By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Nuvendil on 08 June 2017
Edit Thread
Soundwave said:

lol, lets be real, the 60s Celtics would get thrashed by multiple teams. The 80s Lakers/Celtics, probably the Bad Boy Pistons, definitely the 90s Bulls, the Shaq-Kobe Lakers, the current Warriors would all beat them.

Basketball just has evolved a long way from the 1960s and there's nothing wrong with admitting that. The Russell Celtics wouldn't know how to even guard half the modern day players, they'd never have seen anyone like Shaq, Jordan, Durant, Curry, etc. they'd have no answer for their offensive sets, or the physical play of certain teams and the sheer size of many teams either.

They hadn't seen Shaq but they had seen Wilt who was faster, stronger, jumped higher, had a perimeter game, and had far, far more endurance.

They hadn't seen Jordan but they had seen Elgin Baylor, the true father or Show Time.  (Not saying he's better than Jordan but he was one heck of an inside player).

They hadn't played Curry but they played West, the second or third best shooting guard of all time depending on who you ask, who had an outside shot and was basically a 2010s player born many decades early.  Again, not saying he's exactly like Curry, he didn't have the same ball handling, just sayin.

And as for physicality, the Celtics played in a league with NO flagrant fouls.  The 60s was far, far, far, far, FAR more physical and rough and fast paced than todays league.  Take a team from today and stick them on the court back then and most wouldn't be able to go the distance, they would be completely gassed by halfway through a series.  The game has evolved a ton.  Not every evolution has resulted in better play though, nor in better conditioning for players.  

The Celtics faced unstoppable offenses in their day and stopped them.  Shoot, in 69 they faced a Lakers team with what is hands dlwn the most ridiculous big 3 ever leading it:  West, Baylor, and Wilt.  Not only were they arguably the number 1, 2, and 3 best players in the league in terms of individual skill, they are also top 5 all time in ther positions, Wilt and West being top 3 all time.  You could stick that set in any era and they would make a team that would rock the world.  But they got beat by the Celtics, who were at that point actually getting pretty old.

And the reason is as I said: depth.  No, none of the Celtics players back then are top 5 all time.  Shoot, Russell is the only top 10.  But the sheer numbers and team focused play make up for that.  

As for all those teams you mentioned, it would be a battle for all of them.  It would also depend largely on whose rules they play by.  If they play by 60s rules, I definitely give the edge to the Celtics.