Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 115
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington DC
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingdutchdevil View Post
    Side note: I don't think Karl Malone gets enough credit for longevity. He played 19 seasons in the NBA, and this is after playing 3 seasons of college. That's 22 years of highly competitive basketball where he never missed more than 2 games a season until his last season when he was 40 years old.
    Karl Malone was pretty exceptional. He averaged 20+ in all but his first and last seasons. He was also first team all-defense twice. One title could have really changed perception of him and boosted him 5-6 spots higher.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington DC
    Cool article on expected titles - https://www.theringer.com/nba/2020/5...n-lebron-james

    Heat had 76% chance of beating the Mavs in 2011. Ouch.

    Spurs had 73% odds of beating the Heat in 2014.

    Quote Originally Posted by flyingdutchdevil View Post
    He missed 2 with the Heat.

    In the 2011, the Heat were off to a slow start (like any Lebron team that comes together). But Miami won three straight playoff series 4-1, including wins over the Celtics (who had a very similar record to the Heat) and the Bulls (who were top in the East with a 62-20 record). The Mavericks were third in the West with a 57-25 record. It was a huge upset as the Heat were peaking and the Mavs were expected to lose badly.

    And in the 2013-2014, the Heat's core had been together for 4 years and had Battier and Ray Allen for multiple years. Yes, the Spurs still had Duncan, Manu, Parker, and added Kawhi, their core was passed their primes and Kawhi was the best player in that series despite being only 3 years in the league.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by superdave View Post
    Cool article on expected titles - https://www.theringer.com/nba/2020/5...n-lebron-james

    Heat had 76% chance of beating the Mavs in 2011. Ouch.

    Spurs had 73% odds of beating the Heat in 2014.
    Wow. 73% for the Spurs? What the hell did the Spurs have that the Heat didn't? Were there injuries I forgot about?
    Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things. - Winston Churchill

    President of the "Nolan Smith Should Have His Jersey in The Rafters" Club

  4. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingdutchdevil View Post
    Wow. 73% for the Spurs? What the hell did the Spurs have that the Heat didn't? Were there injuries I forgot about?
    They had one of the few human beings who could contain LeBron and a plan to overcome the Heat’s defense with ball movement: https://www.espn.com/nba/playoffs/20...ed-nba-forever
    Carolina delenda est

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO
    Quote Originally Posted by superdave View Post
    I think the simple argument is that Wilt's individual accomplishments dont overcome Russell big advantage on winning.

    I would argue winning is far more important than longevity and individual accomplishments, which were the three categories I mentioned.
    Not to be argumentative, but would that make Yogi Berra the best baseball player of all time, with 14 World Series appearances and ten rings?

    And the NFL? There Tom Brady, the only player with six rings; Charles Haley with five; and, and...

    Twenty-two players earned four rings with Pittsburgh Steelers in the 1970s: Terry Bradshaw, Franco Harris, Lynn Swann, John Stallworth, Mel Blount, Jack Lambert, Jack Ham, Mike Webster, Donnie Shell, L. C. Greenwood, Rocky Bleier, Gerry Mullins, Larry Brown, Mike Wagner, J.T. Thomas, Loren Toews, Jon Kolb, Sam Davis, Steve Furness, Dwight White, Randy Grossman and Mean Joe Greene (who later added two more rings as a coach).
    Sage Grouse

    ---------------------------------------
    'When I got on the bus for my first road game at Duke, I saw that every player was carrying textbooks or laptops. I coached in the SEC for 25 years, and I had never seen that before, not even once.' - David Cutcliffe to Duke alumni in Washington, DC, June 2013

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington DC
    Quote Originally Posted by sagegrouse View Post
    Not to be argumentative, but would that make Yogi Berra the best baseball player of all time, with 14 World Series appearances and ten rings?

    And the NFL? There Tom Brady, the only player with six rings; Charles Haley with five; and, and...
    No. Doesnít make Steve Kerr or Robert Horry top 10 players either.

    Also, Derek Jeter was better at dating than baseball, but Iím getting off track here...

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO
    Quote Originally Posted by superdave View Post
    Karl Malone was pretty exceptional. He averaged 20+ in all but his first and last seasons. He was also first team all-defense twice. One title could have really changed perception of him and boosted him 5-6 spots higher.
    Like a lot of other stars, he could have benefited from a different time zone.
    Sage Grouse

    ---------------------------------------
    'When I got on the bus for my first road game at Duke, I saw that every player was carrying textbooks or laptops. I coached in the SEC for 25 years, and I had never seen that before, not even once.' - David Cutcliffe to Duke alumni in Washington, DC, June 2013

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by sagegrouse View Post
    Like a lot of other stars, he could have benefited from a different time zone.
    Mountain Time is more beneficial than EST?
    Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things. - Winston Churchill

    President of the "Nolan Smith Should Have His Jersey in The Rafters" Club

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO
    Quote Originally Posted by flyingdutchdevil View Post
    Mountain Time is more beneficial than EST?
    I think the guys in Utah and Portland get overlooked by the public if not the media. Not so much LA, which is its own world; Golden State survived Oakland (now in SF) by being better than anyone else. If Karl Malone had played for the Knicks or Celtics, he would be in the discussion as one of the greatest.
    Sage Grouse

    ---------------------------------------
    'When I got on the bus for my first road game at Duke, I saw that every player was carrying textbooks or laptops. I coached in the SEC for 25 years, and I had never seen that before, not even once.' - David Cutcliffe to Duke alumni in Washington, DC, June 2013

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    New Orleans, Louisiana
    I don't see the purpose in trying to determine the greatest individual player in a team sport, and I encourage you all to ask yourselves if you have ever changed your mind on this exact subject based on what someone else wrote.

    That said, here is what someone else wrote, specifically Olympic Fan in 2009 for the thread MJ asks David Thompson to intro him to the HOF.

    Quote Originally Posted by Olympic Fan View Post
    Which record is that?

    We've had this discussion several times. Michael Jordan is the product of the ESPN hype machine. Russell, who played long before there was a Sportscenter, was a far more dominant player than Michael Jordan.

    And, yes, Russell changed the game as much or more than Michael Jordan ever did (the modern goaltending rules are a product of his shotblocking prowess).

    Let's put it in simple terms: His teams won. They won far more often that Jordan's teams (or Wilt's teams or Oscar's teams).

    Yeah, he had good teammates -- but so did the other guys. Look it up, Philadelphia was actually more successful before Wilt joined the team than the Celtics were before Russell joined the team. The Warriors won the 1956 NBA title without Wilt. The Celtics had never before reached the NBA finals (much less won a title) before Russell joined the team at midseason in 1956-57 (he joined at midseason so he could represent the US in the '56 Olympic games). After that, they never stopped winning until Russell retired. The '56 champion Warriors didn't win again, even after adding Wilt, until Russell retired.

    It's worth noting that his San Francisco teams won back to back national titles in his last two years there -- that's more NCAA titles than Jordan, Wilt, Oscar, Jerry West or Larry Bird won COMBINED. Yeah, KC Jones was a teammate for the first title, but Jones was ineligible for the '56 playoffs.

    Just for fun, someday look up Jordan's teammates in 1983 and 1984 and compare them with Russell's teammates in 55 and 56. You might be surprised what you find.

    Let's see ... Russell was the best player on teams that won two straight NCAA titles, the Olympic Gold and Celtics teams that won the NBA title in 11 of his 13 seasons. The Celtics, which had never won anything before Russell, won the NBA title in his first two seasons (then he got hurt and the Celtics lost in the finals), then they won seven more titles in a row. They also won in his final year when Wilt faked an injury and hid on the bench. And the year after Russell retired, the Celtics -- with all those great players who are supposed to be the reason he won so many titles -- finished below .500 and failed to make the playoffs.

    Russell is the greatest winner in the history of team sports -- his teams won the ultimate championship in 13 of his last 15 seasons (14 of 16 if you count the Olympics).

    Jordan was a great player and a great winner too. We all remember that he hit the game-winner to help Dean Smith win his first championshp in 1982. But do you remember that James Worthy was the star of that team (and the Final Four MVP) and it also had three-time All-American Sam Perkins.

    In the two college seasons after Worthy left, Jordan constantly choked in postseason -- to NC State and Duke in the ACC Tournament semifinals; to Georgia in the Elite Eight and to Indiana in the Sweet 16.

    Eventually, Jordan became a winner in the NBA, after a long apprenticeship. After the Bulls added Scottie Pippen. In contrast, Russell won right away and kept winning. Yeah, he won with Cousy (who had never won anything before Russell arrived) ... and he kept winning when Cousy retired. He won before Havlicek arrived and after he arrived.

    Your comment that Oscar and Wilt were better than Russell suggest that you are mesmerized by individual stats -- the way Oscar and Wilt were. They put up great numbers. But they weren't winners. Oscar never got Cincinnati to the national title game, but they got there three straight times in the three years after he left (winning two titles). Can you really argue that a guy's the greatest player ever when his team gets better after he leaves?

    Oscar won one NBA title, when late in his career, he finally hooked up with Kareem Abdul Jabbar.

    Wilt choked against UNC in the 1957 title game and he was constantly beaten by Russell. Yeah, he had great numbers against the Celtics, but at crunch time, Russell ALWAYS shut him down. (Russell explained in his autobiography that during the game, he'd let Wilt get the ball where he wanted and take the shots he wanted -- until the game was on the line and Russell would beat him to the spot and deny him the shots he wanted. It always worked and Wilt -- being the mental midget he was -- never figured it out).

    My point is that the object of the game is to win, not to score a lot of individual points or pile up a lot of stats. Who is to say that the things Russell did -- his ability to dominate games at the defensive end and on the boards -- were not more important than Jordan's ability to score points? The record that you talk about would seem to indicate that Russell's contributions led to more victories than Jordan's contributions.

    Am I right that Russell is the greatest player in basketball history? I think so, but I'm not so arrogant as you are -- and so many other children of the ESPN era are -- to think that my opinion is fact and there's no room for debate.

    Just understand that this IS a matter of opinion and there are plenty of varying opinions out there -- and it's not so crazy to suggest that Bill Russell and not Michael Jordan is not the greatest player of all time.
    Quote Originally Posted by Olympic Fan View Post
    Not that it proves anything, but in 1962 -- the year that Chamberlain averaged 50 points a game (actually 50.4 with 25.7 rebounds a game) -- the players voted on the MVP.

    Guess who won?

    It wasn't the guy nicknamed the Stilt ... they didn't give it to the Big O, who averaged a triple double (30.8 ppg., 12.5 rpg. and 11.4 apg.).

    Instead, the players gave it to perhaps the most unpopular guy in the league -- Bill Russell. And it sure wasn't a popularity contest -- nobody outside Boston liked Russell, while everybody was Wilt's buddy. Think about that ... they overwhelming voted the MVP award to a guy who averaged 18.9 points and 23.6 rebounds a game.

    Actually, Russell may have averaged a triple double too -- several sources estimate that he averaged between 12-15 blocked shots a game in those years, but the NBA didn't keep blocks at that time.

    Maybe his contemporaries weren't as stat-focused as the fans ...
    Quote Originally Posted by Olympic Fan View Post
    [Baseball digression]

    ...When you go back to the NBA MVP vote, there is some of that, but it's not so blatant. They did give MVP awards to Oscar, West and Wilt in years when their teams did not win it all or even finish with the best regular season record.

    There's one big difference between the NBA MVP in that era and the baseball awards. In baseball, the writers made the picks. In the MVP, the awards were voted by the players (at least until 1979).

    I understand the sentiment for Kareem as the greast player of all time. He did win more MVPs (six) than Jordan or Russell (five each) and two more than Wilt (four). I think he's the greatest collegiate player of all time.

    But I still believe Russell had more impact on the pro game and since he's just a hair behind Kareem as a college player (it took him one season to achieve the same dominance that Kareem had a sophomore), I still argue that Russell is the No. 1 player of all-time. I do have Kareem at No. 2 and Jordan at No. 3.

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Durham
    Quote Originally Posted by elvis14 View Post
    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.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Outside Philly
    Quote Originally Posted by brevity View Post
    I don't see the purpose in trying to determine the greatest individual player in a team sport, and I encourage you all to ask yourselves if you have ever changed your mind on this exact subject based on what someone else wrote.

    That said, here is what someone else wrote, specifically Olympic Fan in 2009 for the thread MJ asks David Thompson to intro him to the HOF.
    Whoa. Has DBR become so institutionalized as to mine its posting depths ten years back for research purposes? That's pretty neat stuff, thanks for pulling that up.

    I feel like someone could write a very specific book with an even more specific audience on the development of virtual micro-cultures and histories using DBR as a case study.

  13. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by superdave View Post
    No. Doesnít make Steve Kerr or Robert Horry top 10 players either.

    Also, Derek Jeter was better at dating than baseball, but Iím getting off track here...


    Quote Originally Posted by sagegrouse View Post
    Like a lot of other stars, he could have benefited from a different time zone.
    Reading these replies back to back confused me because it's early and I haven't had coffee yet.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO
    Quote Originally Posted by Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15 View Post
    Reading these replies back to back confused me because it's early and I haven't had coffee yet.
    No problem. Teams that play "out West" typically get very poor media coverage, and -- in the context of the thread -- their players have diminished chances for recognition. In the NBA the problem seems to affect Portland, Utah, Phoenix, and Denver more than the Lakers and Warriors. Chargers? Not so sure. Karl Malone, had he played on the East Coast, would figure more prominently in the "best of all time" discussion.

    I am not trying to oversimplify. For example, winning championships helps overcome the "late night" issue -- as Golden State has shown. And the Lakers players. for some of the same reasons, are not cheated in recognition, as the SI Top Ten shows.
    Sage Grouse

    ---------------------------------------
    'When I got on the bus for my first road game at Duke, I saw that every player was carrying textbooks or laptops. I coached in the SEC for 25 years, and I had never seen that before, not even once.' - David Cutcliffe to Duke alumni in Washington, DC, June 2013

  15. #75
    Quote Originally Posted by sagegrouse View Post
    No problem. Teams that play "out West" typically get very poor media coverage, and -- in the context of the thread -- their players have diminished chances for recognition. In the NBA the problem seems to affect Portland, Utah, Phoenix, and Denver more than the Lakers and Warriors. Chargers? Not so sure. Karl Malone, had he played on the East Coast, would figure more prominently in the "best of all time" discussion.

    I am not trying to oversimplify. For example, winning championships helps overcome the "late night" issue -- as Golden State has shown. And the Lakers players. for some of the same reasons, are not cheated in recognition, as the SI Top Ten shows.
    You missed my joke!

  16. #76
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington DC
    Quote Originally Posted by Steven43 View Post
    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 heís talking on this subject than random posters on DBR (including myself) or ESPN sportswriters, most of whom werenít there.

    Most people just look at stats and number of titles won and think that determines who the best player was. Itís just a silly way to look at it. Because Bill Russellís teams won 11 championships in the 1950s and 1960s does not mean thatís a greater accomplishment then Steph Curryís teams winning 3 titles in this era. The key word here is ďteamĒ. This is a team sport. One player does not win championships I donít 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 thatís really the only way you can look at it ó who is the best in their era.
    Going back to my three categories for comparing, Bird gets hurt on longevity. If heís healthy, if Bias doesnít 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 didnít 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? Heíd have Steve Kerrís career right? A nice career but no MVPs. That is part of the conversation.

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

  17. #77
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    A lot of folks earlier in this thread were saying that Kobe was basically the same player as Michael and using that as some proof that Michael's game would not be as effective today as it was in the 90s.

    Ummm, the reality is that Michael was waaaay better than Kobe. Sure, they both took a lot of leaning, fade-away jumpers -- they were masters at getting that undefendable shot -- but Michael just hit it a ton more than Kobe did. Kobe never hit more than 50% from the field in his career. NEVER! Michael averaged 50.5% FGs as a Bull.

    -Jason "Kobe always wanted to be Michael... and he maybe came close at times... but he was never quite there. Having one of the all-time greats want to 'be like Mike' is further proof that Mike is the greatest of all time"Evans
    I don't know what you are doing right now, but if you aren't listening to the DBR Podcast, you're doing it wrong.

  18. #78

    As an aside

    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    Ummm, the reality is that Michael was waaaay better than Kobe. Sure, they both took a lot of leaning, fade-away jumpers -- they were masters at getting that undefendable shot -- but Michael just hit it a ton more than Kobe did. Kobe never hit more than 50% from the field in his career. NEVER! Michael averaged 50.5% FGs as a Bull.
    In today's NBA the only things that matter on offense are shots inside the restricted area or three pointers because on average mid-range jumpers don't give you as many points per shot. Curiously, Jordan and Wade lived off mid-range jumpers and both had three entire seasons where they didn't even make ten threes.

    So instead of ignoring the mid-range jumpers, maybe players should want to be like Mike (Jordan, not D'Antoni). Or Dwyane. I know that's not easy, but perhaps they could start by remembering that in Johnny Wooden's day, the bank was always open in Westwood. Just sayin'.

  19. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    A lot of folks earlier in this thread were saying that Kobe was basically the same player as Michael and using that as some proof that Michael's game would not be as effective today as it was in the 90s.

    Ummm, the reality is that Michael was waaaay better than Kobe. Sure, they both took a lot of leaning, fade-away jumpers -- they were masters at getting that undefendable shot -- but Michael just hit it a ton more than Kobe did. Kobe never hit more than 50% from the field in his career. NEVER! Michael averaged 50.5% FGs as a Bull.

    -Jason "Kobe always wanted to be Michael... and he maybe came close at times... but he was never quite there. Having one of the all-time greats want to 'be like Mike' is further proof that Mike is the greatest of all time"Evans
    Or it could actually prove the point. A guy with the same exact skill set, size, athleticism and insane competitiveness wasn’t quite as effective against modern competition.
    Last edited by nmduke2001; 05-17-2020 at 08:20 PM.

  20. #80
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Durham
    Quote Originally Posted by nmduke2001 View Post
    Or it could actually prove the point. A guy with the same exact skill set, size, athleticism and insane competitiveness wasn’t quite as effective against modern competition.
    I beg to differ, sir. I don’t believe Bryant had the overall athleticism, strength, effectiveness in scoring near the basket, defensive ability, or sheer will to win that Jordan had. Bryant was 2% to Jordan’s whole milk.

Similar Threads

  1. ESPN's Top 25 players for 2017-18
    By kAzE in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 05-26-2017, 02:20 PM
  2. ESPN Ranks the Top 100 Men's BBall Players
    By kAzE in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-15-2016, 07:52 PM
  3. ESPN's Top 75 Moments in NCAA Tourney History
    By JasonEvans in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 02-23-2013, 07:42 PM
  4. ESPN attempts to rank top 500 NBA players
    By superdave in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 11-28-2011, 10:29 PM
  5. ESPN's Players To Watch This Year
    By Buckeye Devil in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 10-17-2007, 10:05 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •