luther

Modern players would win, hands down, because of their athleticism. The differences in athletes' physical abilities is ridiculous. Even when you look at players in the 80s, they are not remotely close to modern players in terms of fitness: strength, speed, agility, etc. The game has continued to evolve, and the players continually get better. There were no Kevin Garnetts in the 50s. Watch highlights and you can see the differences: slower players, weaker players, etc.

That said, if you picked 12 guys from each of the eras (by the way, there are more than two eras; I'd have divided history up into at least five, probably, but that is beside the point) and somehow were able to raise them from childhood under the same conditions, same training, same competition, same nutrition, etc., then the above would be a moot point. And so then ... I'd pick new, but just barely. Kareem, Russell and Wilt were great, and I believe would pretty much match up with Shaq, David Robinson and Hakeem. But a lineup that could include Magic Johnson, Michael Jordan and Lebron James...there are no equals to those players. LeBron, at 6-8, 250, playing a wing? Oscar is the closest thing to him, and he was, what, 6-5?