JJ Redick: “Players from the 50s, 60s, 70s could not play in today’s NBA”

[70sFan]

How did you read that and go to a mega star and all time great in walt?

JJ is questioning Mike Riodan, Cazzie Russell, Dave Stallworth, Nate Bowman, John Warren, Don May, and Bill Hosket. Not Willis Reed, Walt Frazier, Dick Barnett, Dave DeBusschere or Bill Bradley.

I don't think questioning Mike Riodan, Cazzie Russell or Dave Stallworth is fair though. They were legitimately good basketball players. Even a scrub like Nate Bowman was a 6'10 center with solid body who could shoot from way outside - he probably wouldn't make the league but he wasn't some kind of unskilled big body.

[dhsilv2]

Who cares? JJ Redick can't even play in today's NBA.

Wish I was so bad at basketball I made 117.9 million dollars playing it.

Would you be able to afford a sense of humor with that much money?

Nah, I'd need at least 120M

[camby23]

Most of the players from 80s and 90s also. Im not talking about superstars but role players and average starters.

[Ontario]

Well this 3pt. generation of basketball has gifted Reddick with a 20 year career so it doesn't shock me to hear him standing up for it.

He'd would have had a much smaller role to play in either the 50's, 60's or 70's.

[dhsilv2]

A lot probably wouldn't, but I dont like this debate. Show some humility cause in 50 years, nosebleeds will say the same thing about you. Oh look, in 2020 a slow white center who cant even dunk was MVP rofl, none of 2020 guys could play in a league today. You know this argument will pop up and we will be spinning in our graves.

But don't you hope it's true? I'd be pretty mad if in 50 years the NBA isn't better than it is today by a hell of a lot. I'd be mad if everything isn't better. That's the whole reason we created society and we work together, to get better. Each generation should be judge on how much better the next generation is from them. The bigger the gap the more successful that generation was. Not the other way around.

Yeah, but how much better it will get realistically, I think less so than future people will believe, which applies to people today too. There are fools who say Mitchel Robinson would be Wilt if you put him in his era, just like people in 50 years will probably point to their version of Doug MacDermott and say he would be Luka Doncic in 2020. Luka is not super athletic not in great shape, so any future scrub would be Luka just like any athletic Freak center would be WIlt, right? You get what I am trying to say? People always underrate past athletes.

Nobody who's listening to what JJ said would ever reference an allstar player, so I don't understand why you're mentioning wilt and luka. They're not part of this topic.

But I hope scouting gets better. Game theory gets better. Development improves. blah blah blah. I expect everything going into going from a kid to adult to a player to the game improves.

Luka is a comically underrated athlete because people over value speed and jumping and don't understand core, leg strength, stability, hand size, center of gravity, and another 100 things we could get into. Nobody has said that athletics ability alone has driven this change...that's people taking trying to add context and making assumptions to what was said.

60-70% of the league in the 50-70's eras likely won't make the league today. Some is due to athletic ability. Some is due to a lack of development and skill. Some of them were just lucky that a lot of smarter people chose going to college and getting a job over the NBA because it didn't pay that well for fringe athletes, but if you weren't smart enough to be successful elsewhere, the NBA was a pretty good deal.

I hope over the next 50 years we see a huge uptick in athletic talent by finding those "50 Gainnis's in Africa" that the league has missed out on. But I also hope analytics keep evolving and skill keeps increasing. I hope nutrition in developing countries keeps enhancing, etc. If I'm watching the NBA in 50 years (and wow I'm alive? Winning!) and I have the idea that "wow I think Taj Gibson could be a key starter for a title time" I'll be depressed as hell. I hope you would be too.

[JujitsuFlip]

I think Big O and Dr J would have no issue playing in today's NBA.

[MrGoat]

Wilt could play today. His physical gifts were just that spectacular. Scary to think what he would have been like with modern training

[dhsilv2]

How did you read that and go to a mega star and all time great in walt?

JJ is questioning Mike Riodan, Cazzie Russell, Dave Stallworth, Nate Bowman, John Warren, Don May, and Bill Hosket. Not Willis Reed, Walt Frazier, Dick Barnett, Dave DeBusschere or Bill Bradley.

I don't think questioning Mike Riodan, Cazzie Russell or Dave Stallworth is fair though. They were legitimately good basketball players. Even a scrub like Nate Bowman was a 6'10 center with solid body who could shoot from way outside - he probably wouldn't make the league but he wasn't some kind of unskilled big body.

Saying they're questionable doesn't mean they don't make the league today (they're ones we'd QUESTION). But I'm not really picking on those guys but just took Walt's 70 title team and listed the guys who weren't getting big minutes for the team to provide some level of context of the types of players we're talking about here. I know a bunch of those guys were relatively young that year so they might not be optimal choices. It's just context assuming this guy did watch walt's knicks.

[dhsilv2]

I think Big O and Dr J would have no issue playing in today's NBA.

So you agree with JJ who obviously wasn't talking about 2 of the 20 best players ever....

Wilt could play today. His physical gifts were just that spectacular. Scary to think what he would have been like with modern training

and again...you think "most" applies to WILT freaking Chamberlain?

[dhsilv2]

Well this 3pt. generation of basketball has gifted Reddick with a 20 year career so it doesn't shock me to hear him standing up for it.

He'd would have had a much smaller role to play in either the 50's, 60's or 70's.

IN the past era's he'd have been a 20 a game guy playing 40 minutes a game taking 15 footers which he's GREAT at. The guy was one of the best college players of the past 30 years which plays the game much more like the nba of the past era's did. JJ had to change his game to become a specialist because of how the nba game is played today. JJ's game translates better to past eras than this one, not the other way around. JJ adapted his game for today.

[Johnny Bball]

but he should’ve added the 80s and 90s to the list.

Except he didn't want to sound stupid.

Never has there been a generation of young people yelling at clouds like this one.

[UcanUwill]

But don't you hope it's true? I'd be pretty mad if in 50 years the NBA isn't better than it is today by a hell of a lot. I'd be mad if everything isn't better. That's the whole reason we created society and we work together, to get better. Each generation should be judge on how much better the next generation is from them. The bigger the gap the more successful that generation was. Not the other way around.

Yeah, but how much better it will get realistically, I think less so than future people will believe, which applies to people today too. There are fools who say Mitchel Robinson would be Wilt if you put him in his era, just like people in 50 years will probably point to their version of Doug MacDermott and say he would be Luka Doncic in 2020. Luka is not super athletic not in great shape, so any future scrub would be Luka just like any athletic Freak center would be WIlt, right? You get what I am trying to say? People always underrate past athletes.

Nobody who's listening to what JJ said would ever reference an allstar player, so I don't understand why you're mentioning wilt and luka. They're not part of this topic.

But I hope scouting gets better. Game theory gets better. Development improves. blah blah blah. I expect everything going into going from a kid to adult to a player to the game improves.

Luka is a comically underrated athlete because people over value speed and jumping and don't understand core, leg strength, stability, hand size, center of gravity, and another 100 things we could get into. Nobody has said that athletics ability alone has driven this change...that's people taking trying to add context and making assumptions to what was said.

60-70% of the league in the 50-70's eras likely won't make the league today. Some is due to athletic ability. Some is due to a lack of development and skill. Some of them were just lucky that a lot of smarter people chose going to college and getting a job over the NBA because it didn't pay that well for fringe athletes, but if you weren't smart enough to be successful elsewhere, the NBA was a pretty good deal.

I hope over the next 50 years we see a huge uptick in athletic talent by finding those "50 Gainnis's in Africa" that the league has missed out on. But I also hope analytics keep evolving and skill keeps increasing. I hope nutrition in developing countries keeps enhancing, etc. If I'm watching the NBA in 50 years (and wow I'm alive? Winning!) and I have the idea that "wow I think Taj Gibson could be a key starter for a title time" I'll be depressed as hell. I hope you would be too.

Well, I got into a bit different argument, because we see young fools talk nonsense like that about all time greats all the time, and they need to be called out sometimes for their foolishness. In 2010 on Raptors forum one guy seriously believed Larry Bird would be backup now. I agree that Luka is underrated athlete, but I talk about general belief, people will look back at Luka 50 years from now, and will think that if Luka Dominated, then any chubby kid could dominate it as well. But can they or is it just that Luka is all time great really?

Do I even believe JJ is wrong. No I dont, obviously a lot of guys from the 50s wouldnt cut anymore, but I just do not even see the point of saying it, like what is achieved, everyone sees how good league is today, even if we just compare it to 20 years ago, we have so much more great international players, so by simple logic it means that lots of other guys get squeezed out, I mean 20 years ago Derrick Williams would probably be still in a league, but today he is in Israel. Dario Saric, Rubio, Valanciunas, better guys like that took his place and league is tronger because of it. I mean we all know League is as good as it ever was.

[Wallace_Wallace]

Bums like Kevin Knox and Frank Nkitilina are in the league but Artis Gilmore can't play in this era of NBA? What is going on in the world?

It's when you give dumb people a platform to speak on without counter arguments.

When one is comparing the worst of an era to the best of an era, then you know that person is not debating in good faith.

On average, the quality of a regular starter & bench player today are better. If I were to create a roster with today's players that are no more than the 3rd best option and put it against the players (same condition, no more than the 3rd best option) in each era (50s-00s), I have no doubt the players today would win in a 7 game series.

[Wallace_Wallace]

On one hand he’s right. There were players who only used one hand to dribble even with those dribbling rules. On the other hand J.J, would have no role pre-merger because there is no 3pt line. He wouldn’t be able to make the league because his role didn’t exist in the 70’s.

Did you see JJ in college? The guy can play. In those past eras where they let non stars shoot elsewhere and more often. He'd still be a monster in the 70's. JJ's a vastly better offensive player than nearly anyone who wasn't a top 3 rotation guy in the league in most of those eras. Maybe a stretch in the 60's before they over expanded where he might not be. But otherwise, you think JJ can't score like Greer or Sam Jones? Two hall guys.

JJ Redick is the one of most lethal college shooters of all time.

I swear people think if shooters were to go back in time, they wouldn't be able to shoot. If no one bothers to guarding them beyond 20 feet, every shot would be a practice shot for them. They wouldn't have to worry about getting hurt by driving to the basket (Curry), nor have to work as hard by running endless around screens (Miller/Allen/Thompson/Redick).

[70sFan]

On one hand he’s right. There were players who only used one hand to dribble even with those dribbling rules. On the other hand J.J, would have no role pre-merger because there is no 3pt line. He wouldn’t be able to make the league because his role didn’t exist in the 70’s.

Did you see JJ in college? The guy can play. In those past eras where they let non stars shoot elsewhere and more often. He'd still be a monster in the 70's. JJ's a vastly better offensive player than nearly anyone who wasn't a top 3 rotation guy in the league in most of those eras. Maybe a stretch in the 60's before they over expanded where he might not be. But otherwise, you think JJ can't score like Greer or Sam Jones? Two hall guys.

JJ Redick is the one of most lethal college shooters of all time.

I swear people think if shooters were to go back in time, they wouldn't be able to shoot. If no one bothers to guarding them beyond 20 feet, every shot would be a practice shot for them. They wouldn't have to worry about getting hurt by driving to the basket (Curry), nor have to work as hard by running endless around screens (Miller/Allen/Thompson/Redick).

Do you think that players couldn't shoot back then?

[Wallace_Wallace]

Did you see JJ in college? The guy can play. In those past eras where they let non stars shoot elsewhere and more often. He'd still be a monster in the 70's. JJ's a vastly better offensive player than nearly anyone who wasn't a top 3 rotation guy in the league in most of those eras. Maybe a stretch in the 60's before they over expanded where he might not be. But otherwise, you think JJ can't score like Greer or Sam Jones? Two hall guys.

JJ Redick is the one of most lethal college shooters of all time.

I swear people think if shooters were to go back in time, they wouldn't be able to shoot. If no one bothers to guarding them beyond 20 feet, every shot would be a practice shot for them. They wouldn't have to worry about getting hurt by driving to the basket (Curry), nor have to work as hard by running endless around screens (Miller/Allen/Thompson/Redick).

Do you think that players couldn't shoot back then?

They cannot shoot better than JJ Redick.

Mind you, the reply was for a post saying JJ Redick cannot defend/shoot back in the 50s/60s/70s. Basically his role would be minimal, which is false, because he has a skill that is ahead of is time and he would have an easier on time getting his shots due to the lack of emphasis on perimeter defense.

[FreeThrowLine]

In this thread, someone is laughing at the idea of Dennis Rodman being able to play in this era.

One of the greatest (if not the greatest) rebounders of all time.

One of the best defenders ever & one of the most fit/athletic players to play the game, couldn’t play now?

Apparently if you don’t attempt 10 threes a quarter you can’t hang in this era.

The majority of starter quality players from the 80’s right through to today could at the very least make an NBA roster in ANY era.

To randomly pick a few names, PJ Tucker, Mario Elie, Michael Redd & Dale Ellis none of these guys are stars, all could play today or back in the day.

Some guys would be better in the modern game, some would be worse. Just like some players of this time would have better success 30-40 years ago and others would be less effective.

It says a lot about certain posters basketball knowledge when they genuinely think the guys from the 80’s-90’s couldn’t compete in the modern game when in reality there’s a list longer than Manute Bols (RIP) arm of guys from that era that would dominate today

[slick_watts]

this is an obvious truth, to me. the average professional athlete is better trained than the average professional athlete from the 50s, 60s, and 70s. there are some players from that time period who could probably survive in today's nba but i don't think many. whereas, i think you could take the average nba player today and put him in the 1950s or 1960s and after some adjustment period they would dominate just by virtue of being superior athletes.

[70sFan]

They cannot shoot better than JJ Redick.

I'm not sure I agree, there were quite a few amazing shooters back then.

[xdrta+]

If Redick is going to make sweeping statement like that, he should specify what he means. "Most" players? Is he talking about 51% or them or 99% of them or something in between. Any of those numbers could be "most." And name some names that people have heard of that couldn't play today. And given that he was born in 1984 he never saw any of them play, so what is he basing his opinion on. Has he studied all the films? Unless he specifies some of these things it sounds to me like he's just talking to talk and be talked about.