Started By
Message

re: Post your Unpopular Sports Opinions

Posted on 6/25/16 at 5:05 am to
Posted by ptra
Member since Nov 2006
1430 posts
Posted on 6/25/16 at 5:05 am to
quote:

Anyone (except Wilt) that played most of career pre-70s would not be that good modern day in any sport and none of them should ever be considered tGOAT 



I never understand how this comment can be made. Take Elgin Baylor for example. Do you just assume he would be the exact same player he was in the 60's-70's? You do not have a clue how good he could be if he had the chance to play basketball year round as high school kids do now. He goes to college and gets world class training and nutrition, then continues that in the pros.
Baylor was a 6'5" guard that averaged 27 ppg in the 60's and he would do it in this era as well. So would Russell, Jerry West, Oscar Robertson etc.
Posted by LanierSpots
Sarasota, Florida
Member since Sep 2010
62059 posts
Posted on 6/25/16 at 5:32 am to
Tiger Woods is the best golfer ever. EVER. And though I love Jack, the comparisons are hilarious. Tiger played at a level against a higher competition. And dominated


His body game up on him but nobody has ever been better




My only one.

Posted by Teddy Ruxpin
Member since Oct 2006
39640 posts
Posted on 6/27/16 at 1:58 am to
quote:



I never understand how this comment can be made. Take Elgin Baylor for example. Do you just assume he would be the exact same player he was in the 60's-70's? You do not have a clue how good he could be if he had the chance to play basketball year round as high school kids do now. He goes to college and gets world class training and nutrition, then continues that in the pros.
Baylor was a 6'5" guard that averaged 27 ppg in the 60's and he would do it in this era as well. So would Russell, Jerry West, Oscar Robertson etc


I think people look at this wrong for a different reason. The problem isn't that Baylor wouldn't survive with his 60s nutrition/coaching in the modern era, nor would receiving modern amenities necessarily help him.

The reason is that back then when an athletic unicorn showed up, there were maybe a few others maybe. Now, the level of play is higher across the board.
I think it compares favorably to women's basketball today, where there isn't enough talent to go around (think UCONN).

So I think the old guy's may have made it, but they aren't putting up those absurd stat lines. And since match ups/styles matter, some would completely disappear.
This post was edited on 6/27/16 at 2:00 am
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram