[Deleted by user.]

These are the guys who Wilt scored 100 points against:
Player Pos Min FGM FGA FTM FTA Reb Ast PF Pts
Willie Naulls F 43 9 22 13 15 7 2 5 31
Johnny Green F 21 3 7 0 0 7 1 5 6
Darrall Imhoff C 20 3 7 1 1 6 0 6 7
Richie Guerin G 46 13 29 13 17 8 6 5 39
Al Butler G 32 4 13 0 0 7 3 1 8
Cleveland Buckner 33 16 26 1 1 8 0 4 33
Dave Budd 27 6 8 1 1 10 1 1 13
Donnie Butcher 18 3 6 4 6 3 4 5

Imhoff was 6’10, 220 making him a modern small forward who would get bullied by larger men like Lebron and Kevin Durant.

Buckner was a size smaller at 6’9, 210.

Everyone else on the Knicks was both shorted and lighter.

The Sixers were playing two guards who were about 6’0 and 180 pounds.

This doesn’t resemble modern pro basketball. I’ll go so far as to say that various Euro teams would smoke them.

This is like pretending that Fred Fulton was the same size and Wlad Klitschko.

 

Imhoff was 6'10 without the shoes, which is the size of average center in the league right now. His 220 lbs is his college weight, he weighed more than that as a pro. There is no way that KD would bully Imhoff, have you ever seen him on the court?

You picked this game only because Phil Jordon missed it and he was also 6'10 veteran. You also picked Knicks because they were relatively small team.

Again, this is Knicks starting lineup in 1962 season (measured without the shoes with college weights):

PG: 6'2 175 lbs Al Butler
SG: 6'4 195 lbs Richie Guerin
SF: 6'6 225 lbs Willie Naulls
PF: 6'5 200 lbs Johnny Green
C: 6'10 205 lbs Phil Jordon

Average: 6'5.4 and 200 lbs

This is 2022 Warriors starting lineup (measured with shoes with college weights):

PG: 6'3 185 lbs Steph Curry
SG: 6'6 200 lbs Klay Thompson
SF: 6'7 200 lbs Andrew Wiggins
PF: 6'6 230 lbs Draymond Green
C: 6'9 220 lbs Kevon Looney

Average: 6'6.2 and 207 lbs

I see no difference basically.

 

So you cherry picked the smallest team in the nba, which is just a bunch of shooters by design?

We can debate this further if you put your weird agenda aside.

 

This thread is is developing into Monty Pythons ‘archaeology today’ sketch.

 

So it's fine to cherrypick undersized Knicks team without their starting center, but I can't use the best team in the league?

Maybe it's better to look at averages then?

2021 (in shoes):

PG: 6’2.5″ and 192 lbs
SG: 6’4.3″ and 200 lbs
SF: 6’6.3″ and 213 lbs
PF: 6’8.3″ and 227 lbs
C: 6’10.5″ and 246 lbs

Average: 6'6.2" and 214 lbs

1962 (without the shoes with college weights):

PG: 6'2" and 183 lbs
SG: 6'3.6" and 190 lbs
SF: 6'5.4" and 209 lbs
PF: 6'7.3" and 213 lbs
C: 6'10.1" and 229 lbs

Average: 6'5.6" and 204 lbs

Staggering half of an inch and 10 lbs difference. Without taking into account that 1960s numbers are from college.

 

Didn't the article posted above give the 3 point shot as the reason for the NBA players becoming smaller on average than they were 10 years ago? Apparently the teams want players who are 3 point threats over big men who mostly play inside the 3 point line and score mostly at 2 point range? I suspect that most 3 point shooters are not 7' tall? Maybe eventually taller players will become 3 point threats and the average height in the league will increase again?
The 3 point shot has changed the league, change the rules again, take away the 3 point shot and the players will get bigger.

 

You don't know much about basketball, do you?

 

The issue is that the players are bigger. I wouldnt be surprised if the Warriors are the smallest team of the last few decades.

I pulled up the Lakers roster and it looks nothing like that.

 

We have data for that, the league has got smaller since late 1980s.

It's so clear none of you have any clue about basketball...

 

I’d dunk on you, gramps.

 

So you admit you were wrong?

 

I think you're into something. 2 of the most famous big men, Carnera and Willard, were strong men/circus freaks and did farm work before getting into boxing with no amateur experience (last I checked). It wasn't unusual for boxing promoters to take big guys who didn't have a solid foundation in sports and rushed them towards the title so that they could become a "freak show" attraction. The novelty of seeing a modern day Goliath squashing normal sized mortals.

I'm not saying they'd be as good as Lewis or Wladmir, but I see no reason to doubt old school super heavies would do better if they played sports as children and had a solid background in the amateurs before going pro. Willard also had a very nasty, arrogant attitude, neglected his training, and underestimated some opponents (most infamously, Dempsey, and he paid the price).

The trainers of big men back then seemed to focus too much on power and overwhelming the opponent instead of having solid fundamentals and fighting tall.

 

Everything I said has been true so far.

 

That played against small guys? Guys who were the same size as modern sized centers?

 

I've thought a lot about this, but I'm not sure I've found the answer. I think one place to start is the British martial and American athletic cultures that valued skill, discipline, fundamentals, and stoicism over flash, athleticism, and size.

In boxing especially there seems to have been folk wisdom that you didn't want to be too big. People today like to believe in some kind of efficient markets hypothesis for all things but if you look at history people maintain incorrect ideas forever.

But since there is a lot of skill to boxing, if you don't attract a good trainer you won't be among the best especiallysince part of being a good trainer is having the right connections.

Also, by the time Primo came along there were a lot of useful PEDs widely available in terms of stimulants. In his time anabolics were mostly being looked at to treat breast cancer, aging, and sex/menstruation issues but by the late 40s/early 50s you never know.