Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 70
  1. #21
    Damian Lillard, LMFAO

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Yeah, Lillard should not be on the list... at least not yet. He's close, but lets see a few more years.

    And you want to know someone else who probably should not be there? Paul Pierce. I have made as many All-NBA first teams as Pierce has (zero). You can't be one of the 75 best players of all time if you ever never one of the 5 best players in the league at your peak. Heck he only made 1 second team All-NBA squad, so at his very best there was 1 year where he was among the ten best players in the league. Sorry, but that ain't the profile of an All-time great.

    By comparison, Grant Hill had 1 first team All-NBA and four 2nd team picks. Not even close.

    George Gervin, by the way, had 5 first team All-NBA selections. He was a pure scorer back when scoring wasn't nearly as easy as it is today.
    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.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Durham
    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernDukie View Post
    I don’t know, that might be a little high for Walton.
    fortunately, there is no such thing as "too high" for Walton.
    basketball is back, baby!

  4. #24
    I think the list undervalues defense. There are four guys who have won a defensive MVP 3 or more times, and none of them are on the list. Dwight Howard in particular should really be on the list if Westbrook is, as they're fairly similar (lots of individual awards with little team success and chemistry issues... though Dwight does at least have a title as a role player).

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    Yeah, Lillard should not be on the list... at least not yet. He's close, but lets see a few more years.

    And you want to know someone else who probably should not be there? Paul Pierce. I have made as many All-NBA first teams as Pierce has (zero). You can't be one of the 75 best players of all time if you ever never one of the 5 best players in the league at your peak. Heck he only made 1 second team All-NBA squad, so at his very best there was 1 year where he was among the ten best players in the league. Sorry, but that ain't the profile of an All-time great.

    By comparison, Grant Hill had 1 first team All-NBA and four 2nd team picks. Not even close.

    George Gervin, by the way, had 5 first team All-NBA selections. He was a pure scorer back when scoring wasn't nearly as easy as it is today.
    Another guy who probably doesn’t belong in the list is Ray Allen. He had one All-NBA second team and one third team. So, for the vast majority of his career he wasn’t considered one of the best in the league. How can he be among the 75 best of all time?
    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.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Durham
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    Another guy who probably doesn’t belong in the list is Ray Allen. He had one All-NBA second team and one third team. So, for the vast majority of his career he wasn’t considered one of the best in the league. How can he be among the 75 best of all time?
    longevity matters. and he is the standing career 3 point leader.

    While that will surely be broken in today's 3-happy game, he's still there. While I likely agree with you, I also do not so easily dismiss absolute career totals in light of measures of single season performance.
    basketball is back, baby!

  7. #27
    I'm having trouble understanding any argument for Lillard or Davis over Dwight Howard.

    All NBA 1st Team All NBA 2nd Team All NBA 3rd Team All-Star All Defense
    Dwight Howard 5 1 2 8 5
    Anthony Davis 4 0 0 8 4
    Damian Lillard 1 4 1 6 0

    Howard and Davis also each have one championship. And while Howard was a backup to Davis during that 2020 title run, Howard is also a THREE time DPOY winner. Dwight also has the longevity, as he's 11th in career rebounds (Anthony Davis is #193) and 13th in career blocks (Anthony Davis is #48).

    How is Dwight Howard not on this list?
    Last edited by Truth&Justise; 10-25-2021 at 11:06 AM.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Truth&Justise View Post
    I'm having trouble understanding any argument for Lillard or Davis over Dwight Howard.

    All NBA 1st Team All NBA 2nd Team All NBA 3rd Team All-Star All Defense
    Dwight Howard 5 1 2 8 5
    Anthony Davis 4 0 0 8 4
    Damian Lillard 1 4 1 6 0

    Howard and Davis also each have one championship. And while Howard was a backup to Davis during that 2020 title run, Howard is also a THREE time DPOY winner. Dwight also has the longevity, as he's 11th in career rebounds (Anthony Davis is #193) and 13th in career blocks (Anthony Davis is #48).

    How is Dwight Howard not on this list?
    Agreed that Howard should be on the list. I'm not really sure how he isn't. Agree that Lillard is much more questionable. Though again, I don't think he's the most questionable guy (or even close) on the list. There are some older-era guys who really shouldn't be on it.

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    Agreed that Howard should be on the list. I'm not really sure how he isn't. Agree that Lillard is much more questionable. Though again, I don't think he's the most questionable guy (or even close) on the list. There are some older-era guys who really shouldn't be on it.
    Which older-era guys shouldn’t be on the list? As far as I know these selections were made with the idea of giving some preference to selecting the best players from each era. Were we somehow able to magically transport, say, Paul Arizin to today’s game he might not even make it onto a roster, much less be one of the best players of this era. However, that’s not to say that if Paul Arizin were born today and he grew up in today’s world he wouldn’t become one of the best players of his era. He very well might.

    I think it’s only fair to compare players to others of their era. That’s why I don’t think you can compare Larry Bird to LeBron James since they did not play in the same era.

    Anyway, just curious as to which players you had in mind and why. And also, which players you would replace them with. Thanks.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Steven43 View Post
    Which older-era guys shouldn’t be on the list? As far as I know these selections were made with the idea of giving some preference to selecting the best players from each era. Were we somehow able to magically transport, say, Paul Arizin to today’s game he might not even make it onto a roster, much less be one of the best players of this era. However, that’s not to say that if Paul Arizin were born today and he grew up in today’s world he wouldn’t become one of the best players of his era. He very well might.

    I think it’s only fair to compare players to others of their era. That’s why I don’t think you can compare Larry Bird to LeBron James since they did not play in the same era.

    Anyway, just curious as to which players you had in mind and why. And also, which players you would replace them with. Thanks.
    I mentioned them earlier: Monroe, DeBusschere, and Wilkens. Maravich would be in consideration for a drop, as would Walton. I would put Hill in above all of those guys for example. And Howard in over Hill.

  11. #31
    Endless debates possible here. And I don't know VORP from GORP. But it appears Bill Sharman got in on free throw shooting ability. Admittedly, I never saw him play.

  12. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    I mentioned them earlier: Monroe, DeBusschere, and Wilkens. Maravich would be in consideration for a drop, as would Walton. I would put Hill in above all of those guys for example. And Howard in over Hill.
    Walton because he was injured so often and thus was only able to play in a relatively small number of games at peak effectiveness?

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    Agreed that Howard should be on the list. I'm not really sure how he isn't. Agree that Lillard is much more questionable. Though again, I don't think he's the most questionable guy (or even close) on the list. There are some older-era guys who really shouldn't be on it.
    Howard was one of the most dominant players in the NBA from 2007 - 2011 and was dominating from the post and on defense. Lillard has never been considered dominant IMO. Howard is definitely better than Rodman, Walton, James Worthy, etc.

  14. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by FerryFor50 View Post
    Howard was one of the most dominant players in the NBA from 2007 - 2011 and was dominating from the post and on defense. Lillard has never been considered dominant IMO. Howard is definitely better than Rodman, Walton, James Worthy, etc.
    Well it depends. I think Walton at his peak was significantly better and had a more versatile game than Howard at his peak. However, Howard was much healthier overall and played in many more games. So I guess it depends upon what you value most in a player.

    Also, James Worthy was an integral part of three championship teams (the LA Lakers would not have won any of the three without him) and a more electrifying and exciting player than Howard. So again, it depends upon where you put your emphasis as a voter.

  15. #35
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Steven43 View Post
    Walton because he was injured so often and thus was only able to play in a relatively small number of games at peak effectiveness?
    Yeah, Walton was great for really only two years (77 and 78). The rest of the time he just wasn't great, likely because of injuries. It's hard to say because injuries came on pretty much immediately.

    But as far as an NBA player, his career was mostly just "okay", with two elite seasons mixed in.

    Maravich had a slightly longer stretch of relevance, but he was pretty overrated in the NBA. He got two 2nd Team All-NBA and 2 1st Team All-NBA honors, but honestly I'm not sure he deserved those. He was atrocious defensively and pretty inefficient offensively.

    But I'd put either of those two in over Monroe, DeBusschere, or Wilkens.

    Monroe: just 1 All-NBA honor, and his win shares and BPM numbers are pretty bad relative to the list. He was on that Knicks title team, which I think gave him more media cred than perhaps he deserved. Sort of like Maravich, more style than substance in his performance.

    DeBusschere: A gritty defender, but just one All-NBA team (a bunch of all-defensive teams) and his overall numbers just weren't great.

    Wilkens: Had a long career of "pretty good", but nothing really suggestive of being a top-75 guy.

    Honestly, I'd put Lillard in over any of these guys. His win share numbers dwarf those guys' numbers, and he has way more All-NBA accolades than them too. And I'd put Hill in ahead of Lillard.

  16. #36
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Steven43 View Post
    Well it depends. I think Walton at his peak was significantly better and had a more versatile game than Howard at his peak. However, Howard was much healthier overall and played in many more games. So I guess it depends upon what you value most in a player.

    Also, James Worthy was an integral part of three championship teams (the LA Lakers would not have won any of the three without him) and a more electrifying and exciting player than Howard. So again, it depends upon where you put your emphasis as a voter.
    It is always hard to assess "value". But Howard's 3 best seasons in terms of win shares per 48 minutes are better than Walton's best season. And on a total win shares basis, he had 4 seasons better than Walton's best.

  17. #37
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Steven43 View Post
    Well it depends. I think Walton at his peak was significantly better and had a more versatile game than Howard at his peak. However, Howard was much healthier overall and played in many more games. So I guess it depends upon which aspect you put more emphasis.

    Also, James Worthy was an integral part of three championship teams (the LA Lakers would not have won any of the three without him) and a more electrifying and exciting player than Howard. So again, I guess depends on where you put your emphasis as a voter.
    I don't think Walton at his peak was significantly better.

    Walton's season highs:

    18.9 ppg
    14.4 rpg
    56% FG%
    4.8apg
    3.2 bpg
    1 steals

    He played more than 70 games in a season just once. He was constantly injured and was really only great for 4 or 5 years of his career.

    Howard's season highs:

    22.9 ppg
    14.5 rpg
    63% FG %
    2.9 bpg
    1.5 steals
    1.9 apg

    Walton wasn't that much more versatile than Howard - maybe more of a midrange game, better passer and better from the FT line (66% career vs 57% career), but Walton was also never one of the top 5 dominant players in the league like Howard was, and Howard has stayed healthy most of his career and produced as well as Walton or better for 13+ seasons. It's not even close.

    As for Worthy, he was a good player, but he was the 3rd or 4th wheel on those Laker teams. I don't consider that "worthy" of top 75 all time.

  18. #38
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by CDu View Post
    It is always hard to assess "value". But Howard's 3 best seasons in terms of win shares per 48 minutes are better than Walton's best season. And on a total win shares basis, he had 4 seasons better than Walton's best.
    Howard in his prime was amazing to watch. I think people discount him because his game dropped off from that peak really suddenly (making it easier to remember the drop than the peak performance), and because he sort of picked up a rep as a locker room cancer.

  19. #39
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Acymetric View Post
    Howard in his prime was amazing to watch. I think people discount him because his game dropped off from that peak really suddenly (making it easier to remember the drop than the peak performance), and because he sort of picked up a rep as a locker room cancer.
    Absolutely. He was like Shaq, but with way more athleticism. Probably why Shaq hated him so much.

  20. #40
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Durham
    Quote Originally Posted by FerryFor50 View Post
    Absolutely. He was like Shaq, but with way more athleticism. Probably why Shaq hated him so much.
    whatever it was that howard had, it clearly didn't translate well over time. shaq made his last all-nba first team at 34. Howard made his last at 27. Shaq mad his last NBA team of any level at 37, howard at 29.

    Maybe howard had more athleticism, but shaq had a way better overall game. Not that anyone is arguing to the contrary...but just to put into context how incredible shaq's career was...given that he was making all nba teams at nearly a decade older than howard's last. Howard won't be as old as shaq was when he made his last all-nba team for another 2 seasons.
    basketball is back, baby!

Similar Threads

  1. The greatest sketch of all time
    By JasonEvans in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 04-09-2021, 03:23 PM
  2. An opinion of greatest Players under K
    By arnie in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 08-05-2019, 09:38 PM
  3. ESPN's 75 greatest NCAA Tournament players
    By hurleyfor3 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 02-19-2013, 11:23 PM
  4. 100 Greatest College Basketball Players of All-Time
    By bludvlman in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 12-03-2008, 11:02 AM
  5. Greatest of All time
    By tecumseh in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 08-11-2008, 04:45 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
  •