yeah, a fair list would have to have 90's shaq vs. post 90's shaq, etc. etc. shaq was a beast as soon as he was drafted. just b/c he got his rings with la doesnt mean he was sub-par before that. and then throwing lebron and the recent players on all-time is a little unfair. i think the 90's could give them a good run. it would be a good series. i think there would be bloodshed and major casualties. Hakeem, 90's Shaq, Mutombo, Robinson, 90's Duncan, Ewing, Rodman, Kemp, Barkley, Malone, MJ, Clyde, Wilkins, Grant Hill, Reggie, AI, Kidd, Penny, Tim Hardaway, KJ, Payton, Stockton i think they could handle almost anything you throw at them kill, grill, and eat it, then crap it out and flush it down the toilet. nobody from any decade would be able to handle that variety of big men and everyone else may cancel each other out. MJ would rape Kobe. (Kobe's great but a beneficiary of softer rules and officiating. which is a moot point here b/c MJ would get all the calls over everyone) Kemp. They wouldnt know what hit them. Yeah, Lebron has some monster dunks but Kemps were demoralizing, career ending, "i never want to pick up a basketball again after being dunked on like that" dunks. point guard play would be a wash. i think the 90s fare pretty well with Kidd Stockton and Penny as their true PGs and Tim Hardaway, KJ, Payton as their attacking PGs AI they wouldnt know what hit them. Hakeem Mutombo, and Shaq. "prime" Shaq and Wilt would have problems scoring 10. Hakeem AND Mutombo down low. who is going to get their shot off in the paint? nobody. not even lebron, kobe or super duper Wilt. the all-time team would have to rely on their jumpers and Bird.
Of course it's unfair. The whole point of the thread was to point out how awesome the 90s generation was; that they could even field a team that wouldn't necessarily get blown out against the rest of the all-time greats.
but by the same argument if wilt had grown up in the 80's and pro balled in the 90's, wouldn't he be just as skilled as anyone of that time? what you'd have to work out is whether wilt was smart enough to have played in the 90's to match his athleticism and size. most probably yes. would he have dominated the field in the 90's like he did in his time? probably not. but would he still be a beast and a center as good as any other of the 90's...i think so... but this is all conjecture...there's no way we can compare apples to apples if we're talking about different eras, all we can do is speculate. besides, isn't that what we're doing anyway
Actually, that's not the same argument. Francis is trying to apply Wilt's actual skill sets to the current era. You are trying to project new skill sets to Wilt's game.
then you would have to have Pre/Post 90's Olajuwon and Jordan then. they should still be able to outplay each other. but then again the premise was to take the best players from the 90s n match em against everyone else. shaq belongs in the 90s or should be removed from both teams. wat would make things interesting is putting Yao (not saying he's an all-time great) on the all-time team, but he and Wilt together would cause some problems for the 90's squad.
Anti, that's the problem of your premise. Players don't just neatly belong to one artificially defined "decade." You can't really say that Jordan was better in the 90s than in the 80s just because he won rings then. Dream, Jordan, Ewing, and a few other guys can easily be put on the 80s team to play with Bird, Magic, Moses, and Kareem.
Exactly. We can have fun with these scenarios, but the time element is just too arbitrary. Jordan, for instance, averaged 37.1 ppg in '86-'87 and 35 ppg the following season. Assuming we're talking heathy versions of these players, you can toss Ralph Sampson into the mix for the '80's. Heck, I'd pick the '80's over the '90's every day and twice on Sundays. As for Wilt, I have to side with Drexlerfan22. Sorry, Francis 4 ever, but Wilt was a beast that they changed the rules for. He would have Camby, just as a "for instance," since he was mentioned, blubbering on the floor in a fetal position. All I have to go by is seeing him on TV when he played and reading countless articles about the guy, but that's my opinion. I would pick Hakeem over him for the 5 spot were I constructing a team, but that's the only guy I'd choose over Wilt.
No, the problem with my premise is that we don't have a time machine. It seems a lot of people are interpreting this as some attempt to make an authoritative list. It's not. Nothing's stopping anyone from making another thread about a team comprised of three versions of Michael Jordan, two versions of Shaq, and Wayne Gretzky. I'd like to see more of these kinds of replies and less whining about Penny being snubbed or how reliable accounts of Wilt's promiscuity are.
