Today, I found out just how in little esteem the NBA's history is held by Robert Horry. Just a short time after claiming his seventh world title (the first non-Celtic to do so), he commented that his current Spurs team could beat the 1980s Lakers and Celtics, saying that the players today are much better than the players on those teams and making statements that those players played only to the right side of the court. Where does he get off saying that ####?
Obviously, Horry must be referencing the fact that players today are physically more gifted than the 80s Lakers and Celtics. Duh! That's to be expected as time and technology gets better. Of course the players are physical freaks. They are undoubtfully more able to make SportsCenter highlights than the other teams. But does that mean the teams are better? Hell no! In fact, I'd say the Lakers or Celtics could destroy the Spurs! Here's why, in a nutschell: The Spurs' era is a different era than the 1980s were.
In the '80s, teams scored a lot more than the Spurs have scored in their four title reigns. The Showtime Lakers defined the run-and-gun style that pleased the crowd and was highly successful, and even though the Celtics didn't always run it up, they scored plenty and were successful, as well. Does anybody recall this year's Final? It was dreadful! No real action, just two slow, walk it up and score just enough to win teams slugging it out in a forgettable final. No doubt that the Spurs are the best team of this generation, but even if you compare these teams physically, it's hard to justify Horry's statement. Here's a look at the lineups for each team (the '88 Lakers, the '86 Celtics and today's Spurs):
1988 Lakers 1986 Celtics 2007 Spurs
C Kareem Abdul-Jabbar C Robert Parish C Fabricio Oberto
PF A.C. Green PF Kevin McHale PF Tim Duncan
SF James Worthy SF Larry Bird SF Bruce Bowen
SG Byron Scott SG Danny Ainge SG Michael Finley
PG Magic Johnson PG Dennis Johnson PG Tony Parker
Bench
PG-SG Michael Cooper C-PF Bill Walton SG-SF Manu Ginobili
C Mychal Thompson SF-SG Scott Wedman SG Brent Barry
PF Kurt Rambis PG Jerry Sichting PG Jacque Vaughn
(for the sake of argument, we'll stop there)
Let's compare the positions, shall we? Center is not even close: Kareem is the best stats C of all time, and Parish gets lost in the shuffle because of his running mates. Oberto doesn't even deserve to be listed near them. Magic and Dennis would give Parker fits and, unlike Larry Hughes, would have found a way to keep him out of the paint. Bird and Worthy would have dominated Bowen. Get the picture? Only Duncan over McHale and Green is a worthy argument.
I know that Horry is simply expressing his opinion, and you must have confidence in your team, but his Spurs would struggle against the '80s Lakers and Celtics. Duncan can only do so much when you consider that seven of the players on those two teams above (Magic, Kareem, Worthy, Parish, Bird, McHale and Walton) were members of the 50 Greatest Players club, and only Duncan would qualify if there was an addition of ten to the list today. So Bob, show the past some respect! I sure would rather watch a historic game than one of these finals games today!
He said the "teams" from the 70s and 80s! While I think those teams probably would win, when you put it all in perspective I can see his reasoning. For one back in those times, the game wasn't as physical as it is now, pretty much everyone's emphasis was on offense. It wasn't until the "Bad Boys" came with a defensive approach did that mindset change. Now pretty much every team focuses on defense except Phoenix and Golden State.
In all honesty, I was just saying that the fact that Horry's contention that this era's players are better doesn't belie the fact that the players from the past were great for that time and for all time. And I do watch the games from the past. I'd rather watch an exciting, high scoring game than the comatose games from these recent finals.
i agree!!! and also lets throw in the fact, that they wernt so, lets say money hungery like the players are today!! why cant players play again for the love of the game, and for the fans who, work at , some jobs they hate, and then go see an NBA game, and then read about all the whining the players say about the contracts, and how little thye are getting payed, cut me some slack players!!!!
Downs...I agree, a fast game is a fun game.
Dpyrst...I lived and grew up in that era so I know what kind of games they were.
Kelly...Free agency change the way the NBA works. Players became a specialist and marketed their talents to the highest bidder. Blame the franchises.
yea and free agency in my view killed all sports!!! now a player goes to lets say, seattle ya rah rah im a seahawk, or mariner or whatever, fans get to know this player, bye his jersey, then sometime later hes in new york and as sonny and chers song goes and the beat goes on
observation ok, joey harrington ok we have all around the oregon campus, what we call the duck shops, selling jerseys of ex university of oregon ducks now in the NBA, or the NFL, gosh they cant keep up with where he will be next, first thye sold his detroit jersey, then miami, now atlanta, question is what jersey will he be in next??? also luke jackson ex oregon basketball player first it was cleveland, then boston, now toronto raptors my advice to them on this is make a jersey with a velcro lining to add a name on the jersey??? (save money)
I agree. The players of today couldn't run with those guys. People think that the NBA is more physical today than yesterday. I disagree. I just think that the old NBA looked soft because you had fewer players going to the basket. They didn't have to. They could do something that the average NBA player today has a very hard time doing. They could hit a jump-shot.
Not saying that players today can't shoot, A lot of them can, but in the 70's and 80's it seems as if EVERYONE could shoot. The average player in this era could shoot so well because their contracts were often determinted by field goal percentage, something that has little if any effect on a contract today. Also, up until 1979 players put up these type scores (100+) without the aid of the 3pt line. In this NBA players hardly ever break the century mark even with the line.
So with San Antonio basically relying on the defense of Bruce Bowen the speed of Tony Parker, how could they beat let's say, the Celtics? They couldn't. I say Celtics because they obviously would have no shot against the Lakers, but let's have a look.
Johnson / Parker: Edge = Johnson
While Parker may have the edge in speed, Dennis Johnson was more of a Director of Operations than Parker could ever be. I think Parker wouldn't be able to get into the paint because under the old rules in the "Soft NBA" hand checking WAS ALLOWED. WOW. This is a rule that was taken out so that guys like Parker could survive in the NBA because a in the Old NBA Parker wouldn't be able to cut it with LEGAL body contact nullifying his speed.
Ainge / Finley: Edge: Ainge
Ainge is just simply a better shooter. Leave him open, give him a crack of daylight and you can just about count it or cancel Christmas because it's good. Maybe Finley in his "hay day" could compete, but then again he was never the type of threat from the perimeter that Ainge was. Even Danny Ainge with the Suns was a better shooter than Finley was with the Mavs.
Bird / Bowen: Edge - Bird
PLEASE, I won't even dignify this one with an answer.
McKhale / Duncan: Edge - PUSH
Yeah that's right I'm saying push. Since in a game like this Duncan would really be the only threat, I'm pretty sure that Kevin could hold his own. I mean look at it this way. Duncan was getting killed by Boozer in that Jazz series. Do you really think that he could stop the "Man of 1000 Post Moves." Hardly. However I do think that he could do enough to edge him in pure performance, but as far as how much of an effect his stats would have on the game. I see it as a push.
Chief / Oberto: Edge - Chief
Once again, no need to dignify this one
the hand checking rule was put in because of the new york knicks. hand checking is a foul. because i am a farely strong guy if i keep hand checking a smaller guy he will never be able to get around me. what the knicks were doing wasnt hand checking it was pushing, which is what hand checking is a nice word for pushing
the teams were better in the old days not the players
back in the old days there were no:
nets
bobcats
heat
magic
pacers
timberwolves
nuggets
spurs
mavericks
hornets
you take those players and split them up among the remaining teams you would have some pretty good teams
I can definitely go for that. And you're right. Hand checking really was a nice word for pushing. But it was allowed for years up until a few years ago in that Miami and NY series is where they just finally said enough. Nonetheless, I don't think Parker would be very effective in a league like that.
And you're right on another account. Not only were the teams better then, but the players played as teams better. Kinda like the NE Patriots. Sum of the parts was often much greater than the whole. Teams had players that complimented each other that made each player more dangerous. So yeah I can go for that also. I guess what we're both saying is, the talent pool is so diluted at every position these days that any team that has two or three descent players mixed with one Star is a contender. It's a shame too. I enjoyed the old league where even the Bucks could make it deep into the playoffs. Most kids don't remember the Bucks being in the playoffs before Ray Allen and Big Dog. Shame isn't it?
i am from milwaukee. i remember when the bucks were fighting for the title every year, but you had the celtics and sixers to get past. they went through a drought before they got big dog and sugar ray seems like they are in another drought now
I am David Downs, and I'm a sports nut who loves basketball and football and am open to good discussion about any sports subject. I am a Detroit sports fan, but I not a homer. Expect frequent vents on subjects that irritate me, and also expect the utmost respect for anybody's opinion, even if they disagree with me. Because, after all, that's what these blogs are all about, aren't they?
