One thing that's missing in these discussions of old-timers -- and can't really be assessed -- is the adjustments a guy like Rick Barry might have made, or tried to make, to play in today's game.

Clearly, some of the older players would have simply been out-athleted; but there are some who might have found ways to adjust and improve.

And there's no way to know which player falls into which category ... but I think it's fair to say some would still be stars, and some would disappear.

Who would be stars today?

It's not about adjustments, it's about talent, skills and athletic ability. Look at the key skill traits of basketball. Look at the absurd shots old timers were able to put up -- shots that would not be feasible today. What would Rick Barry do today that he's capable of doing?

The scrubs of today could D-up these old timers. These old timers could not stop the scrubs of today.

Old School Players That Would Thrive in Today's NBA

https://medium.com/@drewment2/old-school-players-that-would-thrive-in-todays-nba-9f81be6ada92

https://www.google.com/amp/s/syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/1770703-former-nba-stars-who-could-thrive-in-todays-game.amp.html

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thesportster.com/basketball/nba-legends-in-todays-game/amp/

Larry Bird is Kyle Korver lite. Imagine how easy it would be to attack Bird on D for an easy two points or trip to foul line. Bird is so slow he would be nothing more than a spot up shooter.

GBear4Life said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

In today's game he'd be carrying jock straps, perhaps in the G-League. Kwame Brown would own him.

---

Kwame who? He was a good high school player. I think he averaged 10 points in the NBA one season. And last I looked, he was not in today's game any more.

As Dr. J said in an interview a couple years ago at the PAC12 Tournament, when asked how the players of today would compare to the players of his day, "Oh, they're athletic, but they do a lot of things now that we were not allowed to do."

---

Irving is actually one of the few whose talent and skill could translate to being serviceable in today's era. But there aren't many. And I'm not being facetious.

---

I have news for you. Irving IS a player in today's era, as he is still playing in the NBA, last I heard.

I'd be pedantic too if I made the egregious claims you have here

GBear4Life said:

---

I'd be pedantic too if I made the egregious claims you have here

---

I invite you to read SFCityBear's post game analysis during the hoop season. He is one of the most knowledgeable commenters on this board.

bearister said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

I'd be pedantic too if I made the egregious claims you have here

---

I invite you to read SFCityBear's post game analysis during the hoop season. He is one of the most knowledgeable commenters on this board.

---

I'm specifically discrediting his perspective on old timers in today's era.

bearister said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

I'd be pedantic too if I made the egregious claims you have here

---

I invite you to read SFCityBear's post game analysis during the hoop season. He is one of the most knowledgeable commenters on this board.

---

ha ha ha ha!!!

....Remember the time SFCity announced he was leaving BI because it was taking up too much of his time and he had other priorities he needed to tend to? That was like 3 years ago.
Honestly, that post hurt my heart. And I begged him back.

I'm glad he's back for good so we can get such insights!

BearSD said:

---

BEARUPINDC said:

---

BearSD said:

---

bearister said:

---

Rick had the musculature of the modern player. He had good handles, could shoot the three and rarely missed a free throw. He would sniff the court in the modern era, and even more so because he would be allowed to palm the ball, take 5 steps, and have less physical defense to go against.

---

Yeah, I don't see how anyone could say that Barry couldn't play today. Any NBA team today would love to have Barry in his prime.

There are other players from past eras who wouldn't fit as well today, especially slow moving big men who scored only out of the low post and played physical defense back when the refs followed a "no autopsy no foul" rule for contact in the paint.

---

There are other players from past eras who wouldn't fit as well today, especially slow moving big men who scored only out of the low post and played physical defense back when the refs followed a "no autopsy no foul" rule for contact in the paint.

Wes Unseld wants you to say that to his face.

---

If he played in today's game, Unseld would have plenty of time for that after fouling out in the second quarter.

Swen Nater would foul out in the first quarter.

---

I'm drafting Mark Eaton next!

bearister said:

---

---

Neither of those offensive fouls would be called today.
Count the layup, give an And1 and he's got 70 and still playing at the end of the game.

bearister said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

I'd be pedantic too if I made the egregious claims you have here

---

I invite you to read SFCityBear's post game analysis during the hoop season. He is one of the most knowledgeable commenters on this board.

---

He's really not. Only if you rate people per word.

BearNakedLadies said:

---

bearister said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

I'd be pedantic too if I made the egregious claims you have here

---

I invite you to read SFCityBear's post game analysis during the hoop season. He is one of the most knowledgeable commenters on this board.

---

He's really not. Only if you rate people per word.

---

What posters do you rank ahead of him as a Bears' game analyst?

bearister said:

---

BearNakedLadies said:

---

bearister said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

I'd be pedantic too if I made the egregious claims you have here

---

I invite you to read SFCityBear's post game analysis during the hoop season. He is one of the most knowledgeable commenters on this board.

---

He's really not. Only if you rate people per word.

---

What posters do you rank ahead of him as a Bears' game analyst?

---

Well, thanks for the support. You are my biggest fan, and sometimes my only fan. I'd rank former Cal analysts Mike Montgomery, Brad Duggan, Ben Braun, and Bill Walton (when he is focused on the game) as light years ahead of me. But if I want game analysis on the Bear Insider, I'd read Hoopdreams and BeachedBear, primarily, but there are so many knowledgeable fans here, who all know the game. The ones I like to read, with apologies to all the ones I leave out (If you haven't posted lately, I may not have you fresh in my mind) are are #1 bearister (of course), southbender, UrsaMajor, Kelly09, and in no particular order, helltopay1, Yogi Bear, Joe Amos Yaks, , calumnus, OdontoBear66, roqmoq, 59Bear, KoreAmBear, Stu, Big C, MSaviolives, bluesaxe, blueblood, sycasey, socal, the guy in Reno, the guy in Puget Sound, and one of the NYC Bears, and of course, Eric, Greg, and Moraga who all know the game but don't post often enough. There are many more. You guys have all contributed to my basketball education.

My ignore list runs to 17 posters right now, and several of them are very knowledgeable fans, like CivilBear, Oaktown, and Tsubamoto. Tsuba, I miss you and hope you will start posting again. Don't give up on our Bears. We will rise again!

Go Bears!

BearSD said:

---

BEARUPINDC said:

---

BearSD said:

---

bearister said:

---

Rick had the musculature of the modern player. He had good handles, could shoot the three and rarely missed a free throw. He would sniff the court in the modern era, and even more so because he would be allowed to palm the ball, take 5 steps, and have less physical defense to go against.

---

Yeah, I don't see how anyone could say that Barry couldn't play today. Any NBA team today would love to have Barry in his prime.

There are other players from past eras who wouldn't fit as well today, especially slow moving big men who scored only out of the low post and played physical defense back when the refs followed a "no autopsy no foul" rule for contact in the paint.

---

There are other players from past eras who wouldn't fit as well today, especially slow moving big men who scored only out of the low post and played physical defense back when the refs followed a "no autopsy no foul" rule for contact in the paint.

Wes Unseld wants you to say that to his face.

---

If he played in today's game, Unseld would have plenty of time for that after fouling out in the second quarter.

Swen Nater would foul out in the first quarter.

---

Maybe so, but if any outstanding offensive player of today played back an earlier era, say pre-1980, he would foul out of games just as early, mostly on charging calls. The game is different now, and the players all learn the skills to play the game by the rules of the game in that era.

GBear4Life said:

---

Did you guys actually watch these guys play and the guys they play against?

Do you realize the average 8th grade starting PG has better ball handling skills than the perimeter greats of yesteryear? Off-hand dribbling was virtually non existent.

Rick Barry wouldn't be able to get off a shot. Despite the rule changes, defenders are MUCH better today. Barry would get D'd up all day. He wouldn't be able to dribble around anybody with his p**s poor ball handling and slow feet. His game is trash in today's league.

Finals teams of the 60s/70s, look at these scrubs lol. HS-level athletic ability and skills in today's era, and zero defense.

---

As to the 8th grade point guard, you can't make that comparison. It is apples and oranges. The rules today are different. The 8th grade kid is allowed to carry the ball, and he does that with nearly every bounce of the ball. They don't call it "handles" for nothing. Did you ever try to dribble without palming the ball. It is damn hard, especially if you have small hands. Your comment that "off-hand dribbling was virtually non-existent" only shows that you are not very observant at all. I was only a scrub as you call them, but I spent many hundreds of hours to learn to dribble with my off-hand, not to mention countless hours of drills under coaches.

With so many rules to hamper the defenders today, there really aren't many good man defenders around in the NBA. They don't even want a player like Jorge, who is a shut down defender, but would be ineffective in the NBA due to the stupid rules. Why do you think there is so much help defense now? It is because of the restrictions on the individual defender. With help defense, there is always a man left open, and Rick Barry would find that man. And being allowed to carry the ball, travel, and charge, Rick would have a field day in today's NBA.

And that was really clever of you, to find a video of Russell's last basketball game before he retired. He was old, and slowed by injury. Chamberlain at that time had transformed himself to being just a post player, a defender, rebounder and passer, for the good of the team, supposedly. He was slowed by all the weight and strength he and gained, and was up to 320 lb from his early NBA weight of 250 or so. You seem to overlook players in their prime in your observations, Wilt, Russell, or Barry in their first few seasons, for example.

GBear4Life said:

---

Larry Bird is Kyle Korver lite. Imagine how easy it would be to attack Bird on D for an easy two points or trip to foul line. Bird is so slow he would be nothing more than a spot up shooter.

---

Defenders can rarely stop anyone nowadays, with the various crossovers which are allowed and encouraged by the rules permitting carrying the ball. Today's defenders can rarely stop anyone without help.

GBear4Life said:

---

Who would be stars today?

It's not about adjustments, it's about talent, skills and athletic ability. Look at the key skill traits of basketball. Look at the absurd shots old timers were able to put up -- shots that would not be feasible today. What would Rick Barry do today that he's capable of doing?

The scrubs of today could D-up these old timers. These old timers could not stop the scrubs of today.

---

Oh, is that the reason players of today have so few different types of shots? I thought they were just not very creative. Dunk, three, layup. Anything else? Guys like Earl Monroe, Tiny Archibald, Barry, Erving, Heinsohn, had more shots in their arsenal than today's players have ever dreamed of. Who has a hook shot today, still the most unstoppable shot in basketball? Skills? Players learn skills for today's game and rules. Many of them arrive in the NBA not even knowing how to make a layup. I didn't say that. It was Geoff Petrie, Kings GM. They have to come to a jump stop on a layup, but don't realize that taking off on one foot is quicker to the rim. Why do you think the NBA has a D league and a G league? It is because so many players arrive in the NBA with great athleticism, but very little skills, especially footwork, and defense

You mean old-timers like KC Jones, Walt Frazier, Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, Gary Payton, and Jason Kidd could not stop anyone today? You discredit your opinion, post by post.

GBear4Life said:

---

BEARUPINDC said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

In today's game he'd be carrying jock straps, perhaps in the G-League. Kwame Brown would own him.

---

Oh. you're just funnin' us. I got to see Kwame up close.....his best moments were picking up
two quick fouls and being sent to the bench.

---

lol...I know he was bad. I use Kwame to illuminate just how bad players of yesteryear were. Kwame's size and athletic ability would be enough to dominate 98% of the big men 60 years ago.

---

In your dreams.

GBear4Life said:

---

Maravich maybe could be a good Globe Trotter

---

Pete was not eligible.

GBear4Life said:

---

Frankly, I think your defense of players from a bygone era is grounded less in objective observation and analysis than nostalgia for an era that resonates with you personally.

Somebody posted something about Rick Barry needing to be on any list for best forwards. Rick Barry couldn't sniff the court today. I think that's patently obvious, even discounting for the different rules. These guys simply can't compete physically, athletically. They are quicker, faster, stronger, and more skilled. It's not an aim to denigrate older players, just an observation of what is, and what isn't.

---

Sure I'm nostalgic, but the argument I made was based on facts and I tried to be logical to reach my conclusions. Your argument is a subjective opinion, apparently based on your observations. Nothing objective about it.

ClayK said:

---

Every generation thinks what was going on when its members were young is superior to what's going on now ...

Go back to the '60s, and fans then complained about the "modern" style and how things were much better in the '50s.

And it's not just sports -- it's everything. "The good old days" were always better, despite the fact that by almost every metric, "today" is better (life expectancy, infant mortality, quality of life, and on and on and on).

Of course, if the good old days were really better, then life in 1890 was better than life now ...

---

Clay,

I agree with you on the 1960s, for Cal sports at least. Our basketball and football teams were not as good as in the 1950s. Many, many things are better, but I caution you on saying everything is better today.

There are more people working than ever, but there are more homeless than ever. More drug addicts too. The traffic is more congested. People have less social skills and there are more arguments. There seems to be more hate around, or at least it is more visible. A lot of violence, mass killings, daily murders in big cities, race-baiting and race-hating. Cars are better, but they don't look as good - I can't tell from another. The dress code today seems to be to look poor. They sell jeans complete with dirt and holes in the fabric. Everything today is much more expensive, and in the Bay Area, if you are middle class, you will have trouble finding a house. If you are poor, forget it. We have more and more laws, but not enough police to enforce them. I think that as a society, we still can stand some improvement.

BearNakedLadies said:

---

bearister said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

I'd be pedantic too if I made the egregious claims you have here

---

I invite you to read SFCityBear's post game analysis during the hoop season. He is one of the most knowledgeable commenters on this board.

---

He's really not. Only if you rate people per word.

---

You make a good point. I'm trying to cut down. It's an addiction, and not easy to break.

And I'm half Irish. It's a national trait.

bearister said:

---

BearNakedLadies said:

---

bearister said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

I'd be pedantic too if I made the egregious claims you have here

---

I invite you to read SFCityBear's post game analysis during the hoop season. He is one of the most knowledgeable commenters on this board.

---

He's really not. Only if you rate people per word.

---

What posters do you rank ahead of him as a Bears' game analyst?

---

I'd prefer SFCityBear's analysis on anything over GBear4Life and HoopDreams.

As far as who do I think is a particularly good hoops analyst on this board? I don't know if anybody necessarily stands out, but there are plenty of people who can give you an accurate breakdown of what happened in a game.

GBear4Life said:

---

I'd be pedantic too if I made the egregious claims you have here

---

The pot calling the kettle black, eh?

What claims have I made in this thread that are egregious? All I did was reply to a list of the best all-time small forwards, saying that Rick Barry needs to be on the list. I'd guess a million or more fans would agree with that.

I don't like to get into arguments of which era's players are better, and who could play in this or that era. You force that issue, so here is my opinion. I don't know. What I do know is that I would love to play today. If you tell me I can carry the ball when I dribble, that I can take a few extra steps without dribbling, and tell me I can crash into a defender to score at the rim and not get called for a foul, I'm ready to play tonight. I would really not like it that I would not be allowed to put my hands or body on a player to defend him, but you tell me my long range bombs are now worth 3 points, and I'm in heaven. Where do I sign up? With the important rules thrown out, maybe I could have made that Cal team in '59, and maybe played somewhere after college. Whoopee!

What I observe is that players of today have far less stamina and endurance than players of old. Wilt and Russ played 48 minutes. Players today only have to get in shape to play in short bursts, maybe 8 minutes max, and then get a break or time out. Newell's players had to be ready to play 40 minutes with no timeouts. Today's players don't have to play on tired legs.

Today's players are nearly all much more brittle or fragile than players of old. They are one fall or one collision away from ending their career. In Newell's 6 years, he never had a player miss a game due to injury. Today, almost every team loses a player to injury which can cost them the season and maybe more. Teams often have several players injured, and almost never have a fully healthy team. The Warriors lose both Klay and KD for the finals and several others got hurt during the season. No one I know of in the old days got seriously injured. There were no ACLs torn, no stress fractures. I saw a video of one player getting a compound leg fracture during a game! These may be the most athletic players ever, but they are no good to the team if they are on the bench in street clothes, in a cast, or on crutches.

SFCityBear said:

---

bearister said:

---

BearNakedLadies said:

---

bearister said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

I'd be pedantic too if I made the egregious claims you have here

---

I invite you to read SFCityBear's post game analysis during the hoop season. He is one of the most knowledgeable commenters on this board.

---

He's really not. Only if you rate people per word.

---

What posters do you rank ahead of him as a Bears' game analyst?

---

Well, thanks for the support. You are my biggest fan, and sometimes my only fan...

---

Not anymore. You didn't even give me an honorable mention or a pity f. I'm going to let GBear4Life and other Millennials at the Gate gut you and leave you to bleed out on the side of the trail next time.

bearister said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

bearister said:

---

BearNakedLadies said:

---

bearister said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

I'd be pedantic too if I made the egregious claims you have here

---

I invite you to read SFCityBear's post game analysis during the hoop season. He is one of the most knowledgeable commenters on this board.

---

He's really not. Only if you rate people per word.

---

What posters do you rank ahead of him as a Bears' game analyst?

---

Well, thanks for the support. You are my biggest fan, and sometimes my only fan...

---

Not anymore. You didn't even give me an honorable mention or a pity f. I'm going to let GBear4Life and other Millennials at the Gate gut you and leave you to bleed out on the side of the trail next time.

---

Geez, you won't allow a tired old senior citizen even one brain cramp. The post has been revised accordingly, which I hope will be acceptable. If I lose your support, I might as well move to the women's basketball board, and there are probably even more sharks waiting for me over there.

bearister said:

---

---

A big Bear group hug...

SFCityBear said:

---

You force that issue, so here is my opinion. I don't know. What I do know is that I would love to play today. If you tell me I can carry the ball when I dribble, that I can take a few extra steps without dribbling, and tell me I can crash into a defender to score at the rim and not get called for a foul, I'm ready to play tonight.

What I observe is that players of today have far less stamina and endurance than players of old. Wilt and Russ played 48 minutes. Players today only have to get in shape to play in short bursts, maybe 8 minutes max, and then get a break or time out. Newell's players had to be ready to play 40 minutes with no timeouts. Today's players don't have to play on tired legs.

Today's players are nearly all much more brittle or fragile than players of old. They are one fall or one collision away from ending their career. In Newell's 6 years, he never had a player miss a game due to injury. Today, almost every team loses a player to injury which can cost them the season and maybe more. Teams often have several players injured, and almost never have a fully healthy team. The Warriors lose both Klay and KD for the finals and several others got hurt during the season. No one I know of in the old days got seriously injured. There were no ACLs torn, no stress fractures. I saw a video of one player getting a compound leg fracture during a game! These may be the most athletic players ever, but they are no good to the team if they are on the bench in street clothes, in a cast, or on crutches.

---

So basically:

1) if old tymers could palm the ball (they can't today, but whatever), they'd be just as good as modern era players? K

2) Old tymers played 48 minutes, therefore...??

3) Modern era players are injury prone, therefore talent between eras are basically the same

This is the best hoops analyst on BI? Give me a break.

The object of the game is to win ...

If shooting threes and layups gives your team a better chance to win than shooting entertaining (but low-percentage) mid-range jumpers and spinners, what shots should you take?

The way you determine who wins is by who scores the most points -- thus the ability to score is the most important in the game. Stopping scorers is also important, but basketball today favors offense, and scorers are more valuable than defenders.

And everyone's defense gets better if one player on the other team can't score, because the modern game is actually much more sophisticated defensively in terms of rotations and percentage plays. If a defender cannot score, then the person guarding him is now free to help and disrupt the offense, and will do so.

Unless a defender can make a top scorer disappear -- and that does not happen very often -- he must be a threat at the other end to justify playing time.

Everyone has their preferred style of play and favorite players, but my favorite style was to have more points than the other team at the end of the game -- however pretty or ugly that might be.

Modern NBA players don't palm the ball while dribbling? Here is an isolation shot of Harden mid dribble:

SFCityBear said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

Maravich maybe could be a good Globe Trotter

---

Pete was not eligible.

---

His socks were too long?

Ed Gray and Tremaine Fowlkes were Harlem Globetrotters.


https://www.harlemglobetrotters.com/roster/harlem-globetrotters-all-time-roster

bearister said:

---

Modern NBA players don't palm the ball while dribbling? Here is an isolation shot of Harden mid dribble:

---

Yeah that's why Harden can school all the geriatrics from a weak era of basketball! His palming in a captured photo online! That's why Harden is one of the most effective offensive players ever!