Best NBA Team All-Time
 

Okay guys, I just got into an argument with someone about how the team of about 2 decades ago would crush today's team. I argued the opposite, and began listing off a starting lineup that consisted of:

Shaq-C, all day, best centre of all-time
Garnett-SF, can play any position on the floor, so I gave him this one
Duncan-PF, again, all-day, I don't like him but he is good
Kidd-PG, Mr. Everything, he can match up against the best point guards of any era
Stojakovic-SG, again, a very good shooter and good height for the position.

He begins naming off:
Jordan-PG, can't argue there
Bird-SG, again can't argue, but Peja has a few inches on him
K. Malone-SF, Garnett would school him
Olajuwon-PF, Duncan would food him
Abdul-Jabbar-C, Shaq would snap him like a twig.

I know a lot of you guys grew up during both eras, so who would win. I say today's NBA would dominate. This all started when I said LeBron is sick and will be better than Jordan, which drew some backlash. Oh well, I guess averagin 21 a game out of high school doesn't get the respect it should. He is going to be the BEST player of all-time, possibly any sport.

That 2 decades ago team is all wrong. Magic, Jordan, Bird, Moses Malone and Jabbar would destroy today's 5.

Stojakovic wouldn;t even get a shot off...Jordan was one of the best defenders all time and would bottle Kidd up....Malone could guard Shaq better than anyone ever has in his career... Garnett would still be good but not enough to carry the team....and Olajuwon would have some success against jabbar but still not enough....the guard play from the 2 decades ago would roll over your current squad

So many things to address here... lol.

Saying LeBron will be better than Jordan is sacreligious! Jordan is THE best player of all time. His stats stand alone, and it will take a long time before anyone can surpass what he has accomplished. Although Lebron has considerable talent, I don't buy the "21/ppg in HS" argument. He was able to shit on high school kids because they were so young and he was just GOOD. It's a different game in the NBA. I look forward to watching him mature and just get better - even though he's already very good. I don't think Lebron will be better than Jordan, but only time will tell.

It's hard to argue against Kevin Garnett or Tim Duncan, but at the height of Karl Malone's and Hakeem Olajuwon's careers - they were NASTY. Bird was disgusting, and if you allow Michael Jordan to run the point, I don't think the new team has a shot of winning.

Sidenote: I would exchange Iverson for Kidd, and here's why: Jordan would just shit on Kidd everytime they're matched up. I feel like Iverson is more of a streetballer and he would be able to "keep up" with Jordan... (more than Kidd would.)

Who knows.

This kinda stuff is tough to argue online - but makes for great "around the TV" debates.

I will take the 95-96 Chicago Bulls who were 72-10 if memory serves, you can have anyone else not on that team from any time period and I think you get crushed.

dood, old school team would murder your squad. peja shouldnt even be your 2 guard (kobe - pierce - mcgrady?).

uh he actually scored 30+ in HS, what he was referring to was 21ppg straight out of high school (in the nba). lebron is not just "good" he's a fucking stud. but, either way, i don't think he'll be better than mike.

i think the old team would kill the new team, but not as it was constituted in the original post. you have too many people in the wrong positions for it to be right.

the old team has to be

pg - either magic or isaih.
sg - jordan
sf - bird
pf - pick between moses/barkley/malone, etc.
c - jabbar/olajuwon

this puts players in their natural positions, and it also makes a much better team as a whole.

Gotta go with the old school on this one.
A team made up of something like Jordan, Magic, Bird, M. Malone and Abdul-Jabbar would make a much better team than anything the NBA can throw its way now. Or you can just grab the original Dream Team and they'd wipe the floor with today's squad. The old school team's would play much better all-around basketball and the new school team would be left in the dust.

lets think of one thing old school NBA does and new school NBA doesnt... Old School plays DEFENSE...

Peja is a shooter... alot of todays players are shooters... they rather cherrypick at the other end and wait for the ball.

Jordan was one of the best defensive players ever... Malone would limit Shaq... Malone would give him a few elbows right in the head and that will slow him down. Nobody want to mess with Malone's elbows.

Old School is so much tougher than New School... todays players sit out with a hang nail. Then you got Jordan who is throwing up all over himself go out and score 63pts vs the celtics.

I think this is a pretty easy decision.

All the old school players have rings to back it up... todays amazing players rarely have the rings to back it up since they are not team players. McGrady, Iverson, Garnett, etc...

One player I wish I could exclude from new school is Duncan... he was born in the wrong era. Duncan all he does is make his bankshots, plays amazing defense, and wins championships...

the old school team... Jordan, Bird, Isiah, Magic, Kareem, Hakeem... they all have MULTIPLY rings to back it up. Malone/Stockon should of had a ring but cant mess with the bulls. Why do you think the original dream team played so amazing. All the players knew how to play as a team.

The new school "dream team" barely wins a medal because they rather steal the ball from each other than share it.

Peja would be a good 6th man ... maybe! He's like the guy you have to go to when you're down double digits, and you absolutely need to start hitting some threes.

But then again, Peja doesn't compare to the Bird-man.

I Wanna Be Like Mike.
 

You misinterpreted my use of the word good. Either way, I think we both agree he's no Mike and probably won't get to that level. (It would be awesome if he did, though.)

Peja no where near that good!
 

Great thread. But what’s with Peja being included here? The initial post had him out of position – he’s a forward. And sure, he’s a good forward, but no where near being the best in his position. I’d go with Dirk ahead of him for my today’s team, opposite Duncan/KG. Moving him away from shooting guard leaves room for TMac as well.

Meanwhile, for my old school forward, the second Bird sits down, I’ve got Bernard King (the most underrated player ever?) coming off the bench.

And I’d probably start Olajuwon over Jabbar as well.

king may be the most underrated SCORER ever, but he wasnt as complete a player as bird was. there is a pretty good reason why bird won three straight mvps at a time when the nba was a great league, and it is no slight to king to be sitting behind larry legend.

who would even make up the new team? i basically have no idea who to include.

i do know that kg and duncan both have to be in the frontcourt though. they are the best two players out there right now, and both of them are complete players who can score, rebound, make their teammates better, and play some serious defense. shaq has to be up front, i guess, and the guard spots are very unsettled. i think you need kobe at the two, just because he is the best defensive guard who can also play some offense. the point should probably be kidd, but whoever it is, they are at a huge disadvantage against either magic or isaih.

i think if you put the old school players at the correct positions, then that team blows away whoever we put on the floor right now, basically because their guard play will be better. the frontcourts would be pretty evenly matched, but the old school guards would kick our asses now.

by the way, this is a fantastic thread. it makes you remember why the nba was a great league, and why the league basically sucks right now.

Basketball used to be my favorite sport, it's now Basbeball, football, then basketball. I remember the days when people actually knew how to make a jumpshot, and players would develop there game in college.

omg
 

G- Magic
G- Jordan
SF- Bird
PF- Barkley
C- Kareem

No arguments other than maybe Hakeem at C. This team would beat any of todays. Todays could take 10 man team(top 10 in last 5-7 years) and sub in and out and let the old school players play the full 48 and still beat them by 15+.DEFENSE is the key. Reason being is who would you take off and replace from the old school team with a new player? No way jordan bird magic or barkley. Barkley was one of the most amazing players i have ever seen play the game at his position. He had so much love for the overall game and it showed by his physicallity and perseverance. Is there anyone else you can think of that worked harder than him in the league ever? If so please name him. Also, watch out for a Jr in High school named OJ Mayo. He is the man coming up.

I agree with everything you said BigJohn... I agree that Barkley was an unreal player. I also think Karl Malone could play PF with Barkley. People dont realize Karl Malone is SECOND on the alltime scoring list and the record is all but his if he keeps playing. Malone was also a beast on defense like Barkley. I agree that those 5 would own any new school team.

ty
 

basketball is my forte. It always has been. I have played and watched it all of my life and became a High School official after i graduated. Malone was the man omahillo....no doubt but i would have to stick with barkley there IMO. Just too much of a fighter not too

yeah I agree with you... cant go wrong with either guy anyways lol.

what? no love for my man wilt chamberlin? 100 points in a game! or what about bill russell? oscar robertson? dr. j? theres no way you can say "current NBA" vs "old NBA" because there are decades and decades of players, vs the current ones. there are too many great players. maybe if you chose a decade, and THEN built the teams you might have a reason to argue this.

I thought we were talking about the 80s... I know Russell and Wilt were amazing in the 60s. Russell won 11 titles... try topping that.

yea
 

if you read the whole thing it says 80's. Im only 22 so im not a stud on 60's and 70's. I would have to say that for the 80's i have the optimum team IMO.

if it's the 80's....moses malone has to be the power forward over barkley. He was an absolute force and i believe one of the most underrated players of all time. Barkley was a great player, but undersized, and his scoring ability wouldnt be needed on this team.

Jordan's not a PG, Bird not a SG, Malone not a SF, Olajuwon not a PF.

You must be 10 to think that anyone is ever going to eclipse Jordan. Kobe is the closest thing and they both have the will and skill to hit game winning shots time after time. If LJ starts doing that and sniffs the playoffs then look me up again.

I don't know why Kobe is compared to Jordan, he had Shaq who is the most dominant player to ever play the game. While Jordan led a bulls dynasty that is the only dominant team in NBA history that didn't have a dominant inside prescence. Watching LA this year it's prety clear that was Shaqs team.

Looking at this thread I realized one thing. If you were to make an all-time NBA team, any player from any era, how many players from these two eras would be on it? Looking at the 80s team I know that Magic, Bird, and Jordon are without a doubt starting on my all-time team, the rest of the guys from the 80s would probably make it too. Then you look at the combinations that have been thrown out there for today's team, Shaq makes it, but he just barely gets in with the competition at center from Abdul-Jabbar, Russell, and Chamberlain. I think that's the difference between the two teams, the guys from the 80s are the ones always brought up in "greatest ever" discussions, while only 4-5 guys from today even look like they have the potential to be among that elite group by the time their career ends.

would you really expect there to be more than 4-5 guys from any given decade that would be included in a best ever debate? i dont think that you could, so i think that this era of players is doing just fine. the 80s did have a number of great players in their prime with bird, magic, mj, moses, dr j, barkley, malone, stockton, etc., but i dont think that the 90s/2000s will suffer too much. shaq, kg, duncan, kobe, lebron, etc. will probably have some unbelieveable numbers when they are done, especially because so many of them made the jump to the nba at the age of 18, and with modern conditioning and injury rehab advances, they can still expect to play well into at least their early 30s, if not significantly later.

for example, kg is just beginning his 10th season in the league right now, at the age of 28. if he plays seven more years, and retires when he is 35 (which i think seems a bit early), he will have played in approximately 1425 nba games. with his career averages at 20.1 points, 10.9 boards, 4.4 dishes, 1.4 steals and 1.8 blocks per game, that gives him career totals of 28642 points, 15641 boards, 6270 assists, 1995 steals and 2565 blocks. Those numbers, which i think are a bit conservative, put him fifth all time in scoring, sixth in rebounds, close to the top twenty in assists, just outside the top ten in steals, and seventh or eighth in blocks. that would seem to correspond pretty well with an all-time best argument, and i think that i could run the same calculations for shaq, duncan, etc.

in twenty years we will probably have a significantly better view of this era, but i think that it will stack up fine when we do make that comparison.

It's a stretch to say the Shaq was the most dominating player ever....you could easily make the case that Chamberlin was more dominating....Jordan too....

In fact, if jordan's bulls were the only dynasty without a dominating big man, that might be all the evidence you need to say he was the most dominant player to ever play the game....shaq didnt win when jordan was in the league, and when he was out, olajuwon in his prime schooled him....shaq never won a title until Kobe came into his own, and over those title runs, Kobe took most of the big shots in the big games near the end.

with the same type of argument, you can clearly downgrade jordan because he didnt come close to winning a title until pippen became a star. shaq at least made it to the finals without kobe (he did have penny), but jordan never got out of the east without pippen at his side.

chamberlin was spectacular, but he NEVER beat russell, so it is difficult to say that he was the most dominating in his own time, nevermind ever. i am not sure who was, but it seems like shaq cant be dismissed from the argument.

I made some errors in the original post, but some things I have heard are crazy.

Forward, I would take Garnett and Duncan 11 times out of 10 over Malone and Olajuwon. They are better, period. Malone and Olajuwon were good in their prime, but I have to wonder if Garnett and Duncan, given their ages, have even hit their prime yet. Regardless I would go with them based on their talent today.

Centre, Shaq, enough said. Jabbar may have had more skill but Shaq is the most dominant force of all-time.

The guards, ya, gotta go with the Bird-Jordan combo. But whoever said Iverson was better than Kidd, HUH? Iverson shoots like 20% most of the time, and Kidd is better all-around and better at distributing the ball.

All in all, the new team is a thousand times more athletic overall and bigger. IMO today's team would crush the team of decades ago.

PS- James shits on people now too, and he is 19 :eek: . Wait 4 years until he is better still, and more mature. I think he will eventually surpass Jordan as the best of all-time.

i too would take duncan and kg over malone and olajuwon, but i dont think that is the correct comparison. bird should be the small forward, and everyone else can fight over the power forward spot. that makes the backcourt of the old team significantly better, and it also puts everyone in their correct positions on the floor. upgrading from malone at the small forward, which wasnt his position, to magic at the point is a big gain for the old timers.

i think that frontcourt play would be better by the new guys, by a little bit, and that backcourt play would be dominated by the older players.

Yeah, so 2 guys in the backcourt vs. 3 guys in the front court. And remember, no bench=no "hack a Shaq". He'd be dunking all day, I don't care who the hell is guarding him.

Today's NBAers are just too damn athletic, too well conditioned, and freakish at that, there's 3 guys over 7 feet tall and 1 can play all 5 positions on the court effectively. I may even reconsider putting Nowitzki on the floor but I couldn't figure out where to put him. Think he could pull off a SG. I personally do, but I know there will be arguments to the contrary. He certainly has the shooting range, and adding a fourth 7 footer would make this team unbeatable on the boards. And height can often also make up for lack of defensive ability too. But even without that fourth 7 footer, who is going to pull down the boards for the old-timers? Garnett would probably have 40 rebounds in this game.

Can't say that yet!
 

How many have we heard that about? Penny H? Vince C? Kobe? Lebron is a phenomenal, but god forbid one play away from tearing a tendon and never being the same. To say he’ll surpass MJ at this point strikes me as heresy.

Anyone catch the phenom score 43 yesterday against the defending champs? Cleveland looks to be heading towards possible, dare I say home court advantage.

I realize he'd have to stay healthy, but at his age young bodies tend to be more flexible and able to deal with more stress. Man, it's just amazing that the guy is only 19 years old and he's dropping 43 against a team that beat the Lakers for the title last year.

i agree that the current team has a significant advantage in the frontcourt, but i dont think that you can make a basic "3 vs 2 advantage" argument here. big men dont touch the ball as much, so having the better backcourt makes up for this disadvantage a little.

the other major difference between the two teams is that the older players were better fundamental players. they could all shoot, and for the most part they could pass and rebound. this also cuts into the advantage in athleticism that the new guys have.

my big question is what do the new guys do against magic. lets not forget, he was 6'9", and played center in the nba finals his rookie year. none of the point guards today could handle him on the low post. and if you take kg to guard him (probably the most likely of the big men to be able to handle him), that probably puts kidd on bird and kobe on jordan. magic is the big wild card here.

the big if here is officiating. you are definitely right that the hack a shaq couldnt work here, but at the same time, if he got called for some of his numerous offensive fouls (and the calls would probably come because the old guys would have some respect from the refs), then he wouldnt be close to as effective.

this would be a tremendous matchup, and i am really torn as to who would win. the big argument to me is does the athleticism and size advantage of the new guys beat the fundamentals and magic of the old school guys.

gotta be garnett,shaq,kidd,bryant and james. Garnett would play PF and james SF. This team whould be unstoppable....o wait nvm bryant wouldnt pass so we whould probably lose to the pistons.

Jordan, Bird, Magic, a telephone pole, and me. We would school anyone from today!!

I agree
 

the all NBA third team from most years in the 80's would beat the all NBA first team now, players have lost all fundamental skills, the concept of team is gone. As was evident in the embarassment we called the olympics

I don't think you could use the Olympics as an argument in this case. Those international teams do play a lot of ball together whereas the US teams plays only a handful. I think any NBA team would have beaten the Americans, since they were just kind of thrown together.

I must say some of you guys must be performance de-hancing drugs though :p . The guys today are using the 'roids and are 10X better athletes, making up for their lack of fundamentals. They are also way bigger than before, causing the average point guard alone to grow from likely well under 6 feet tall to a few inches above 6 feet. Fundamentals are a lot in basketball but height can sometimes prove to be an insurmountable disadvantage.

To each his own I guess.