ESPN's Top 10 players in NBA history

[bullettoothtony]

Thoughts?

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/...s-all-nos-10-1

[acdevil]

Meh!

[cato]

Thoughts?

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/...s-all-nos-10-1

My immediate reaction is that I’d knock Kobe off the list. And no, Oscar Robinson, I’m not necessarily giving you his spot.

From the modern era, does Tim Duncan deserve inclusion over Kevin Durant? Before he got insured, one could argue KD was better then LBJ or Steph.

[miramar]

Well, at least not yet.

[sagegrouse]

Thoughts?

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/...s-all-nos-10-1

Without looking at the link, I would offer the beginnings of my analysis.

(A) Before the Dream Team
(B) The Dream Team
(C) After the D.T.

Kindly,
Sage
'Second installment later'

[Kdogg]

Without looking at the link, I would offer the beginnings of my analysis.

(A) Before the Dream Team
(B) The Dream Team
(C) After the D.T.

Kindly,
Sage
'Second installment later'

Did a Laker's homer make the list? I'd drop Shaq and Kobe from the top ten.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Did a Laker's homer make the list? I'd drop Shaq and Kobe from the top ten.

Shaq is overrated. He was a beast. But not a top player.

[bundabergdevil]

Shaq is overrated. He was a beast. But not a top player.

I was pleased to see the article at least dip its toe into the difference between the best player, the greatest player, and the most dominant in his prime (peak performance) player, which are three different things, IMO.

To your critique above, I think Shaw has a case for Top 3 most dominant in his prime players but a much diminished case for best player and greatest player.

Kobe wouldn't sniff my Top 10 most dominant players in his prime designation but does sneak into my best and greatest player discussions.

Also, what would it take for general agreement to coalesce on LBJ > MJ?

For me, first things first, it would have taken those 2 extra lost titles in Miami. I'm not sure if he can recover from that. After that, GS ascended, changed the how the game was played, and LBJ's window closed but for that incredible 3-1 comeback, which may be the single best finals achievement and greatest upset in NBA history.

If LBJ wants to move the needle on the LBJ v. MJ discussion, I think he needs to win 1 in LA (COVID may have intervened on MJ's behalf) and capture the NBA all-time leading scoring record enter the Top 5 all-time assist leaders, both of which are achievable.

[ice-9]

Shaq is overrated. He was a beast. But not a top player.

In today's faster paced NBA, he might not be a top player.

But in his era...the moniker "most dominant ever" was quite justified. I've never seen a player like him ever since. The best thing you can do to stop him is to foul him, and even with his woeful FT shooting percentage that's still a point per possession.

Plus, he won four championships as one of the team's top two best players. Shaq should be up there.

[JNort]

Sticking to just the top 10.

- Shaq should be ahead of Kobe, always.

- Kobe might not be top 10 (11th to 15th).

- Wilt over Bird?!?!? Fairly certain general consensus is the top 5 (no order) usually includes Jordan, Bird, LeBron, Magic, and Kareem.


Ps: I know I said I was sticking to top10 but what are they thinking put Giannis that high up.?!?!? Way too early.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Sticking to just the top 10.

- Shaq should be ahead of Kobe, always.

- Kobe might not be top 10 (11th to 15th).

- Wilt over Bird?!?!? Fairly certain general consensus is the top 5 (no order) usually includes Jordan, Bird, LeBron, Magic, and Kareem.


Ps: I know I said I was sticking to top10 but what are they thinking put Giannis that high up.?!?!? Way too early.

From what I've read (and discussed), Wilt is usually consensus top 5. Then again, the consensus top 10 active NBA players usually includes ~25 players.

For me, the 5 players who need to be in the top 5 are Jordan, Lebron, Kareem, Wilt, and Russell. I'd probably put Bird and Magic in the top 10. Then I'd have to go Timmy D, the greatest PF in the game. That leaves 2 players to round out the top 10.

So many options, but I'd probably add Karl Malone (personal bias, and he's the 2nd highest scorer of all time) and Shaq.

The biggest issue I have with the top 10 is the inclusion of Kobe and the order.

[brlftz]

Before reading the article I made my list, and I'm pretty amazed to say we matched on 9 of 10. The only difference was that I included the Big O over Shaq, and I think I can defend that one. Also, MJ is the best ever, and I am surprised it's a debate. MJ was inevitable. Lebron will put on an amazing show but his team will still lose.

[flyingdutchdevil]

Before reading the article I made my list, and I'm pretty amazed to say we matched on 9 of 10. The only difference was that I included the Big O over Shaq, and I think I can defend that one. Also, MJ is the best ever, and I am surprised it's a debate. MJ was inevitable. Lebron will put on an amazing show but his team will still lose.

I sadly agree with you, but let's remember MJ went to UNC and this is a Duke board.

It's like going to IC and asking if Tatum, Ingram, Kyrie, and Zion are All-Stars. They will clearly say no and argue Coby White is a top 5 NBA player...

[nmduke2001]

Before reading the article I made my list, and I'm pretty amazed to say we matched on 9 of 10. The only difference was that I included the Big O over Shaq, and I think I can defend that one. Also, MJ is the best ever, and I am surprised it's a debate. MJ was inevitable. Lebron will put on an amazing show but his team will still lose.

The reason that I put Lebron over MJ is because of Kobe. People on this board are ranking Kobe out of the top 10. Kobe was pretty much exactly MJ just a generation later. There isn't a better test of how one player would play in the next generation. Kobe did everything Jordan did and wasn't the best of his generation. Jordan was the missing link. He created the evolution to the modern, more athletic player. Lebron has mastered it. Lebron can do anything Jordan could do (I'd argue he's a much better passer and ball handler) and he does it with an addition 3 inches and 50 lbs. I'll give you one more thought; who was guarding MJ on the iconic last shot against Cleveland? Craig Ehlo. Do you think Ehlo is even in the game during that possession if it was the modern NBA? On more; Jordan's main rival early in his career for best perimeter player was Clyde Drexler. Go look at old game film. Clyde could barely dribble without looking at the ball.

footnote: I realize this is an unpopular opinion, but my generation has made MJ into a mythical figure. Take away Nike, "Like Mike", and Space Jam and I think we remember him as the most dominate player of his generation and a top ten player.

[ice-9]

Before reading the article I made my list, and I'm pretty amazed to say we matched on 9 of 10. The only difference was that I included the Big O over Shaq, and I think I can defend that one. Also, MJ is the best ever, and I am surprised it's a debate. MJ was inevitable. Lebron will put on an amazing show but his team will still lose.

What was self-illuminating was as I was reading the list, LeBron at #2 seems strangely out of place. It jumped out that he "only" has 3 championships, while everyone else on the list had more (except Wilt with 2 and Bird with 3). It made me wonder why so many (including me) put LeBron at #2. Is it recency bias? Is it the eye test? Why wouldn't someone like Kareem, who was also dominant in his time and has twice as many championships, be rated higher?

[PackMan97]

I do take issue with the quote they used for Kareem at #3..."His unstoppable skyhook allowed him to score more points than anyone in league history, and while he wasn't flashy, there has arguably never been anyone better.". Clearly they think there have been two better or he wouldn't be at #3. Just saying.

I still hate MJ and he doesn't deserve to be at #1 over players like Kareem and Russel. I love that Duncan gets his due. I never realized he has won the most regular season games with the same team.

[elvis14]

ESPN's list:

1. MJ
2. Bron
3. Kareem
4. Bill
5. Magic
6. Wilt
7. Larry
8. Tim
9. Kobe
10. Shaq

It's pretty hard to argue with the names on this list. I was no Shaq fan but anyone that thinks he wouldn't be dominant in any era of NBA basketball is batsh*t crazy. Leaving Kobe out of the top ten, ridiculous. I don't care about the MJ vs Bron argument, they both dominated their times. I agree with the poster that said Kobe was basically MJ (without the UNCheat baggage). Bill is too high IMHO, he was a great team guy but on this list I'd have him at 9 or 10. Kobe is too low, Larry is too high. Tim is probably 10. I would have MJ, Bron, Kareem and Wilt as my top 4 in some order. Followed by Magic, Larry, Kobe, Shaq in some order.

[rsvman]

ESPN's list:

1. MJ
2. Bron
3. Kareem
4. Bill
5. Magic
6. Wilt
7. Larry
8. Tim
9. Kobe
10. Shaq

It's pretty hard to argue with the names on this list. I was no Shaq fan but anyone that thinks he wouldn't be dominant in any era of NBA basketball is batsh*t crazy. Leaving Kobe out of the top ten, ridiculous. I don't care about the MJ vs Bron argument, they both dominated their times. I agree with the poster that said Kobe was basically MJ (without the UNCheat baggage). Bill is too high IMHO, he was a great team guy but on this list I'd have him at 9 or 10. Kobe is too low, Larry is too high. Tim is probably 10. I would have MJ, Bron, Kareem and Wilt as my top 4 in some order. Followed by Magic, Larry, Kobe, Shaq in some order.

Are you saying that you would Kobe Bryant over Larry Bird?

[Steven43]

ESPN's list:

1. MJ
2. Bron
3. Kareem
4. Bill
5. Magic
6. Wilt
7. Larry
8. Tim
9. Kobe
10. Shaq

It's pretty hard to argue with the names on this list. I was no Shaq fan but anyone that thinks he wouldn't be dominant in any era of NBA basketball is batsh*t crazy. Leaving Kobe out of the top ten, ridiculous. I don't care about the MJ vs Bron argument, they both dominated their times. I agree with the poster that said Kobe was basically MJ (without the UNCheat baggage). Bill is too high IMHO, he was a great team guy but on this list I'd have him at 9 or 10. Kobe is too low, Larry is too high. Tim is probably 10. I would have MJ, Bron, Kareem and Wilt as my top 4 in some order. Followed by Magic, Larry, Kobe, Shaq in some order.

Larry is too HIGH?? No, Larry is way too low. I think he had more high-level abilities — passing, court vision, rebounding, shooting from ANYWHERE on the court, FTs, clutchness, leadership, will to win, toughness — than anybody on this list. The only thing that kept him from being considered right alongside Jordan as the best player ever was injuries. If you didn’t see him play at his absolute peak you would not understand. You had to see with your own eyes how he would absolutely dominate games.

The narrative has changed with time, but when Bird was at his peak he was widely considered the superior overall player to Magic. Kareem said Bird was the best player he ever played against, and he played against many of the all-time greats. I am more inclined to believe Kareem knows what he’s talking on this subject than random posters on DBR (including myself) or ESPN sportswriters, most of whom weren’t there.

Most people just look at stats and number of titles won and think that determines who the best player was. It’s just a silly way to look at it. Because Bill Russell’s teams won 11 championships in the 1950s and 1960s does not mean that’s a greater accomplishment then Steph Curry’s teams winning 3 titles in this era. The key word here is “team”. This is a team sport. One player does not win championships I don’t care how good he is/was.

Honestly you really cannot legitimately compare players from different eras. Russell was probably the best player from his era. Kareem was the best player from his era. Bird was the best player from his era. Jordan was the best player from his era. James is the best player from his era. I think that’s really the only way you can look at it — who is the best in their era.

[superdave]

The narrative has changed with time, but when Bird was at his peak he was widely considered the superior overall player to Magic. Kareem said Bird was the best player he ever played against, and he played against many of the all-time greats. I am more inclined to believe Kareem knows what he’s talking on this subject than random posters on DBR (including myself) or ESPN sportswriters, most of whom weren’t there.

Most people just look at stats and number of titles won and think that determines who the best player was. It’s just a silly way to look at it. Because Bill Russell’s teams won 11 championships in the 1950s and 1960s does not mean that’s a greater accomplishment then Steph Curry’s teams winning 3 titles in this era. The key word here is “team”. This is a team sport. One player does not win championships I don’t care how good he is/was.

Honestly you really cannot legitimately compare players from different eras. Russell was probably the best player from his era. Kareem was the best player from his era. Bird was the best player from his era. Jordan was the best player from his era. James is the best player from his era. I think that’s really the only way you can look at it — who is the best in their era.

Going back to my three categories for comparing, Bird gets hurt on longevity. If he’s healthy, if Bias doesn’t overdose, if McHale stays healthy, there is a chance Bird finishes top five in points scored and wins like 7-8 titles and takes a title or two away from Jordan.

But it didn’t happen that way.

Also, I love the exercise of adjusting for eras. MJ and Lebron would have dominated any era. How would Steph have fared vs the Bad Boys? He’d have Steve Kerr’s career right? A nice career but no MVPs. That is part of the conversation.

I think Russell could have had Duncan’s career in the modern league. That guy built the culture, but it’s harder to win eleven titles in a thirty team league.