I like it a lot. I do question how 2 players that averaged a usage of over 30 are going to share the ball in Kobe and Luka. Although if they can make it work they will be a force.Jerry West-Bob Cousy
Kobe Bryant
Luka Doncic
Scottie Pippen
Willis Reed-Marc Gasol
So far.
That's crazy. Back in the 70's the average height was the same as today. There were a lot of great bigs in the 70's too. Even at an advanced age Gilmore was a baller vs the big men of the 80's.No one here can respect what Gilmore brings to the game. I drafted him a couple of times and the comments were "but he's an old guy from the 70's when everyone was really only 6'5" and couldn't run. He'd get slaughtered by Whiteside today!"
People are stupid.
Great pick.
Yeah it really is the recency bias thing. And the idea that "if you put that guy on the floor today he couldn't keep up with the pace and the athletes today" ignoring the fact that these guys were top-level athletes when these dudes still smoked like chimneys and drank on game days and ****. With modern medicine and training they would be even more dominant. Hell, Gilmore was one of the few who had a legit sky-hook, with the left hand no less, and could hit jumpers out to 18 feet. Yeah no 3 pt shot but who is to say he couldn't develop one, like Lopez did over his career. And in his freaking rookie year he averaged 23 pts 20 boards and 5 blocks. So cut those in half and he is automatically rookie of the year even today. We sadly devalue the guys from the past because we want to believe we live in the more dominant age, but we have been making that same argument for decades. It just doesn't hold water.That's crazy. Back in the 70's the average height was the same as today. There were a lot of great bigs in the 70's too. Even at an advanced age Gilmore was a baller vs the big men of the 80's.
Yeah just watching film on him you can see his post moves were solid, his defense and verticL were elite, his hook shot was smooth, his jumper from mid range was smooth. He also held his own vs the best Hall of Famer to ever play. As soon as I discovered him I became hooked. Criminally underrated.Yeah it really is the recency bias thing. And the idea that "if you put that guy on the floor today he couldn't keep up with the pace and the athletes today" ignoring the fact that these guys were top-level athletes when these dudes still smoked like chimneys and drank on game days and ****. With modern medicine and training they would be even more dominant. Hell, Gilmore was one of the few who had a legit sky-hook, with the left hand no less, and could hit jumpers out to 18 feet. Yeah no 3 pt shot but who is to say he couldn't develop one, like Lopez did over his career. And in his freaking rookie year he averaged 23 pts 20 boards and 5 blocks. So cut those in half and he is automatically rookie of the year even today. We sadly devalue the guys from the past because we want to believe we live in the more dominant age, but we have been making that same argument for decades. It just doesn't hold water.
Thank you! Nate the Great is the other guy that I was talking about. He’s the one guy that I just can’t let go undrafted in this thing. I think I’ve taken him about a half a dozen times myself. Guy was a stud.Bernard King 84-85
Nate Thurmond 67-68 ... the dude was pulling 20 points and 20 rebounds a game!
Bernard King was an amazing scorer, but he was a liability defensively. He'll probably do great off the bench though. Thurmond is a solid pickup this late in the draft.Thank you! Nate the Great is the other guy that I was talking about. He’s the one guy that I just can’t let go undrafted in this thing. I think I’ve taken him about a half a dozen times myself. Guy was a stud.
King’s off the court problems are more of an issue than his on the court production.Bernard King was an amazing scorer, but he was a liability defensively. He'll probably do great off the bench though. Thurmond is a solid pickup this late in the draft.