Neyland I (Formerly known as Gruden Thread)

Status
Not open for further replies.
#8,176
#8,176
apevol said:
6'9-6'10 isn't exactly uncommon height for centers of any era. Now we hardly even see actual centers.

Whenever you have guys like kareem, or Shaq, you always see an overreaction by the rest of the league trying to find a big 7 footer to account for dominant 7 footers. Usually results in a bunch of big tall stiffs making too much money to stand there and foul out.

The 50s and early 60s definitely saw a lot of undersized centers, but by the late 60s, the center position had become the most important position on the court. So Wilt played through two different eras, and was freakish in both. When he was old and broke down he was often playing kareem to a near draw.

But if you want to say his career as a Laker wasnt as good as Kobe, thats totally fair. Kareem's best years were in Milwaukee, similarly.

Lakers are funny in that they have a ton of hall of famers that spent a lot of their careers on other teams, whereas the Celtics have had a lot of guys that spent their entire careers in Boston.

As far as Kobe's footwork, he was taught a lot by Hakeem. Definitely outstanding, but its interesting that Hakeem was also an innefecient scorer. Shouldve went to Mchale.

He missed a ton of game winners, because hes just a player who missed a ton of shots in general. Was a good enough defender/rebounder/passer that he's still one of the best 2 guards all time, But he was so bad at taking care of the ball and maximizing his touches to call him a top 5 player.

The way I look at it is..
I can't say Michael Jordan was clearly better, or would rather build a team around him than a handful of players, but Jordan was clearly better and more compatible than Kobe ever was.

I'd rather hang out with Kobe tho
Click to expand...

Eh, my point was the average player in the NBA in the ‘60’s (and surrounding years) was nowhere near the caliber of the average player of the modern era. That’s why it’s hard to judge just how good they actually were. You had superstars back then, but your run-of-the-mill player was significantly worse than what you would see today. Wilt was a freak, no doubt. But he’s not averaging 50 a game in today’s league. Nowhere close to that if we’re being honest. That’s why him and Bill Russell were able to have so many of those 30 rebound nights. Men playing against boys on most evenings.

And you can thank rule changes for the reason we don’t see traditional centers anymore. The league thinks more points and a faster pace will draw in more fans. So they encourage it anyway they can.

Kareem still won 5 rings in L.A.. So I understand the argument with him being over Kobe as a top Laker. And obviously Magic as well. But 3rd is about as low as I can reasonably see him being.

Boston is a weird sports town. They seem determined, and very often succeed in hanging onto their stars. I wish more teams did it like that. I know I’m glad Green Bay does.

As far as Kobe goes, I told you I overvalue one-on-one ability. It’s just my bias and I’m not ashamed to admit it. And I think he’s unquestionably top 2 all time in that area. His glaring flaws as a 5 on 5 player drop him down to around 4th or 5th all time for me. Just slightly ahead of LeBron. But yes, Kobe had a consistent knack for ignoring situations and trying to win games by himself. Often to detriment of his own team. He missed a ton of game winners because he took a lot of just plain awful shots. He also made quite a few of those awful shots as well. The fact that he shot over 30 percent on game winners is kind of impressive when you consider nearly all of those shots were ill-advised and highly contested. But that’s the paradox with Kobe. His greatest fault is also somewhat his most impressive attribute. The fact that he was able to make an adequate amount of those shots that he had absolutely no business making. The fact that even taking those shots in the first place was a mistake but making as many as he did is impressive as hell.

But it’s just my personal opinion. However, I think we can both agree on who is 1st on our lists. It’s all subjective anyway. But I think dropping Kobe any lower than 10th all time is going a bit too far.

And I’d definitely rather hang out with Kobe. If he knew how to play golf, he’d be in my dream foursome with Sinatra and someone else who liked to drink a lot. Idk, Brett Favre seems like he’d be fun. And he’s a former Packer so that’s a plus.
 
Last edited:
#8,177
#8,177
I miss the Gruden threads. Sometimes, when I'm bored, I come back here and post, just to feel the exhilaration I once felt, sitting at my laptop for hours at a time, waiting for the next nugget to fall, all the while, enjoying the shenanigans of my newfound friends. Oh, and then there was the rude people who'd come in and tell us how stupid we were (maybe they were right?) for believing, wanting, and hoping for the best for our beloved Vols.

Sadly, this ain't the Gruden thread.
Go Vols.
Go Raiders ... 'cause ... why not?

giphy.webp
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#8,179
#8,179
Charlie Kelly said:
Eh, my point was the average player in the NBA in the ‘60’s (and surrounding years) was nowhere near the caliber of the average player of the modern era. That’s why it’s hard to judge just how good they actually were. You had superstars back then, but your run-of-the-mill player was significantly worse than what you would see today. Wilt was a freak, no doubt. But he’s not averaging 50 a game in today’s league. Nowhere close to that if we’re being honest. That’s why him and Bill Russell were able to have so many of those 30 rebound nights. Men playing against boys on most evenings.

And you can thank rule changes for the reason we don’t see traditional centers anymore. The league thinks more points and a faster pace will draw in more fans. So they encourage it anyway they can.

Kareem still won 5 rings in L.A.. So I understand the argument with him being over Kobe as a top Laker. And obviously Magic as well. But 3rd is about as low as I can reasonably see him being.

Boston is a weird sports town. They seem determined, and very often succeed in hanging onto their stars. I wish more teams did it like that. I know I’m glad Green Bay does.

As far as Kobe goes, I told you I overvalue one-on-one ability. It’s just my bias and I’m not ashamed to admit it. And I think he’s unquestionably top 2 all time in that area. His glaring flaws as a 5 on 5 player drop him down to around 4th or 5th all time for me. Just slightly ahead of LeBron. But yes, Kobe had a consistent knack for ignoring situations and trying to win games by himself. Often to detriment of his own team. He missed a ton of game winners because he took a lot of just plain awful shots. He also made quite a few of those awful shots as well. The fact that he shot over 30 percent on game winners is kind of impressive when you consider nearly all of those shots were ill-advised and highly contested. But that’s the paradox with Kobe. His greatest fault is also somewhat his most impressive attribute. The fact that he was able to make an adequate amount of those shots that he had absolutely no business making. The fact that even taking those shots in the first place was a mistake but making as many as he did is impressive as hell.

But it’s just my personal opinion. However, I think we can both agree on who is 1st on our lists. It’s all subjective anyway. But I think dropping Kobe any lower than 10th all time is going a bit too far.

And I’d definitely rather hang out with Kobe. If he knew how to play golf, he’d be in my dream foursome with Sinatra and someone else who liked to drink a lot. Idk, Brett Favre seems like he’d be fun. And he’s a former Packer so that’s a plus.
Click to expand...

He pulled down 55 rebounds in a game against Russell. There were fewer good players, but there were also a lot fewer teams and conference rivals played each other almost constantly. The primary reason for ungodly stats was the pace the game was played at. Wings did nothing but run and jack up quick shots, so there were tons of rebounds available.
 
#8,180
#8,180
apevol said:
He pulled down 55 rebounds in a game against Russell. There were fewer good players, but there were also a lot fewer teams and conference rivals played each other almost constantly. The primary reason for ungodly stats was the pace the game was played at. Wings did nothing but run and jack up quick shots, so there were tons of rebounds available.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Those stats aren’t sustainable in today’s game. But when you’re the only one assigned to rebounding in a watered down league with a pace like that you can put up anomalies. You’re right; 1 through 3 got back on defense and the 4 barely entered the paint unless he had to. That’s why 62 in three quarters against a finals team in 2005-2006 holds so much weight for me. He could’ve flirted with 90 that game. Which is insanity for a 2 guard in the modern era. It’s more impressive than his 81 a couple months later (more inefficient against a worse team) and Wilt’s 100 to me. Even his 81 is more impressive than Wilt’s 100. Tougher competition and 81 on 46 attempts versus 100 on 63. Kobe also had like 12 fewer free throws in that game as well. But it’s subjective and up to personal interpretation. Kobe is just that good to me but he isn’t without his flaws. Top 5 for me but I can understand if others rank him lower. But lower than 10th is just flat out disrespectful and reeks of bias.
 
#8,181
#8,181
Charlie Kelly said:
Agreed. Those stats aren’t sustainable in today’s game. But when you’re the only one assigned to rebounding in a watered down league with a pace like that you can put up anomalies. You’re right; 1 through 3 got back on defense and the 4 barely entered the paint unless he had to. That’s why 62 in three quarters against a finals team in 2005-2006 holds so much weight for me. He could’ve flirted with 90 that game. Which is insanity for a 2 guard in the modern era. It’s more impressive than his 81 a couple months later (more inefficient against a worse team) and Wilt’s 100 to me. Even his 81 is more impressive than Wilt’s 100. Tougher competition and 81 on 46 attempts versus 100 on 63. Kobe also had like 12 fewer free throws in that game as well. But it’s subjective and up to personal interpretation. Kobe is just that good to me but he isn’t without his flaws. Top 5 for me but I can understand if others rank him lower. But lower than 10th is just flat out disrespectful and reeks of bias.
Click to expand...

100 is basically just a novely. What was impressive about what he did was year after year of dozens of 50+ games with absurdly high effeciency, while being the best defender on his team. Then later acting as a distributor. He did just about everything any other center ever did.

He wouldnt average 35 20 and 5, but hed be dominant in any era.

Kobe had some ridiculous single game outbursts, but Jordan was doing it more consistently and more effeciently, with fewer touches, in the slowest league in the modern era
 
#8,182
#8,182
apevol said:
100 is basically just a novely. What was impressive about what he did was year after year of dozens of 50+ games with absurdly high effeciency, while being the best defender on his team. Then later acting as a distributor. He did just about everything any other center ever did.

He wouldnt average 35 20 and 5, but hed be dominant in any era.

Kobe had some ridiculous single game outbursts, but Jordan was doing it more consistently and more effeciently, with fewer touches, in the slowest league in the modern era
Click to expand...

I’m not arguing Jordan wasn’t good. In fact, I think he’s the greatest player of all time for some of the reasons you just mentioned. A better and more aware version of Kobe in a slower era. Of course Kobe played the first 7 years of his career and won 3 titles in the same era. But with Shaq, they had arguably some of the best teams of all time. However, MJ was much better 5 on 5 than Kobe was. But one-on-one they were pretty equal. That’s why Kobe is so high on my list. He’s the only one that can stack up to MJ one-on-one. That gives you a significant advantage in my book.

And yes, Wilt would be great in any era. But he wouldn’t average 50 and 30 in today’s game. Nowhere close to that. My point was more to reveal how difficult it is to place players that played that far back in a hierarchy with more modern players. The competition was vastly different and the game has changed considerably.

P.S.: It’s not too difficult to be a great post defender when you’ve got 3 to 6 inches and 50 pounds on the guy you’re guarding.
 
#8,183
#8,183
Came here for the Grumors,
Leaving thinking about the Detroit bad boys of the 80s for some reason. Glad to see this thread has turned into a debate in reality though, good on you guys.
 
#8,184
#8,184
Not throwing him in for comparison, but I always liked James Worthy.
 
#8,195
#8,195
I don't really know how this works. I plan to be counted in the Lord's supporters and I am trying to send out an invitation in the only way I know how.
 
#8,196
#8,196
VolunteerHillbilly said:
I don't really know how this works. I plan to be counted in the Lord's supporters and I am trying to send out an invitation in the only way I know how.
Click to expand...

Steeldrivers were ****ing great with what's his name. Bunch of elite studio bluegrass/country musicians paired with a dude with a sandpaper-gravel-silk voice.

Saw them live, and was completely floored like I havent been by a new group in a long time.
 
#8,198
#8,198
Hey Charlie.

I've got Dennis Rodman ahead of Kobe.

Figure that one out and get back to me.
 
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.

VN Store



Back
Top