The "Old Skool Baller" Thread

[Drex]

His nose is bigger than Earl Boykins.

[shadowgrin]

But I doubt Big Gheorghe can bench press 300 lbs.

[hova-]

I dont know wether or not you can say hes an oldschool baller but I remember playing NBA live 2001 with the Hornets and my go-to-guy was Jamal Mashburn.

I looked up his stats and I think he was a pretty decent all-around player with being capable of numbers like 20/5/5. His FG% was not really high throughout his career but with that many threes taken its at least not that bad.

[The X]

hova, I was also a fan of Mash, but like many, unfortunately injuries cut his career short....

[Andrew]

So many What Ifs with the Three Js, who never really got on the same page and were broken up within a couple of years.

[Kenny]

I read on the back of a basketball card I got that Jimmy Jackson was actually pretty close to the scoring title one year, but injury hampered him.

On another note, I remember having so many basketball cards of Ken Norman but I never saw him play... what was he like?

[Andrew]

He averaged 25.7 ppg through 51 games in the 1994/95 season which would've placed him top five, but Shaq led the league with 29.3 ppg so it wouldn't have been that close had he maintained his average to the end of the season.

Ken Norman had a few good years with the Clippers and posted some decent career numbers but I wouldn't call him a star.

[Clueminati017]

Remember Manute Bol????

phpBB [video]

[Skills]

Those are some nice highlights of Bol on and off the court. The guy has a nice heart. He used most of his money earned in the NBA on supporting different causes. I even remember he almost died a few years ago because of a car accident. Found this on the 76ers website:

http://www.nba.com/sixers/features/driv ... 70807.html

One day there was a golf tournament in Philly. I was driving a golf cart and I hit him with the golf cart while he was doing an interview.

[shadowgrin]

Complete it.

Barkley and Bol grew close during their time together. Good natured barbs flew across their Spectrum locker room nightly. It kept everybody loose.

One day, for a television show, the joke was on Bol, shocking as it was.

“They brought me into a big hotel conference room and told me we were going to have lunch,” remembered Bol. “They went through the different dishes. They said here’s the soup, here’s the salad. Then they came to a big covered dish and said it was the main course. When they opened it, Rick Mahorn’s head was on the plate. His eyes were open real big. Man, I jumped! The people who did the show put him under the table and he put his head through a hole and onto the plate. Man, I thought I’d have a heart attack. Good thing I didn’t have a bad heart!

“Well, Charles was in on the joke so I got him back. One day there was a golf tournament in Philly. I was driving a golf cart and I hit him with the golf cart while he was doing an interview. I don’t remember what Charles thought, but I thought it was real funny.”

[Skills]

Yeah, I knew they were buds. It just sounds funnier by itself.

[Andrew]

Great video. Those threes are fun to watch but my favourite plays from that mix were the pass after wrapping the ball through his legs and putting the ball on the floor for the driving dunk. Those blocks were simply effortless too.

[Clueminati017]

Great video. Those threes are fun to watch but my favourite plays from that mix were the pass after wrapping the ball through his legs and putting the ball on the floor for the driving dunk. Those blocks were simply effortless too.

There would never be another big man like Manute Bol in the 7'7" class that can do those things back in his 76ers year. Maybe Yao Ming but not like the name of Kenny George.

[Joe']

All of you fail for not yet mentioning John Stockton. First in career assists and steals, not to mention best player of the '90s (after MJ) and best PG ever IMO, this little guy could do everything. He could score, he could hit threes, he could pass and he sure could steal the ball.

What I loved the most about him, though, was the fact that he was traditional. He kept everything simple and because of that it was a true pleasure to watch him play; I hate flashy players, I hate players who dunk constantly just because they can or do flashy passes and stuff. It's not a freaking circus goddamnit, it's basketball.

It's a shame he, as many greats (Malone, Barkley) of his era didn't get a ring. The Jazz truly deserved it in '98 and '99...

[Clueminati017]

True Joe, but we're talking about players who were not considered as legends, or superstars / all stars when they played in the NBA. Like Dan Marejle, Sam Perkins, Shawn Kemp, Gary Payton, the late Kevin Duckworth, Orlando Woolridge, Kurt Rambis **snickers**, etc. You know players like that.

[Andrew]

All of you fail for not yet mentioning John Stockton. First in career assists and steals, not to mention best player of the '90s (after MJ) and best PG ever IMO, this little guy could do everything. He could score, he could hit threes, he could pass and he sure could steal the ball.

As Clue said, most of us have been trying to avoid the obvious names (as such I only mentioned Michael Jordan in passing). I don't know about him being the second best of the 90s, I think Hakeem Olajuwon, Scottie Pippen and his own teammate Karl Malone could each make a strong claim in that regard.

What I loved the most about him, though, was the fact that he was traditional. He kept everything simple and because of that it was a true pleasure to watch him play; I hate flashy players, I hate players who dunk constantly just because they can or do flashy passes and stuff. It's not a freaking circus goddamnit, it's basketball.

I get what you're saying but I couldn't disagree more. The flashy players had strong fundamentals in their own right, but they're simply remembered for certain plays that stood out because they were so memorable. SLAM Magazine probably put it best when they included Dominique Wilkins on the "real Top 50" list and commented that of his 27,000+ points, about 20,000 of them weren't that memorable. A 'Nique highlight reel gives you the impression that he dunked every time down the court though and while he certainly threw it down many, many times in his career his game was more than just dunks.

I think the dunk is much maligned anyway. It's become fashionable to criticise dunking and dismiss it as useless showboating but it's the highest percentage shot in the game. Shaq once said if he can get the dunk ten out of ten times, he's going for the dunk ten out of ten times. Some players can put on a bit of a show when they dunk and I don't see a problem with that. It's not a circus, but sport isn't a business meeting either. If you don't like flair then that's cool, we should all appreciate the fundamentals anyway. But I think players playing with flair and having distinctive styles and personality on the court is a part of sport too.

It's a shame he, as many greats (Malone, Barkley) of his era didn't get a ring. The Jazz truly deserved it in '98 and '99...

I don't entirely disagree (well, maybe about 1998 as I'm not upset the Bulls won) but I think we make too much about who deserves a ring and who doesn't. You mention that professional sport isn't a circus, well, it's not a charity either. Unfortunately, there can only be one winner and with the way dominant athletes and teams get a stranglehold on their sports' highest achievement, some will never win the ultimate prize. If you win the championship, then you deserve it. If you lose in the championship game, you've still accomplished a lot and should be recognised for your efforts but you can't say you deserved something you didn't win.

[Joe']

As Clue said, most of us have been trying to avoid the obvious names (as such I only mentioned Michael Jordan in passing). I don't know about him being the second best of the 90s, I think Hakeem Olajuwon, Scottie Pippen and his own teammate Karl Malone could each make a strong claim in that regard.

I apologize, it's just it always seems to me John gets overlooked whenever people talk about the greats of the 90s and such...

I get what you're saying but I couldn't disagree more. The flashy players had strong fundamentals in their own right, but they're simply remembered for certain plays that stood out because they were so memorable. SLAM Magazine probably put it best when they included Dominique Wilkins on the "real Top 50" list and commented that of his 27,000+ points, about 20,000 of them weren't that memorable. A 'Nique highlight reel gives you the impression that he dunked every time down the court though and while he certainly threw it down many, many times in his career his game was more than just dunks.

I think the dunk is much maligned anyway. It's become fashionable to criticise dunking and dismiss it as useless showboating but it's the highest percentage shot in the game. Shaq once said if he can get the dunk ten out of ten times, he's going for the dunk ten out of ten times. Some players can put on a bit of a show when they dunk and I don't see a problem with that. It's not a circus, but sport isn't a business meeting either. If you don't like flair then that's cool, we should all appreciate the fundamentals anyway. But I think players playing with flair and having distinctive styles and personality on the court is a part of sport too.

I'm not criticizing dunking, nor dismissing it as useless showboating. I'm just saying it's overdone... I agree it's the highest percentage shot in basketball, but I don't see the need to go for a dunk every single time. Nowadays, even when they're all by themselves on a fast break, 90% of players go for a dunk; in this situation the "highest percentage shot" excuse isn't good anymore, since I expect an NBA player's layup conversion percentage to be as high as his dunk conversion percentage. Anyway, I can stand a dunk, hell I love dunks; I just don't see the point in flashy dunks (really what's the point in a treadmill dunk or stuff like that?) and the more than occasional show after the dunk...

Even point guards, who shouldn't care much about scoring since that's not their main duty in basketball, they drive and dunk whenever they can, just because they can, when a pass or even a mid-range shot would be the best option. Same thing with passes: I'll use Jason Williams as an example because I despise him in a particular way, but it applies to a lot of players. Why on Earth would you even think of passing the ball that way when passing it "the traditional way" is easier, not to mention and especially more effective? I don't see any other reason other than to show off, and it really pisses me off.

I don't entirely disagree (well, maybe about 1998 as I'm not upset the Bulls won) but I think we make too much about who deserves a ring and who doesn't. You mention that professional sport isn't a circus, well, it's not a charity either. Unfortunately, there can only be one winner and with the way dominant athletes and teams get a stranglehold on their sports' highest achievement, some will never win the ultimate prize. If you win the championship, then you deserve it. If you lose in the championship game, you've still accomplished a lot and should be recognised for your efforts but you can't say you deserved something you didn't win.

Okay, then maybe you can make an argument the '97 and '98 Jazz at least deserved a Game 7. The Bulls won thanks to a buzzer beater on both occasions, and I think it's safe to say they won (and I'm talking about exclusively about Game 6 here,) not entirely of course, thanks to a little bit of luck.

Anyway, back on topic, any of you remember Richard Dumas? I watched Game 3 of the '93 Finals yesterday and the guy was on fire. What ever happened to him?

[Clueminati017]

Richard Dumas was a good player. What ever happened to the whereabouts of the names J.R. Rider, Jason White, and Harold Minor?

[Kenny]

Harold Miner's career was unbelievably unremarkable. Spanned over 4 or 5 years... apparently now he's in Las Vegas with his wife and kid. I'm actually surprised his name isn't mentioned more under the draft bust category. He was the 12th overall pick, which is pretty high up for someone who came and went so quickly. I guess he did have 2 dunking titles.

Isiah Rider got into a lot of trouble off the court with numerous charges against him over the past few years. I think He did end up with a ring though.

I can't help you out much with Jason White... I don't really remember him.

[Andrew]

I apologize, it's just it always seems to me John gets overlooked whenever people talk about the greats of the 90s and such...

No need to apologise, John Stockton is definitely someone to talk about in a thread like this and you're right, he does get overlooked to a certain extent. Of course, by not mentioning him in a thread where most have been focusing on players who aren't necessarily in the first tier of all-time greats, in a roundabout way that's kind of acknowledging him as one of the best.

I'm not criticizing dunking, nor dismissing it as useless showboating. I'm just saying it's overdone... I agree it's the highest percentage shot in basketball, but I don't see the need to go for a dunk every single time. Nowadays, even when they're all by themselves on a fast break, 90% of players go for a dunk; in this situation the "highest percentage shot" excuse isn't good anymore, since I expect an NBA player's layup conversion percentage to be as high as his dunk conversion percentage. Anyway, I can stand a dunk, hell I love dunks; I just don't see the point in flashy dunks (really what's the point in a treadmill dunk or stuff like that?) and the more than occasional show after the dunk...

I think the highest percentage shot argument still carries weight, simply because of the mechanics of dunks and layups. With a layup, there's a greater chance you put too much english on the shot and have it spin out, put it too hard off the board or mess up the aim. A few examples:

phpBB [video]

phpBB [video]

phpBB [video]

phpBB [video]

phpBB [video]

Now, that's not to say dunks can't be missed because the ball will slip and sometimes players are going to catch the rim, but when you're getting right up to the hoop and putting the ball down through it, you're eliminating some of the things that can go wrong on a layup attempt. A dunk is most certainly still a higher percentage shot.

As for flashy dunks, I see where you're coming from but if you eliminate that culture, the artistic nature of the sport and the self-expression aspect of it all, you're left with...well, netball. A fine team sport, great fundamental skills, but the pro players are getting less than $5000 a year because there's no money it, because nowhere near as many people are interested in it.

Even point guards, who shouldn't care much about scoring since that's not their main duty in basketball, they drive and dunk whenever they can, just because they can, when a pass or even a mid-range shot would be the best option. Same thing with passes: I'll use Jason Williams as an example because I despise him in a particular way, but it applies to a lot of players. Why on Earth would you even think of passing the ball that way when passing it "the traditional way" is easier, not to mention and especially more effective? I don't see any other reason other than to show off, and it really pisses me off.

Again, I see where you're coming from but that's a fairly rigid definition of a point guard and the best point guards in NBA history - John Stockton included - tended to average more than 15 ppg. Bob Cousy was the first player to score 50 points in a playoff game. Point guards tend to be the primary ballhandler and as such they're running the show, so a certain level of unselfishness goes a long way but that's not to say they shouldn't care so much about scoring. If they have the skills to score a lot of points, then they should have those opportunities within the offense. And who's to say that a pass or a midrange shot is the best option? A shot close to the hoop is a higher percentage shot and a good point guard is not one who avoids scoring when the opportunity is there.

As for flashy passes, I agree that they're risky but some of them are also elusive, throwing defenders off by feinting a pass one way while sending the ball the other way. Such passes are nothing new, some players take it to a level that is beyond being functional as there's a definite streetball influence with a lot of players but they do serve their purpose in being deceptive and elusive, when used at opportune times.

Okay, then maybe you can make an argument the '97 and '98 Jazz at least deserved a Game 7. The Bulls won thanks to a buzzer beater on both occasions, and I think it's safe to say they won (and I'm talking about exclusively about Game 6 here,) not entirely of course, thanks to a little bit of luck.

You could say they deserved a Game 7 but that's essentially saying the same thing. You could just as easily say the Cavs didn't deserve to get swept in 2007, the Mavericks deserved to win in 2006, the Lakers didn't deserve to get blown out in Game 6 last year and so on. The bottom line is that's the way things went down and in sports a win isn't earned until it's achieved; if you can accomplish that, then you deserve it. I know that's a fairly rigid definition and I understand the sentiment behind it but when we say the team that lost deserved to win, we're also suggesting that the team that won deserved to lose. We can always go into the specifics of course, bad calls, injuries and other factors but if you win four out of seven then I think in all fairness you're the most deserving. Like I said, I understand the sentiment and that it's not so much anti-Bulls as it is pro-Jazz (for most people, anyway) but in my opinion it's a sentiment that gives too much credit to the losing side.

Anyway, back on topic, any of you remember Richard Dumas? I watched Game 3 of the '93 Finals yesterday and the guy was on fire. What ever happened to him?

Ah, Richard Dumas, the last rookie to start a Finals game before Daniel Gibson did it in 2007. I've got a feeling a couple of suspensions for drug violations resulted in his early departure from the NBA though he continued to play overseas.

[Jeffx]

I think the dunk is much maligned anyway. It's become fashionable to criticise dunking and dismiss it as useless showboating but it's the highest percentage shot in the game. Shaq once said if he can get the dunk ten out of ten times, he's going for the dunk ten out of ten times. Some players can put on a bit of a show when they dunk and I don't see a problem with that. It's not a circus, but sport isn't a business meeting either. If you don't like flair then that's cool, we should all appreciate the fundamentals anyway. But I think players playing with flair and having distinctive styles and personality on the court is a part of sport too.

Well said. Basketball is a game of improvisation(in his autobiography, Kareem compared it to jazz, and he's right). Some cats do it old skool, some with more flair, some with a combo of the two. I can appreciate any style.

Back to old skool ballers, how about the Man from Lovetron, "Chocolate Thunder", Darryl Dawkins? Dude was breaking backboards when Shaq was in diapers, and he had a nice 'J' too. I'll never forge him squaring off against Portland's Maurice Lucas in the 1977 NBA Finals.

[jonthefon]

Vinnie Johnson, anyone? He was THE Microwave. That 22-point 4th quarter playoff game against the Celtics was a serious case of heating up.

Mark Price = probably my favorite retro PG behind Stockton. His three-point shot form was beautiful as was John Paxson's. Good passer and could score inside.

John Starks gets a plus from me. He was pretty much the definition of the 90s Knicks: he could play tough, scrap and hustle, he had a good three-point shot and plus he made some great moves - of course there was that infamous dunk past practically the entire Bulls team but he made a bunch of other sick moves and dunked on a number of others.

Mark Aguirre was unstoppable as a scorer. He had range from everywhere on court and he shot a lot of free-throws. Combined with Rolando Blackman really well when they were in Dallas, those 80s Mavs teams were big scorers.

Nick Van Exel wasn't exactly old-school, but I'll put him on here for the sake of it. He had sick handles and will always be thought of fondly by me because of how he dropped 40 on the Kings in the playoff game in 2003.

[Andrew]

John Starks' career was a classic underdog story without the climactic championship victory. The careers of the best of the best make great tales as well but players like Starks, Mario Elie and Avery Johnson who didn't have immediate success, had to play in minor league or overseas and in some cases bounced from team to team before finding success are often inspirational as the dream of finding success in a particular field and paying one's dues is something most people can relate to. I usually think of players like that when I read about players complaining about playing time in their first or second seasons and talking about what they deserve and being unappreciated.

[Clueminati017]

Where's the love for Jamal Wilkes and Orlando Woolridge? These guys were an exceptional role players just like Sam Perkins.

[Andrew]

Woolridge had an impressive entry in the 1984 dunk contest, wrapping the ball behind his back before going up for a between-the-legs dunk. He never seems to get credit for that (I don't think he even got close to a 50 for it, though my memory could be letting me down there), everyone talks about players bringing it into the contest in the last ten years or so but he did it way back then.