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

[CitySushi]

I think they can manage. Just because they didn't have to doesn't mean they can't. Those guys were beasts. All of them

Fair enough.

 

[CitySushi]

Is there any composition of players post Dream Team that could have beaten them? I'm talking about taking into account player age as well. So like you couldn't have Prime Olajuwon and Prime Lebron at the same time.

I think this team could have given them a run:

Year 1999-2000
PG: Gary Payton - 32
SG: Kobe Bryant - 21
SF: Grant Hill - 27
PF: Tim Duncan - 23
C: Shaq O'Neal - 27

Bench:
Kevin Garnett - 23
Jason Kidd - 26
Ray Allen - 24
Reggie Miller - 34
Alonzo Mourning - 29
Vince Carter - 23
Chris Webber - 26

 

[SJ76]

Is there any composition of players post Dream Team that could have beaten them? I'm talking about taking into account player age as well. So like you couldn't have Prime Olajuwon and Prime Lebron at the same time.

I think this team could have given them a run:

Year 1999-2000
PG: Gary Payton - 32
SG: Kobe Bryant - 21
SF: Grant Hill - 27
PF: Tim Duncan - 23
C: Shaq O'Neal - 27

Bench:
Kevin Garnett - 23
Jason Kidd - 26
Ray Allen - 24
Reggie Miller - 34
Alonzo Mourning - 29
Vince Carter - 23
Chris Webber - 26

Interesting. I like me some "the Glove" but I can't remember how he was at 32. Grant Hill was good not great. But Kobe Shaq and TD are all time top 10 players or dam near. Vinsanity at 23 was nasty and so was KG. Guards are kind of a ?? Kobe was raw and nasty at 21 but shot selection was ??

1992 Jordan against those young raw beasts would have been a show

 

[CitySushi]

Interesting. I like me some "the Glove" but I can't remember how he was at 32. Grant Hill was good not great. But Kobe Shaq and TD are all time top 10 players or dam near. Vinsanity at 23 was nasty and so was KG. Guards are kind of a ?? Kobe was raw and nasty at 21 but shot selection was ??

1992 Jordan against those young raw beasts would have been a show

I think you forget how great Grant Hill was pre-injury on the Pistons. His second year in the league at 23 he averaged 20.2 pts, 6.9 apg and 9.8 RPG. He was the original Lebron. He had a handle, jumpshot, could pass, defend, rebound, and his athleticism was amazing. He was an amazing player. The year I also referenced he averaged 25.8 pts a game. Everyone thought he was going to be the one who was going to carry the torch after Jordan. It's just unfortunate his injuries took that away.

Also Payton was 31(my mistake), and at that season he averaged 24.2 Pts, 8.9 APG and 6.5 RPG. He was still in his prime although at the later part.

 

[SJ76]

I think you forget how great Grant Hill was pre-injury on the Pistons. His second year in the league at 23 he averaged 20.2 pts, 6.9 apg and 9.8 RPG. He was the original Lebron. He had a handle, jumpshot, could pass, defend, rebound, and his athleticism was amazing. He was an amazing player. The year I also referenced he averaged 25.8 pts a game. Everyone thought he was going to be the one who was going to carry the torch after Jordan. It's just unfortunate his injuries took that away.

Also Payton was 31(my mistake), and at that season he averaged 24.2 Pts, 8.9 APG and 6.5 RPG. He was still in his prime although at the later part.

I would say he's more like KD than Lebrom. Too skinny to be a Lebron type SF but yeah he had some good years.

Espn is always gonna try to compare someone to Jordan

 

[trojanfan12]

Is there any composition of players post Dream Team that could have beaten them? I'm talking about taking into account player age as well. So like you couldn't have Prime Olajuwon and Prime Lebron at the same time.

I think this team could have given them a run:

Year 1999-2000
PG: Gary Payton - 32
SG: Kobe Bryant - 21
SF: Grant Hill - 27
PF: Tim Duncan - 23
C: Shaq O'Neal - 27

Bench:
Kevin Garnett - 23
Jason Kidd - 26
Ray Allen - 24
Reggie Miller - 34
Alonzo Mourning - 29
Vince Carter - 23
Chris Webber - 26

Holy shit would that be a helluva series. They could match the DT is pretty much every area and have great 3 point shooters in Ray Ray and Reggie on top of it.

 

[Guidry79]

Here is my team to take on any team from any other era: Wilt, Russell, Oscar, West, Baylor. And think about it before you reply. These guys had size, strength, speed, athleticism, guile, shooting skill, defense.....

 

[tlance]

Here is my team to take on any team from any other era: Wilt, Russell, Oscar, West, Baylor. And think about it before you reply. These guys had size, strength, speed, athleticism, guile, shooting skill, defense.....

They didn't though.

Speed, athleticism and strength do not compare to players today. They would get curbstomped by both the Dream Team and a current group.

 

[trojanfan12]

They didn't though.

Speed, athleticism and strength do not compare to players today. They would get curbstomped by both the Dream Team and a current group.

Wilt, Oscar and Elgin, would have been able to compete athletically to a point and West could shoot with a lot of guys. I think they'd be competitive with either team for about 2.5 - 3 quarters, but either team would have too much for them to compete for 4 full quarters, let alone win a game.

 

[Guidry79]

They didn't though.

Speed, athleticism and strength do not compare to players today. They would get curbstomped by both the Dream Team and a current group.

Did you ever see those guys play? No one could possibly "curbstomp" them. Russell and West were all-world defenders, Wilt, Baylor, West and Oscar were scorers nonpareil. They all had the height, weight and athleticism of the modern players. I don't know what evidence you have.

 

[tlance]

Did you ever see those guys play? No one could possibly "curbstomp" them. Russell and West were all-world defenders, Wilt, Baylor, West and Oscar were scorers nonpareil. They all had the height, weight and athleticism of the modern players. I don't know what evidence you have.

I have seen game replays, yes.

Their competition was equivalent to D3 basketball today. Russell and West were all world defenders in their era.

No, they didn't have the weight and atheltism of modern players.

Russell was 6-10 215 LBs
West was 6-2 175
O was 6-5 205
Baylor was 6-5 225

By comparison, the players Russell O and Baylor match up with are:

LeBron: 6-8 250
Durant: 6-10 240
Davis: 6-10 250

Also, you think Wilt is defending well in space against ball screens? Almost no chance of that.

Yes, your group gets curbstomped. Especially if I play LBJ at point. West, as good as he was defensively isn't going to do well guarding LeBron, KD or Kawhi. Just isn't happening.

Lastly, your guys going 48 minutes? My group would have a very dynamic bench.

Would be an easy sweep.

 

[Guidry79]

I have seen game replays, yes.

Their competition was equivalent to D3 basketball today. Russell and West were all world defenders in their era.

No, they didn't have the weight and atheltism of modern players.

Russell was 6-10 215 LBs
West was 6-2 175
O was 6-5 205
Baylor was 6-5 225

By comparison, the players Russell O and Baylor match up with are:

LeBron: 6-8 250
Durant: 6-10 240
Davis: 6-10 250

Also, you think Wilt is defending well in space against ball screens? Almost no chance of that.

Yes, your group gets curbstomped. Especially if I play LBJ at point. West, as good as he was defensively isn't going to do well guarding LeBron, KD or Kawhi. Just isn't happening.

Lastly, your guys going 48 minutes? My group would have a very dynamic bench.

Would be an easy sweep.

You obviously know even less about D3 basketball than you do about basketball in the 1960s. First of all, you conveniently left out Wilt Chamberlain. Second, I will tell you my bench. Behind West and Robertson I'll put Walt Frazier and Earl Monroe. The back-up center will be Nate Thurmond. Or Elvin Hayes. The back-up forwards, I'll have to pick from Connie Hawkins, Rick Barry, Jerry Lucas and Dave DeBusschere. I doubt LeBron at PG could get the ball to the floor against West and Frazier, they'd eat him alive with steals. Chamberlain and Russell would dominate the boards and West and Robertson were amazing shooters. You clearly never saw Wilt, perhaps you are thinking of the 1972 version. Find film of him 10 years earlier,he would make mincemeat of Anthony Davis. Russell INVENTED defense. And on and on.

 

[tlance]

You obviously know even less about D3 basketball than you do about basketball in the 1960s. First of all, you conveniently left out Wilt Chamberlain. Second, I will tell you my bench. Behind West and Robertson I'll put Walt Frazier and Earl Monroe. The back-up center will be Nate Thurmond. Or Elvin Hayes. The back-up forwards, I'll have to pick from Connie Hawkins, Rick Barry, Jerry Lucas and Dave DeBusschere. I doubt LeBron at PG could get the ball to the floor against West and Frazier, they'd eat him alive with steals. Chamberlain and Russell would dominate the boards and West and Robertson were amazing shooters. You clearly never saw Wilt, perhaps you are thinking of the 1972 version. Find film of him 10 years earlier,he would make mincemeat of Anthony Davis. Russell INVENTED defense. And on and on.

I did not leave out Chamberlain.

You said your guys had modern weight/atleticism.

Literally none of them do except Wilt, and he never had to guard in space during his entire career.

 

[tlance]

You obviously know even less about D3 basketball than you do about basketball in the 1960s. First of all, you conveniently left out Wilt Chamberlain. Second, I will tell you my bench. Behind West and Robertson I'll put Walt Frazier and Earl Monroe. The back-up center will be Nate Thurmond. Or Elvin Hayes. The back-up forwards, I'll have to pick from Connie Hawkins, Rick Barry, Jerry Lucas and Dave DeBusschere. I doubt LeBron at PG could get the ball to the floor against West and Frazier, they'd eat him alive with steals. Chamberlain and Russell would dominate the boards and West and Robertson were amazing shooters. You clearly never saw Wilt, perhaps you are thinking of the 1972 version. Find film of him 10 years earlier,he would make mincemeat of Anthony Davis. Russell INVENTED defense. And on and on.

You are also taking players from an entirely decade, not specifcying a single year. These guys were not all at their peak at the same time. That matters.

 

[Guidry79]

You are also taking players from an entirely decade, not specifcying a single year. These guys were not all at their peak at the same time. That matters.

Neither was the Dream Team. Bird was finished, Magic had been out of the league. What is the standard here. We're picking a single year? Stop changing the goal posts, we are obviously doing a rather simplistic comparison of players across eras. We have no way to resolve this discussion, as interesting as it is. I think your points are reasonably good, but I wish your tone was more respectful and less dismissive. Comparing these legends to a D3 team is absurd, and I hope you know that. Let's focus on that. Do you think the current D3 champs, Amherst or Williams, or who it was last year, could beat the 1966-67 NBA All Stars?

 

[tlance]

Neither was the Dream Team. Bird was finished, Magic had been out of the league. What is the standard here. We're picking a single year? Stop changing the goal posts, we are obviously doing a rather simplistic comparison of players across eras. We have no way to resolve this discussion, as interesting as it is. I think your points are reasonably good, but I wish your tone was more respectful and less dismissive. Comparing these legends to a D3 team is absurd, and I hope you know that. Let's focus on that. Do you think the current D3 champs, Amherst or Williams, or who it was last year, could beat the 1966-67 NBA All Stars?

Nobody is changing the goal post.

The question was whether the Dream Team could beat a current version of the Dream Team.

I think not, because some of the biggest names were not in their primes. Like I said many pages ago, world completion in '92 was not close to what it is today and part of the Dream Team's allure was utter domination of far inferior completion.

No, I don't think Amherst could beat the '66-'67 all star team, but I absolutely do think they would beat a team of league average players from that era. I am not comparing the legends to a D3 team, I am comparing league average players to current D3. Maybe that was unclear, but I think quite accurate.

 

[tlance]

Neither was the Dream Team. Bird was finished, Magic had been out of the league. What is the standard here. We're picking a single year? Stop changing the goal posts, we are obviously doing a rather simplistic comparison of players across eras. We have no way to resolve this discussion, as interesting as it is. I think your points are reasonably good, but I wish your tone was more respectful and less dismissive. Comparing these legends to a D3 team is absurd, and I hope you know that. Let's focus on that. Do you think the current D3 champs, Amherst or Williams, or who it was last year, could beat the 1966-67 NBA All Stars?

Going back to the 60s is like bringing a knife to a gunfight.

Yes, the legends from that era could play in today's NBA, but to assume they would be as effective is a bit naive. The game has progressed a long way from then.

 

[Guidry79]

Nobody is changing the goal post.

The question was whether the Dream Team could beat a current version of the Dream Team.

I think not, because some of the biggest names were not in their primes. Like I said many pages ago, world completion in '92 was not close to what it is today and part of the Dream Team's allure was utter domination of far inferior completion.

No, I don't think Amherst could beat the '66-'67 all star team, but I absolutely do think they would beat a team of league average players from that era. I am not comparing the legends to a D3 team, I am comparing league average players to current D3. Maybe that was unclear, but I think quite accurate.

I played D3 basketball. At Williams in fact. I don't know how to impress this on you more clearly, without sounding mean, which I am not trying to be. But you truly do not understand either the calibre of play at Amherst and Williams -- today -- or that of the NBA in the mid-60's, or both. There were only 12 teams in the league. There were 60 starters. They were all very, very good players who would literally dominate a D3 team. I'm sorry -- I was THERE in the 1960s and watched those games. I played D3 in the 1970's. And I watch the best of D3 today. So I think my basis of comparison is more informed than yours. And, wth respect, you are really, really wrong.

 

[tlance]

I played D3 basketball. At Williams in fact. I don't know how to impress this on you more clearly, without sounding mean, which I am not trying to be. But you truly do not understand either the calibre of play at Amherst and Williams -- today -- or that of the NBA in the mid-60's, or both. There were only 12 teams in the league. There were 60 starters. They were all very, very good players who would literally dominate a D3 team. I'm sorry -- I was THERE in the 1960s and watched those games. I played D3 in the 1970's. And I watch the best of D3 today. So I think my basis of comparison is more informed than yours. And, wth respect, you are really, really wrong.

You are making assumptions about my level of knowledge.

I do understand well the caliber of D3 basketball today. I coach high school and have worked with many players who have matriculated to college programs at all levels, from D3 to high major D1.

Basketball has advanced by leaps and bounds over the last 50 years. While there may have only been 12 teams and 60 starters back then, pro basketball was not a destination like it is today. The money simply wasn't there.

Not only did players not train their entire lives as most do today, but there were many NBA caliber players who passed up pro basketball for opportunities in the business world back then. That would NEVER happen today.

Once you factor in the global reach of the player pool and human evolution where today's athletes are bigger, faster and stronger, the talent pool for the NBA is literally 50 times what it was in the 60s.

So, while there may be more spots today , it is much harder to make it to the NBA today than it was 50 years ago.

I apologize for my dismissive tone, but it is a pet peave of mine when people think old school is better. Human beings get better things over time. It is true in every professional industry in the world, basketball is no different.

 

[tlance]

And again, I am not suggesting that good D3 players today are better or as good as the legends. They aren't.

I am suggesting that the average players from that era (especially the early 60s when the greats were posting video game numbers) just weren't that good when compared to league average players today. The talent disparity makes the legends look better than they actually were (and they were great).