How would the 1970's be viewed on this board nowadays without Kareem

[coastalmarker99]

In a hypothetical situation in which Kareem didn't exist.

How differently would we on player comparisons view that era?

Jerry West and Wilt both win MVPs in 1971 and 1972.

The Lakers maybe go back to back in 1971 and 1972.

Bob McAdoo now has three MVPs

Bill Walton has two MVPs

The ABA now has the clear-cut best player in the world with Doctor J.

A tough question for me to answer is who goes down as the best NBA player of that era with no Kareem.

Wilt would from 1970 to 1973 would have won one MVP and two final MVPs to go along with 3 rebounding titles and 2 FG% titles along with one first-team all-NBA and second-all-NBA team plus two all defensive first teams.


But I don't think that beats Bob McAdoo or Havlicek

[penbeast0]

First, Dr J is not the clear cut best player in the world, he's the guy that ABA fans (a minority) say is the best but the NBA guys say it's McAdoo, or Cowens, or a healthy Walton, or someone else with legit NBA creds. And depending on whether Hayes wins a couple of titles, or McAdoo does, or Boston wins a couple more and how they did it would answer the question of who is the best because while titles aren't the only thing (or Kareem might not be seen as the best), they are where people look first.

[falcolombardi]

Knicks likely get 3 rings in this scenario beating lakers thrice to 1

Which makes the narrative of the knicks dinasty more memorable despite its short lived ness

[coastalmarker99]

Knicks likely get 3 rings in this scenario beating lakers thrice to 1

Which makes the narrative of the knicks dinasty more memorable despite its short lived ness

But remember the Bullets beat the Knicks in 1971 so they don't take advantage of the power vacuum that exists with no Kareem.

Instead, it is La who despite having no Baylor and West that manages to take advantage.

As they make the NBA finals to match up against the Bullets who were also dealing with injuries of their own and lacked the size to deal with Wilt and Happy.

If Wilt ultimately ends up winning the title and finals MVP despite having no Baylor and West his legacy as a result goes through the roof.

[falcolombardi]

Knicks likely get 3 rings in this scenario beating lakers thrice to 1

Which makes the narrative of the knicks dinasty more memorable despite its short lived ness

But remember the Bullets beat the Knicks in 1971 so they don't take advantage of the power vacuum that exists with no Kareem.

Instead, it is La who despite having no Baylor and West that manages to take advantage.

As they make the NBA finals to match up against the Bullets who were also dealing with injuries of their own and lacked the size to deal with Wilt and Happy.

If Wilt ultimately ends up winning the title and finals MVP despite having no Baylor and West his legacy as a result goes through the roof.

Ohh you right

Remembered the knicks losing to bucks in the 71 finals for some reason

[LukaTheGOAT]

Would David Thompson alongside Bill Walton be considered the greatest "What if," ever?