share

Overrated All-Time Greats

rwd5035
Registered User
Joined: 07/04/2011
Posts: 325
Points: 405
Offline
It's so hard to even analyze

It's so hard to even analyze the stats from the Celtics dominated era where Wilt, Russell, Robertson, etc. played. For one, teams would take terrible shots, would be inefficient and they played fast. So all rebounding numbers from this time are inflated. Also, there were very few quality bigs to match someone like Wilt or Russell, so they'd rack up rebounding stats with relative ease. That era of basketball almost should stand alone, can't compare it to the eras that follow it.

ItsVictorOladipo
ItsVictorOladipo's picture
Registered User
Joined: 08/12/2009
Posts: 2010
Points: 4632
Online
Absolutely rwd. I don't

Absolutely rwd.

I don't think the Big O is overrated. But I do think his triple double season is overrated by fans of the modern era.

We have to keep in mind in that era it was not uncommon for the best players like Robertson to average 45+ minutes per game, while the best players in todays game play about 38-40. So that'll give a slight boost to stats.

Then keep in mind that the average team in 1962 scored 118.8 PPG and grabbed a whopping 71.4 RPG while the average team this past season averaged 98.1 PPG and 42.1 RPG.

Don't get me wrong Robertson's numbers in his triple double season are very impressive but not any more impressive than Magic's years from 1982-84 (17.6 PPG, 8.6 RPG, and 10.9 APG combined over all three years), MJ's 1989 season (32.5 PPG, 8 RPG and 8 APG), Larry Bird's 1990 season (24.3 PPG, 9.5 RPG and 7.5 APG) and Lebron's 2010 (29.7 PPG, 7.3 RPG, 8.6 APG) and 2013 (26.8, 8 RPG, 7.3 APG) seasons. They also put up fantastic all-around numbers albeit in eras with a much slower pace.

AmiableBaller34
AmiableBaller34's picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/16/2013
Posts: 273
Points: 688
Offline
I understand your logic, but

I understand your logic, but if it was that easy than wouldn't everyone be doing it? Times change and so does the game, so why should someone be reprimanded for it. LeBron plays in an era were shooting is at a premium, and until recently had no great big men. Should we denounce LeBrons assist numbers because of the narrow focus on shooting, and his rebounds because of lack of big men? Of course not, those are all just aspects that define the style of play we see today, and today, like in Oscar's time, someone who is a physical freak is going to dominate. It's really simple as that.

I also don't understand why some people question individual Legends. I know certain players to be great because they played with other great players. Oscar played with Kareem, who played with Magic, who played against Bird, who both played against the greatest talent of all time in MJ. All of those guys held their own out there against each other, so why does it matter when someone played if they still dominated?

I see a lot of this talk with Larry Bird and it makes me sick. Ignorant people say Bird would be the equivalent to a lesser Dirk, or Bargs type of player today, and to me that is just outlandish. I know a player like Bird is great because I've watched full games of him going against guys like Magic, Worthy, Kareem, Hakeem, and MJ, and always produce great numbers. Why would that change today?

I think this "modern era" ideology needs to go, or people need to at least acknowledge the same advantages modern era Stars have. The three point line wasn't put into place until 1984, the blocked shot until 1974, and the steal the same year. Players back then didn't have the advantage of mastering one single skill like guys today. Remember, it's these legends who the great players of today learned from.

ItsVictorOladipo
ItsVictorOladipo's picture
Registered User
Joined: 08/12/2009
Posts: 2010
Points: 4632
Online
understand your logic, but if

I understand your logic, but if it was that easy than wouldn't everyone be doing it? Times change and so does the game, so why should someone be reprimanded for it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I didn't say it was easy. I said that a handful of guys have put up numbers on the same level as that over the last 50+ years, if you think that makes it "easy" then that misconception is on you.

I'm not "reprimanding" Oscar for playing in a different era, I'm just taking that era into account when trying to put his numbers in perspective. "Times change and so does the game" is exactly my point, the problem is that some modern fans put the players like Wilt, Big O etc on a pedestal primarily because of how their stats look in comparison to the superstars of today without looking at those numbers in context.

It works both ways, I'm not going to be under the impression that Stephon Marbury was a better passer than Bob Cousy because his assist numbers were slightly higher. It's not a "modern era" idealogy that I'm going with here, it's the realization that while "numbers don't lie" they can be misleading.

RUDEBOY_
RUDEBOY_'s picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/10/2010
Posts: 7333
Points: 13185
Offline
and i wouldnt consider reggie

and i wouldnt consider reggie miller or bill laimbeer all time greats.....

RSS: Syndicate content