Winner of this matchup will play the winner of Celtic_Fan/DynastYWarrioR6 Agoo101284 PG: Gary Payton / Chauncey Billups / Fat Lever SG: Adrian Dantley / Paul Westphal SF: Elgin Baylor / Larry Nance / Marques Johnson PF: Dennis Rodman / Ben Wallace C: Wilt Chamberlain / Spencer Haywood Huevonkiller PG: Chris Paul / Deron Williams SG: Vince Carter / Gilbert Arenas SF: Paul Pierce / Carmelo Anthony / Shane Battier PF: Kevin McHale / Amare Stoudemire / Kenyon Martin C: David Robinson / Dwight Howard
I think I have a clear and significant advantage at all positions except PF. At PG, Chris Paul wants to be Gary Payton when he grows up. At SG, Dantley is a better scorer than Carter, though I think both would have their way with the other offensively. Pierce can't handle Baylor. Wilt, as always, it an unstoppable scorer down low and Robinson won't be able to keep up with him bucket for bucket. Off the bench, I think I am better at both guard spots and small forward, and I don't think the gap at C/PF is enough to make up for Huevon's other losses in the starting five and bench. I'm going to the finals.
Payton's and Paul's game are different, so that was a weird analogy to me. How is Dantley a better scorer? I'd say they are about even factoring in pace, basketball-reference would agree (Carter = 25 PER, Dantley is at 24.6 at his peak). Carter can actually lock down people once in a while too unlike Adrian, and David Robinson is underrated as hell being third all-time in PER. Wilt wouldn't get the chance to shoot 35-40 times a game at this NBA pace, or play as many minutes with the rule changes. In fact, David Robinson was noticeably more efficient throughout his career, Wilt sucks at shooting FTs and his FG% can't fully make up for it. D-Rob has a 5 TS% edge on him career-wise. Paul is also a better distributor than Payton ever was, his 28+ PER last season ranks him among the best ever. Payton was never as productive offensively. And J_Ray was indeed right last round, Baylor is good but he also takes way too many shots, his True Shooting percentage is below the average of 53% (Bayler is at 49%). You made solid but not significantly better choices in Payton/Wilt, then you went for mystique and underrated the modern stars of today. My depth is amazing as well.
I'm going with huevonkiller on this one, I don't think some of those past legends would be as good in this NBA, especially Wilt since now there are players his size and stronger than him.
umm yeah, David Robinson shot better at the FT line and thus had a better cumlative FT%.. he was SOOO much more efficient than Wilt... good gravy you actually believe such crap. People don't know or forget, Wilt was a world class athelte. This guy could have qualified for the Oylmpics.. in High Jumping. He played pro beach Volleyball after his days in the NBA. He could have played college football too. Sure his number would drop in today's game.. not because 'there's guys his own size' crap, but because of the aggressive double teams he would have saw by bigger and quicker SF's. It would have slowed him down, but if you think for a second he wouldn't clearly be the best Center in the game.. well that's just sad. Dude is the only center to lead the league in assists.. that says something. And if the pace was so much faster back then, His stamina WOULD allow him to play a lot of minutes today. Let's not forget he AVERAGED 48.5 mins/game for a season.. that's right, half a minute more than the average NBA game. HOW? He played all but 3 minutes the entire year, including overtime games.. that's freakish cardio my man. Wilt would make David 'sharmin' Robinson his bitch, plain and simple. And don't discount Elgin Baylor so easily either... go here http://sportstwo.com/forums/showthread.php?t=125458 educate yourselves. good gawd, such a pathetic showing to vote for the current era guys because you 'know' them. Half these guys have barely started their careers!! It's like saying Roy Tarpley is an all time great because he had a few good years before he did too much coke...
Lol what? I'm reporting the news here, it isn't an opinion when I talk about efficiency. Frankly you didn't even know what True Shooting percentage was a few weeks ago. Right... I addressed all of this. He also shot 35-40 times a game which is completely unrealistic and the answer is staring you right in the face; pace. It's just too inconvenient for you to admit. Baylor was a great player who still took too many shots. People should educate themselves on the entire issue not just anecdotal accounts.
His frontline is weaker than mine, Paul's 28.0 PER at the PG position is almost unprecedented as well. I feel the SG/SF comparison is a wash really.
maybe depthwise, but his starters on the frontline are definitely better than yours. Paul is amazing for sure, but at this point I think Payton in his prime could wrap him up like a glove and make him work harder than he has had to in the past.
Well first why are we ignoring depth though? Even so, Agoo even admitted he didn't have the edge at PF. McHale is amazing in the post and an excellent defender. Payton didn't really have an affect on players like John Stockton who Paul actually outperforms on a single-season level. That wouldn't be a given to me that he would wrap him up like a glove. Payton never ran a team as well as Paul either, so I think my frontline and depth gives me the edge. My Swingmen also play better defense and were already comparable offensively.
Rodman was a better defender than McHale, and Rodman is the best rebounding big man of all time. He would make McHale eat shit all game and take him out of the game mentally. I'm basing Payton off watching both of them. I think Payton would match up quite well against Paul. But that's my opinion. You also do not have a player on Wilt's level. I'm a huge DRob fan, but Wilt would have sunk the admiral.
And what would Rodman do on offense? I guess McHale would make him eat shit then as well, because Rodman wasn't anything special on that end. Mac is simply more complete. Oh actually I do, D-Rob is quite easily on his level, as his 26 career PER would suggest. What he didn't have the luxury of was taking that many shots per game in a funny era. No one can average that many rebounds without a ferocious pace either, it is quite evident.
I beg to differ, and so do lots of basketball analysts that get paid to study basketball all day long. http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?page=dailydime-GreatestCenters And for shits and giggles http://bleacherreport.com/articles/65759-top-10-nba-centers-of-all-time And I love these PER ratings, it's like John Hollinger all over again. Carl Landry fro ROY!
He'd never average that many shots/rebounds/etc. a game now. When you break it down, his stats are quite inflated and it doesn't matter if you use PER, XYZ, etc., he's not as dominant as many think. Per is simply one point I brought up.
I never said Wilts stats aren't inflated. I simply said he is much better than DRob. Which is a true statement.
Obviously the question of how inflated Wilt is, is something that is brought up frequently. You feel he would translate well still into this modern NBA game, I simply disagree. Wilt and Shaq are always compared to each other and DRob is quite comparable to Shaq in my opinion.
agoo should be winning this by a landslide. In fact, he was when I voted, but wow have things changed since then.
