5 twice. Frazier would be a bit better.

West would simply be one of the best 2-3 players in the game every year. Frazier would only suffer by comparison; he'd be a top 5-7 player in a lot of years. AMong guards, Nash could hold a candle to them. Kobe too, although I think players and GMs would prefer West to Kobe on their team. Wade, when he's healthy. Some of the younger players might get to that level, but I don't know if it will happen. It's hard for me to conceive of West being considered anything lower than the third best guard in the league. there might be a player or two or three between he and Frazier...and then again, there might not. Clyde was great.

ThaRegul8r · Post #18 » by **ThaRegul8r** » Sun Feb 10, 2008 12:48 am

farzi wrote:Talent wise yes, however, I think that they would be over powered by many of the starters in the league these days.

With regards to Frazier, Frazier was 6-4, 200. That's without any modern advantages. Gary Payton playing the same position was the same height and 20 pounds lighter. Did he get overpowered? Chauncey Billups is 6-3, 202. Does he get overpowered? Jason Kidd is 6-4, 212. How does he fare? Walt Frazier would do just fine in the league today. This is not meant to be a personal attack, but it seems as if whenever a player of the past is mentioned and the question is asked how he would do today, the automatic response is that they wouldn't be strong enough/athletic enough without even knowing anything about the player(s) in question or doing any research.

girlygirl · Post #19 » by **girlygirl** » Sun Feb 10, 2008 5:41 am

Just as great as when they actually played.

writerman · Post #20 » by **writerman** » Sun Feb 10, 2008 6:06 am

both of them would clearly be end-of-the-bench scrubs, or even D-Leaguers. Just ask 99% of the under-thirty crowd on this site who possess infallible acumen and knowledge of the game

Hell, Courtney Sims would have averaged 65 points, 40 rebounds, 20 assists, and 15 blocks against any of those guys in that era. Everybody knows they only had spastic 6-5" white guys playing back then!!!