I can make a team today to beat the 1992 Dream Team

[CitySushi]

So what bigs are gonna beat the 1992 dream team from the 3 point line ? Cuz I'm not seeing that.

Oh, not from MSG's team. I was talking about my own composition. It would need a specialized roster in order to compete with this dream team. MSG's team (no offense) wouldn't have a shot against the Dream Team. You would need more skilled outside bigs in order to compete with these teams. You would need a couple post shooters, and good high post passers.

This was my team:

Starters:
Lebron James- PG
Kevin Durant - SG
Kawhi Leonard- SF
Anthony Davis - PF
Boogie Cousins - C

You'd have 5 skilled guys who are all great athletes to run the floor and great floor spacers. Opens the entire game up and they could switch on defense. Having that much size on the court would also help to mitigate some of the post play, but not all. Basically you'd hope to trade some 3's for 2's and out run the Dream Team.

Bench:
Klay Thompson
Draymond Green
James Harden
Jimmy Butler
Karl-Anthony Towns
Kevin Love
Chris Paul


I even omitted Steph Curry and Russell Westbrook from this team just for team composition.

 

[msgkings322]

So what bigs are gonna beat the 1992 dream team from the 3 point line ? Cuz I'm not seeing that.

Bigs, smalls, the 3 pointer would be a major factor in how the new guys win, yes.

 

[SJ76]

Oh, not from MSG's team. I was talking about my own composition. It would need a specialized roster in order to compete with this dream team. MSG's team (no offense) wouldn't have a shot against the Dream Team. You would need more skilled outside bigs in order to compete with these teams. You would need a couple post shooters, and good high post passers.

Well yeah I could hand pick 5 players that could beat the dream team. But I don't see Boogie or AD being the difference in the game from the 3 point line.

 

[msgkings322]

Oh, not from MSG's team. I was talking about my own composition. It would need a specialized roster in order to compete with this dream team. MSG's team (no offense) wouldn't have a shot against the Dream Team. You would need more skilled outside bigs in order to compete with these teams. You would need a couple post shooters, and good high post passers.

This was my team:

Starters:
Lebron James- PG
Kevin Durant - SG
Kawhi Leonard- SF
Anthony Davis - PF
Boogie Cousins - C

You'd have 5 skilled guys who are all great athletes to run the floor and great floor spacers. Opens the entire game up and they could switch on defense. Having that much size on the court would also help to mitigate some of the post play, but not all. Basically you'd hope to trade some 3's for 2's and out run the Dream Team.

Bench:
Klay Thompson
Draymond Green
James Harden
Jimmy Butler
Karl-Anthony Towns
Kevin Love
Chris Paul


I even omitted Steph Curry and Russell Westbrook from this team just for team composition.

 

[SJ76]

Bigs, smalls, the 3 pointer would be a major factor in how the new guys win, yes.

Obviously it's the only way they could win. Cuz their post players aren't doing a lot against the 1992 front line.


But I'm sure the 1992 team wouldn't be able to figure out those adjustments

 

[tlance]

I love how so many people immediately come on here and say "no chance".

The DReam Team was absolutely great, but the reason they were so dominant was as much about their competition as it was about their actual team.

Worldwide competition finally reached the point where the US couldn't beat international pros with their own college guys in the late 80s, but it was nowhere near what it is today. Many of the game's biggest stars are foreign born now. Also, NBA guys being allowed to compete was a novelty in '92, so they all jumped at the chance. When was the last time team USA consisted of the best talent available? Players turn down invites all the time.

The fact is, that other countries were not equipped to compete with NBA stars in '92 the way they are now. I do believe it possible to assemble a squad of current players to beat the Dream Team, but chemistry and fit would matter a lot.

I like Sushi's squad, but would remove Love for somebody (anybody) else.

 

[Across The Field]

Your love is cute. Lebron likes to shoot jumpers. He's not a very physical guy compared the 90s post players so acting like he is just because he does have size is funny. If he used his size more and shot less jumpers he might be the GOAT


ebron can take the entire dream team."

Your ignorance is sad. Nobody, and I mean nobody, on that DT faced someone like Lebron. Guys like him didn't exist back then. It is funny how everyone just immediately talks about how much more physical players were back then and act like that's some insurmountable characteristic. They were more physical because they were allowed to be. Lebron is 270 lbs of muscle. He was a Mr. Ohio as a football player. Acting like he wouldn't be able to throw his muscle around is retarded. He would more than hold his own against anyone on the DT unless they just resorted to endlessly cheap-shotting him, which isn't even basketball.

 

[Across The Field]

I love how so many people immediately come on here and say "no chance".

The DReam Team was absolutely great, but the reason they were so dominant was as much about their competition as it was about their actual team.

Worldwide competition finally reached the point where the US couldn't beat international pros with their own college guys in the late 80s, but it was nowhere near what it is today. Many of the game's biggest stars are foreign born now. Also, NBA guys being allowed to compete was a novelty in '92, so they all jumped at the chance. When was the last time team USA consisted of the best talent available? Players turn down invites all the time.

The fact is, that other countries were not equipped to compete with NBA stars in '92 the way they are now. I do believe it possible to assemble a squad of current players to beat the Dream Team, but chemistry and fit would matter a lot.

I like Sushi's squad, but would remove Love for somebody (anybody) else.

It's ridiculous. The way that team has been romanticized is just stupid. They were a talented team, but if you took every member of that team and put them in their prime, and took every player from this generation in their prime, I'm taking this generation by a lot. The advantage in athleticism alone is staggering.

 

[flyerhawk]

Fun exercise with no real right answer. Anthony Davis is a great player but as someone that saw all those guys and a lot, I’ll take this chance to say that as the years go by Patrick Ewing continues to be more and more underrated. I think it’s because he never won a title but he was a beast.

Ewing was a great player no doubt. But I honestly don't know how he would do in the modern game.

I also don't know what the Dreamers would think of Kevin Durant. A near 7 footer who can drain shots from 25' out.

 

[msgkings322]

Your ignorance is sad. Nobody, and I mean nobody, on that DT faced someone like Lebron. Guys like him didn't exist back then. It is funny how everyone just immediately talks about how much more physical players were back then and act like that's some insurmountable characteristic. They were more physical because they were allowed to be. Lebron is 270 lbs of muscle. He was a Mr. Ohio as a football player. Acting like he wouldn't be able to throw his muscle around is retarded. He would more than hold his own against anyone on the DT unless they just resorted to endlessly cheap-shotting him, which isn't even basketball.

This is true, but to be fair, no one today has faced anyone of the caliber of Jordan. Kobe was closest, and he wasn't as good.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

Your points on Magic and Bird being old and relatively ineffective is legit. But you are selling many of the others short. Karl Malone is perhaps the greatest power forward in history. Your team is small and Ewing and company would have a big advantage. I don't see how his game would not translate to today.

And there is the X factor, the Dream Team had the greatest player who ever lived and he would have been the difference.

 

[msgkings322]

Your points on Magic and Bird being old and relatively ineffective is legit. But you are selling many of the others short. Karl Malone is perhaps the greatest power forward in history. Your team is small and Ewing and company would have a big advantage. I don't see how his game would not translate to today.

And there is the X factor, the Dream Team had the greatest player who ever lived and he would have been the difference.

These are all fair points, I just see it a little differently. LeBron is better at being Malone than Malone ever was. Davis is better than Robinson and Ewing and it's not close. You're right about size, substitute Boogie for someone then. The modern game shows that small ('death lineup') beats big. Sure the DT would dominate inside, but the new guys would run them into the ground and shoot endless 3s. It's pretty even.

As has been mentioned, a lot depends on which rules are used, regarding allowable defense.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

These are all fair points, I just see it a little differently. LeBron is better at being Malone than Malone ever was. Davis is better than Robinson and Ewing and it's not close. You're right about size, substitute Boogie for someone then. The modern game shows that small ('death lineup') beats big. Sure the DT would dominate inside, but the new guys would run them into the ground and shoot endless 3s. It's pretty even.

As has been mentioned, a lot depends on which rules are used, regarding allowable defense.

Yes the 3 ball is so important in today's game I think you have a legit argument. Doesn't really matter when the game is played, the 3 pt shot was in the rules back then too. They just shoot it a Hell of a lot more now.

If you use up LeBron on Karl Malone, and I agree James has the edge, then I still have Jordan. If you match James with Jordan, which is closer but I give the slight edge to MJ, then we sill have Malone. The bigs are closer than you think IMO.

 

[msgkings322]

Yes the 3 ball is so important in today's game I think you have a legit argument. Doesn't really matter when the game is played, the 3 pt shot was in the rules back then too. They just shoot it a Hell of a lot more now.

If you use up LeBron on Karl Malone, and I agree James has the edge, then I still have Jordan. If you match James with Jordan, which is closer but I give the slight edge to MJ, then we sill have Malone. The bigs are closer than you think IMO.

Again, very defensible points. But it's not a one on one game, having the best player doesn't guarantee wins when the other 4 are the same or worse. And the defense rule is about how you can defend big guys inside. In the old days you couldn't collapse 3 people on them or clog the lane, you can now, so the post game is barely used.

 

[SJ76]

Your ignorance is sad. Nobody, and I mean nobody, on that DT faced someone like Lebron. Guys like him didn't exist back then. It is funny how everyone just immediately talks about how much more physical players were back then and act like that's some insurmountable characteristic. They were more physical because they were allowed to be. Lebron is 270 lbs of muscle. He was a Mr. Ohio as a football player. Acting like he wouldn't be able to throw his muscle around is retarded. He would more than hold his own against anyone on the DT unless they just resorted to endlessly cheap-shotting him, which isn't even basketball.

Lol. He doesn't throw his muscle around. If he did he would defintely be dominant but he loves step back jumpers. That's his mentality. In a league much less physical

 

[SJ76]

Here comes the current NBA circle jerk.


I'm sure the 1992 dream team wouldn't be able to adjust to Lebron. He's just too physical and overwhelming

 

[msgkings322]

Here comes the current NBA circle jerk.


I'm sure the 1992 dream team wouldn't be able to adjust to Lebron. He's just too physical and overwhelming

Here comes the Dream Team circle jerk.

The new guys bring more than just LeBron. The new guys are more talented than the DT, especially when you basically take Bird out and understand Magic was not 1984 Magic Except for Jordan, and it's not a 1 man game.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

Again, very defensible points. But it's not a one on one game, having the best player doesn't guarantee wins when the other 4 are the same or worse. And the defense rule is about how you can defend big guys inside. In the old days you couldn't collapse 3 people on them or clog the lane, you can now, so the post game is barely used.

Defense. Now that's another discussion. One team plays it better than the other and that's the old guys. And the one thing we do know about this game is when two good teams are evenly matched the team with the best player usually comes out on top. And that would be Michael Jordan.

If it came down to a last second shot I'll take my chances with MJ, you can have James.

 

[msgkings322]

Defense. Now that's another discussion. One team plays it better than the other and that's the old guys. And the one thing we do know about this game is when two good teams are evenly matched the team with the best player usually comes out on top. And that would be Michael Jordan.

If it came down to a last second shot I'll take my chances with MJ, you can have James.

If it comes down to a last second shot that means the teams are pretty even, just sayin'.

 

[R.J. MacReady]

I'm taking this generation by a lot. The advantage in athleticism alone is staggering.

If you are going to use a word like "staggering" ..than I assuming you have proven facts to support this.
Honestly, you make it sound like guys were smoking as they ran and up down the court back then.

Is it not today's starters who are whining about the NBA schedule and literally sit during games uninjured.
I think of the most iconic, athletic moments in NBA history and it's seems like most of them are back in the day.

If someone wants to say that there is an argument to be made that today's players win out in this regard ..I could see that. But if you say the difference is "staggering" ....I'm expecting to see some close to undisputed proof.



.