***** ALL-TIME NBA/ABA DRAFT ***** (Scoobus is Champion!) (1 Viewer)

[BobbyLayne]

Has anybody railed about how incredibly biased Simmons is?



No? OK, well, never mind then.

 

[trader jake]

Has anybody railed about how incredibly biased Simmons is?



No? OK, well, never mind then.

There's no doubt.  Combing through a lot of info one thing was very clear...Bill has Celtics just a tad* too high in his Pantheon.

* Definition of "tad" stretched a very, very, very long way.  He, rightfully, had Magic Johnson ranked over Larry Bird though.  So, there's that. 

 

[Jayrod]

• Footballguys All-Time Draft from 2001 (previous order of selections was useful, as was reading the breakdowns, strategies, and judging)
  
  https://forums.footballguys.com/topic/585968-great-nba-draft/
  

I actually finished 3rd last time, thought it was 4th.

Oddly enough, I have 2 players in common from that draft: Harry "the Horse" Gallatin and Brad Miller.  I had Gallatin at C in that draft, but he is my PF in this one.  Also strange, I won the 1990's category then and chose to punt on that era this go around.

 

[Jayrod]

He, rightfully, had Magic Johnson ranked over Larry Bird though.  So, there's that. 

I usually have Bird over Magic due to his peak being better (3 straight MVP's all during Magic's prime) and being a better defender (made 3 all-D teams), but based on a lot of metrics, including all of the advanced stats, Magic is a better player.  My spreadsheet had Magic 4 spots higher.

 

[trader jake]

I usually have Bird over Magic due to his peak being better (3 straight MVP's all during Magic's prime) and being a better defender (made 3 all-D teams), but based on a lot of metrics, including all of the advanced stats, Magic is a better player.  My spreadsheet had Magic 4 spots higher.

Magic & Brd are back-to-back on my list.  When push comes to shove that NCAA title is a really concrete tie-breaker.  I'll be interested to see how the 1980s ranking goes.  Easy to see those two players being a huge advantage there (rightfully so).  Since my basketball nerd is out there now...a few years ago I drove to French Lick to "see the sights".  One of them was the basketball court where Magic and Bird filmed their famous Converse commercial. LINK

 

[Jayrod]

Magic & Bird are back-to-back on my list.  When push comes to shove that NCAA title is a really concrete tie-breaker.  I'll be interested to see how the 1980s ranking goes.  Easy to see those two players being a huge advantage there (rightfully so).  Since my basketball nerd is out there now...a few years ago I drove to French Lick to "see the sights".  One of them was the basketball court where Magic and Bird filmed their famous Converse commercial. LINK

My personal subjective top 12 is:

1. Jordan - GOAT
   
2. LeBron - not a fan, but he's the next best
   
3. Kareem - was #2 until LeBron's Cavs title run
   
4. Wilt - most dominant individual ever
   
5. Larry - my aforementioned arguments over Magic
   
6. Magic - only defensive liability keeps him this low, best PG ever
   
7. Duncan - so good for so long in all phases of the game
   
8. Shaq - 2nd most dominant individual ever, his stubbornness and laziness kept him this low
   
9. Kobe - I hated him, but he earned this spot.  Most overrated on lists, IMO.
   
10. Hakeem - Only about 2 inches of height and MJ kept him this low
    
11. Russell - I love what he brought, but he played with a stacked deck in a weak era
    
12. Moses - Won 3 MVP's over names on the list above him.  Most underrated on lists, IMO.
    

Then there is a mass of guys like Garnett, Admiral, Oscar, Dr. J, KD, Pettit, West, Dirk & Karl Malone that I bounce all over the place on, but those top 12 stay pretty static.

 

[Doug B]

I wasn't going to worry about a 60s squad write-up ... but what the hey.

Doug B's 1960s Team

PG Lenny Wilkens: HOF, 9X All-Star, 2X Assist Leader, 16th all-time in assists

My 1960s floor general, taken to pair with Bellamy. Wilkens made nine All-Star squads, six in the Sixties and three in the early Seventies. Wilkens' basketball smarts were renowned, and he was asked to serve as player-coach of the Seattle Supersonics before his second season with the team (1969-70). Despite the extra workload, Wilkens continued to develop as a player, notching his career-high in assists-per-game (9.6) in his 12th pro season.

SG Kevin Loughery: Voted "Most Likely to Succeed" in high school 

Nice 1968-69 peak with the Baltimore Bullets, when he was a 22-3-5 guy. Averaged 19 ppg, 3.5 rpg, and 4.5 apg between 1965-66 and 1969-70.

SF Cliff Hagan: HOF, 6X All-Star, 2X All-NBA, 1X Champ

23-10-4 guy during his five-year peak with the St. Louis Hawks (1957-62). Hagan was an early 'instant offense' player, complete with a devastating hook shot reflective of the era. Hagan held the record for most points scored in one quarter before Wilt's 100-pt game (a 26-point 4th quarter vs the Knicks in 1958).

PF Willie Naulls: 4X All-Star, 3X Champ

4-time All-Star for the Knicks between 1957-58 and 1961-62. Three-year peak (1959-60 to 1961-62) of 23 ppg and 13 rpg. Career per36 of 19.7 ppg and 11.4 rpg. 81.2% career free-throw shooter to boot. 

C Walt Bellamy: HOF, 4X All-Star, 1962 ROY, 12th all-time in rebounds

By the 7th round, I needed to crack the seal on the 1960s players and I felt like the best way to start out is with a big body that can hold down the middle against the star 5s of this era. Bellamy bust onto the scene like a house of fire in 1961, scoring 31.6 ppg and pulling down 19 boards per game as a rookie. He averaged 25-16 over his first five NBA seasons. Bellamy stayed in the league into his mid-30s as a rebounding and defensive specialist, dropping his scoring average down into the teens while yielding shots to volume-scoring teammates like Dave Bing and Pete Maravich.

...

Other squads may have more hardware. Instead, my teams makes it up in synergy -- I have the perfect fit of all five guys. I got the cerebral distributor in Wilkens, the volume-scoring wing in Hagan, and the menacing physical presence inside with Bellamy. Naulls and Loughery do not need the ball in their hands to contribute, but both are more than capable of leading the team in scoring for a night if their teammates are held in check. I like having two successful coaches in the backcourt -- my squad can rely on Wilkens and Loughery consistently being in the right places and consistently making the right choices on both offense and defense. Though Naulls is a few inches shorter, he's just as bulky as Bellamy -- Walt will not have to shove around the huge 4s and 5s by his lonesome. Lastly, let me not gloss over Cliff Hagan: a player that was a good decade ahead of his time in his ability to take defenders off the dribble and score on the move.

 

[Ilov80s]

My personal subjective top 12 is:

1. Jordan - GOAT
   
2. LeBron - not a fan, but he's the next best
   
3. Kareem - was #2 until LeBron's Cavs title run
   
4. Wilt - most dominant individual ever
   
5. Larry - my aforementioned arguments over Magic
   
6. Magic - only defensive liability keeps him this low, best PG ever
   
7. Duncan - so good for so long in all phases of the game
   
8. Shaq - 2nd most dominant individual ever, his stubbornness and laziness kept him this low
   
9. Kobe - I hated him, but he earned this spot.  Most overrated on lists, IMO.
   
10. Hakeem - Only about 2 inches of height and MJ kept him this low
    
11. Russell - I love what he brought, but he played with a stacked deck in a weak era
    
12. Moses - Won 3 MVP's over names on the list above him.  Most underrated on lists, IMO.
    

Then there is a mass of guys like Garnett, Admiral, Oscar, Dr. J, KD, Pettit, West, Dirk & Karl Malone that I bounce all over the place on, but those top 12 stay pretty static.

Not to be too critical but it's odd how so many of these players played on stacked deck teams, including some of them actually playing on a team with another top 10 guy and yet only Russell gets a "stacked deck" comment. I think Russ is the reason the Celtics were stacked and I think you are really underselling how many all time greats like Wilt and Baylor and West that Russ competed against. 

 

[EYLive]

Not to be too critical but it's odd how so many of these players played on stacked deck teams, including some of them actually playing on a team with another top 10 guy and yet only Russell gets a "stacked deck" comment. I think Russ is the reason the Celtics were stacked and I think you are really underselling how good many all time greats Wilt competed against. 

I agree. It got me thinking that Kobe and Shaq "un-stacked" when they could have gone on to win a handful more chips together. But even then they were just a 1-2 punch compared to players in eras with way fewer teams beating up on the weaklings for so many years.

 

[Ilov80s]

I agree. It got me thinking that Kobe and Shaq "un-stacked" when they could have gone on to win a handful more chips together. But even then they were just a 1-2 punch compared to players in eras with way fewer teams beating up on the weaklings for so many years.

Yeah the Shaq-Kobe era wasn’t exactly peak NBA. There were a lot of teams but a lot of them were really bad. The East was offering up the 76ers and Nets as top challengers some years. It wasn’t good. 
 

In 68-69, the Celtics the beat 55 win Sixers, 54 win Knicks and 55 win Lakers to win the NBA title. Bill retires as coach and player after the season. In 69-70 the Celtics keep all their other top players and replace the 35 year old Sam Jones with a future HOFer JoJo White. The Celtics won 34 games that year. Shows how important Russ was. Also this was far from a weak era. There were less teams so even below 500 teams like the Celtics had HOFers on them. The league was full of legends like Jerry West, Elvin Hayes, Willis Reed, Elgin Baylor, Wes Unseld, Oscar Robertson, Wilt Chamberlain, Dave Bing, Earl Monroe, Jerry Lucas, etc.

 

[Zegras11]

This Walt Hazzard - Frank Selvy guard tandem is the bomb. 

 

 

[EYLive]

Yeah the Shaq-Kobe era wasn’t exactly peak NBA. There were a lot of teams but a lot of them were really bad. The East was offering up the 76ers and Nets as top challengers some years. It wasn’t good. 
 

In 68-69, the Celtics the beat 55 win Sixers, 54 win Knicks and 55 win Lakers to win the NBA title. Bill retires as coach and player after the season. In 69-70 the Celtics keep all their other top players and replace the 35 year old Sam Jones with a future HOFer JoJo White. The Celtics won 34 games that year. Shows how important Russ was. Also this was far from a weak era. There were less teams so even below 500 teams like the Celtics had HOFers on them. The league was full of legends like Jerry West, Elvin Hayes, Willis Reed, Elgin Baylor, Wes Unseld, Oscar Robertson, Wilt Chamberlain, Dave Bing, Earl Monroe, Jerry Lucas, etc.

That's got to be the nostalgia talking though. When you don't have tons of video of old-timers playing, no multiple camera angles or social media, it's so easy to put stars on a pedestal as "legendary". We just have to take eye witnesses at their word. You can say the league was full of legends, you can also say, 90% of the league didn't lift weights, eat right and a few gifted athletes beat up on grocery baggers. If the 2000's weren't "peak" NBA then the 60's was bottom of the barrel compared to the international selection of players that are in the league now. Thank goodness the old timer are judged against their peers and not to modern athletes, because few would be considered "legends".

 

[Ilov80s]

That's got to be the nostalgia talking though. When you don't have tons of video of old-timers playing, no multiple camera angles or social media, it's so easy to put stars on a pedestal as "legendary". We just have to take eye witnesses at their word. You can say the league was full of legends, you can also say, 90% of the league didn't lift weights, eat right and a few gifted athletes beat up on grocery baggers. If the 2000's weren't "peak" NBA then the 60's was bottom of the barrel compared to the international selection of players that are in the league now. Thank goodness the old timer are judged against their peers and not to modern athletes, because few would be considered "legends".

I think this idea the mid to late 60s NBA was a bunch of grocery baggers is nonsense. Sure the athletes now are faster, stronger, more knowledgeable and skilled. They got that way on the shoulders of those who came before them to develop those techniques, set new standards, developed new methods, etc. 

 

[Frostillicus]

I drafted by memory. 

 

[Instinctive]

I drafted with:

• My knowledge
  
• Basketball reference's career winshares list
  
• Basketball reference's winshares/48 list
  
• Basketball reference's MVP list
  
• the idea that I pretty much don't know #### about the 70s NBA so I would save them for last and draft the best ABA team I could at the time (which I think I did a solid job of)
  

 

[EYLive]

Sure the athletes now are faster, stronger, more knowledgeable and skilled.

They got that way on the shoulders of those who came before them to develop those techniques, set new standards, developed new methods, etc. 

These are completely different topics but I agree with both. That doesn't change the idea that 90% of 60's player wouldn't make an NBA team today, or that the top 10% are only "legends" because there is limited footage to prove or disprove they were truly all time great players. Or merely great compared to the gardeners they were destroying night in and night out.

 

[BobbyLayne]

60s and Prior Judging

By 3pm Pacific tomorrow (Wed 3/24), please PM me your rankings for this decade.

west coast bias

 

[trader jake]

west coast bias

 Based on the results of the NCAA tournament so far...seems appropriate.

 

[BobbyLayne]

That's got to be the nostalgia talking though. When you don't have tons of video of old-timers playing, no multiple camera angles or social media, it's so easy to put stars on a pedestal as "legendary". We just have to take eye witnesses at their word. You can say the league was full of legends, you can also say, 90% of the league didn't lift weights, eat right and a few gifted athletes beat up on grocery baggers. If the 2000's weren't "peak" NBA then the 60's was bottom of the barrel compared to the international selection of players that are in the league now. Thank goodness the old timer are judged against their peers and not to modern athletes, because few would be considered "legends".

I kind of look at it like - and this is nigh impossible - how good would Bob Petit have been if he grew up in a era of specialized sports, played in Nike camps, AAU ball, had access to the same training facilities, trainers, shooting coaches, et al. Or conversely, put Kobe in the league when the unspoken quota limit was 4 black men, no Asians, Euros or Latinos, good heavens no you cannot leave school unless it's a "hardship" case after your junior year (& no freshmen playing varsity), et al. It's impossible, right?

(ASIDE: Pettit played church league intramurals as a freshman and sophomore until he grew 5 inches the summer before his junior year, when he finally made his h.s. team. Three years later he was All-SEC and dominant.)

The only sensible solution is to compare each player versus their peers.

But your point remains, @EYLive - not just the NBA, but any of the North American team sports. Mickey Lolich pitched in MLB for about 15 years, used to ride snowmobiles with my dad in the winter (he had a cottage near us.) There weren't more than 20-30 players who made enough playing ball that they didn't have to take an offseason job. Same with the NFL, which before the AFL merger and big TV money, was a seasonal vocation. The NBA was essentially a rec league in the 40s and 50s. I mean, come on, I don't mean to offend anyone but there used to be a whole cadre of sub-six foot Jewish point guards from NYC in the pioneer years of the BAA. For real, bro?

 

[BobbyLayne]

For those who don’t recognize the name, Mickey Lolich pitched 3 complete game wins in 1968 (beating Bob Gibson in game 7.) He was listed at 210 pounds, which was probably light by a good 40 pounds - when he was younger. Dude had a huge gut, hard to believe he was a professional athlete.

Off season job: owned a donut shop.

 

[BobbyLayne]

cigarettes & the NBA

 

[Doug B]

cigarettes & the NBA

Different sport, but(t):

Obligatory Dave Parker in the Pirates dugout

Bonus: Keith Hernandez and his buddy Winston

 

[Ilov80s]

I kind of look at it like - and this is nigh impossible - how good would Bob Petit have been if he grew up in a era of specialized sports, played in Nike camps, AAU ball, had access to the same training facilities, trainers, shooting coaches, et al. Or conversely, put Kobe in the league when the unspoken quota limit was 4 black men, no Asians, Euros or Latinos, good heavens no you cannot leave school unless it's a "hardship" case after your junior year (& no freshmen playing varsity), et al. It's impossible, right?

(ASIDE: Pettit played church league intramurals as a freshman and sophomore until he grew 5 inches the summer before his junior year, when he finally made his h.s. team. Three years later he was All-SEC and dominant.)

The only sensible solution is to compare each player versus their peers.

But your point remains, @EYLive - not just the NBA, but any of the North American team sports. Mickey Lolich pitched in MLB for about 15 years, used to ride snowmobiles with my dad in the winter (he had a cottage near us.) There weren't more than 20-30 players who made enough playing ball that they didn't have to take an offseason job. Same with the NFL, which before the AFL merger and big TV money, was a seasonal vocation. The NBA was essentially a rec league in the 40s and 50s. I mean, come on, I don't mean to offend anyone but there used to be a whole cadre of sub-six foot Jewish point guards from NYC in the pioneer years of the BAA. For real, bro?

I just don’t think greatness is defined only by starts and athletic numbers. Jesse Owens couldn’t even qualify today for the Olympics with his 100 M time. Do we think 8th place in Rio 100M Trayvon Brommell is better than Owens because 70 years later he is faster and finishing in last place? 

 

[Ilov80s]

Different sport, but(t):

Obligatory Dave Parker in the Pirates dugout

Bonus: Keith Hernandez and his buddy Winston

To be fair, someone could still smoke and play MLB with incredible success. 

 

[BobbyLayne]

I just don’t think greatness is defined only by starts and athletic numbers. Jesse Owens couldn’t even qualify today for the Olympics with his 100 M time. Do we think 8th place in Rio 100M Trayvon Brommell is better than Owens because 70 years later he is faster and finishing in last place? 

I think what Owens did at the 1935 Big Ten Championships - 4 WR in 45 minutes - is the greatest achievement in the history of sport.

ETA: [/timmaylevelhyperbole]

 

[wikkidpissah]

there are benefits to smoking in sports. i wouldnta learned the best outlet pass in my league if i hadnt smoked since i was 10

 

[Gally]

To be fair, someone could still smoke and play MLB with incredible success. 

To be fair, I am sure it is still happening

 

[Gally]

I kind of look at it like - and this is nigh impossible - how good would Bob Petit have been if he grew up in a era of specialized sports, played in Nike camps, AAU ball, had access to the same training facilities, trainers, shooting coaches, et al. Or conversely, put Kobe in the league when the unspoken quota limit was 4 black men, no Asians, Euros or Latinos, good heavens no you cannot leave school unless it's a "hardship" case after your junior year (& no freshmen playing varsity), et al. It's impossible, right?

(ASIDE: Pettit played church league intramurals as a freshman and sophomore until he grew 5 inches the summer before his junior year, when he finally made his h.s. team. Three years later he was All-SEC and dominant.)

The only sensible solution is to compare each player versus their peers.

But your point remains, @EYLive - not just the NBA, but any of the North American team sports. Mickey Lolich pitched in MLB for about 15 years, used to ride snowmobiles with my dad in the winter (he had a cottage near us.) There weren't more than 20-30 players who made enough playing ball that they didn't have to take an offseason job. Same with the NFL, which before the AFL merger and big TV money, was a seasonal vocation. The NBA was essentially a rec league in the 40s and 50s. I mean, come on, I don't mean to offend anyone but there used to be a whole cadre of sub-six foot Jewish point guards from NYC in the pioneer years of the BAA. For real, bro?

This really only comes into play for this draft when the Best in Show and Pantheon teams are being discussed.  At this point with the decade reviews it is somewhat and apple to apple comparison.  The less than 69's "decade" is probably the most difficult because there are some changes that really affected the game play but besides that every other decade seems to be a little more straight forward.  

 

[Ilov80s]

To be fair, I am sure it is still happening

For sure just can’t do it in the dugout lol

 

[Yo Mama]

west coast bias

Totally - it’s about time!  I’ve had to set my alarm to wake up early for drafts in the past so I didn’t time out. 
 

Seriously though, I set the 3pm pacific deadline so I could release the results (with some write up) tonight. If judges need more time, I can take rankings until end of day today and release results tomorrow.

 

[timschochet]

Hey guys I’ve been derelict. Sorry about that. Is there something I should be posting further in this thread? What judging needs doing? 

 

[Ilov80s]

I think what Owens did at the 1935 Big Ten Championships - 4 WR in 45 minutes - is the greatest achievement in the history of sport.

ETA: [/timmaylevelhyperbole]

Meh there’s probably dozens of track athletes who could break all of those records in 30 minutes right now. Owens sucks and is lucky he was racing against soda jerks and NAZIs.  Caesar wasn’t a good general either. His legions would get obliterated in about 2 mins by the armed forces of any country on Earth today. 

 

[BobbyLayne]

Hey guys I’ve been derelict. Sorry about that. Is there something I should be posting further in this thread? What judging needs doing? 

Submit your 60s rankings by 3pm PDT.

 

[BobbyLayne]

Meh there’s probably dozens of track athletes who could break all of those records in 30 minutes right now. Owens sucks and is lucky he was racing against soda jerks and NAZIs.  Caesar wasn’t a good general either. His legions would get obliterated in about 2 mins by the armed forces of any country on Earth today. 

I think it’s time we address lies about Hitler...

 

[Yo Mama]

Question for everyone on timing for the 70s. 
 

I plan on rolling out the 60s results tonight (or tomorrow if judges need more time today). 
 

Two options for the 70s timing:

A - Do 70s writeups tomorrow, judging Friday, and I release results over the weekend

B - We give some time to react and discuss the 60s results tomorrow, 70s writeups Friday, judging due Monday mid-day, I release results Monday afternoon/evening

Not sure if A is rushing things too much. 

 

[timschochet]

Submit your 60s rankings by 3pm PDT.

Thanks. Do I post them here? 

 

[BobbyLayne]

Thanks. Do I post them here? 

PM your mom

 

[Yo Mama]

Thanks. Do I post them here? 

Send me a PM - I’m consolidating all the rankings. 

 

[timschochet]

Send me a PM - I’m consolidating all the rankings. 

OK thx

 

[Gally]

Question for everyone on timing for the 70s. 
 

I plan on rolling out the 60s results tonight (or tomorrow if judges need more time today). 
 

Two options for the 70s timing:

A - Do 70s writeups tomorrow, judging Friday, and I release results over the weekend

B - We give some time to react and discuss the 60s results tomorrow, 70s writeups Friday, judging due Monday mid-day, I release results Monday afternoon/evening

Not sure if A is rushing things too much. 

I like B as the option.  There really is no hurry and the discussions are the best part.  Plus if you do it to fast it will cut down on the complaining (ok maybe not).....hahaha

 

[Kev4029]

Question for everyone on timing for the 70s. 
 

I plan on rolling out the 60s results tonight (or tomorrow if judges need more time today). 
 

Two options for the 70s timing:

A - Do 70s writeups tomorrow, judging Friday, and I release results over the weekend

B - We give some time to react and discuss the 60s results tomorrow, 70s writeups Friday, judging due Monday mid-day, I release results Monday afternoon/evening

Not sure if A is rushing things too much. 

I vote B. 

 

[wikkidpissah]

yeah, where we goin', know'm'sayin?

 

[Ilov80s]

I like B as the option.  There really is no hurry and the discussions are the best part.  Plus if you do it to fast it will cut down on the complaining (ok maybe not).....hahaha

Agree

 

[Yo Mama]

OK thx

And you dont have to do rankings for all decades if you don’t want too. I asked for drafters to judge at least 3 of the decades so we have good participation. We’re doing pretty good for the 60s so far. 

 

[Ilov80s]

And you dont have to do rankings for all decades if you don’t want too. I asked for drafters to judge at least 3 of the decades so we have good participation. We’re doing pretty good for the 60s so far. 

That’s good to hear. I felt like it would be tactless for me to judge the 60s. Like a Margot Robbie voting for herself in a beauty pageant. 

 

[Yo Mama]

Based on feedback from the peanut gallery:

****New Official Timing****
 

- 60s rankings due end of day today

- 60s results released tomorrow, arguing and complaining ensues

- 70s writeups due end of day Friday 3/26

- 70s rankings due Monday 3/29 by noon

- 70s results released Monday afternoon/evening

(and honestly we could give more time for rankings and I release 70s results Tuesday, but I don’t want things to stall out too much)

 

[Yo Mama]

That’s good to hear. I felt like it would be tactless for me to judge the 60s. Like a Margot Robbie voting for herself in a beauty pageant. 

Yeah I’m trusting people to be honest when ranking their own teams (not that a high ranking for your 60s team is unwarranted)

 

[Gally]

Yeah I’m trusting people to be honest when ranking their own teams (not that a high ranking for your 60s team is unwarranted)

Oh come on.....it belongs below @higgins entry.  I mean his entry is completely left up to the imagination and could be filled with aliens or something.

 

[timschochet]

OK sent. 

 

[scoobus]

I won’t be judging for a while, but I’m ready to complain.