Reply With Quote
Actually.. you should ask if Nash, Payton and Kidd were there.. Parker at least should be mentioned. 4 times NBA Champion PG.
top10 after the top50 of 1997
How are guys like C Webb a lock, Nash, Kidd being tossed around and Manu not even being mentioned?
Actually.. you should ask if Nash, Payton and Kidd were there.. Parker at least should be mentioned. 4 times NBA Champion PG.
The penalty for not starting-- and consequently not getting enough minutes/production--is a limitation on his recognition as a top player with those guys.
Is there a longer vid of this? I'm actually quite interested.
and honestly, if I have a gun to my head and I need to win the game, I much rather have Manu than A.I
I dont get how AI is a ing majority vote tbhI would take Nash over that overrated punk ass
What I couldn't understand is how they put Wade in ahead of Reggie or like the OP stated Manu.
Kidd and Payton for sure.I dont get how AI is a ing majority vote tbh
Chris Webber couldn't even make a case for Chris Webber.
Kenny: "Two time MVP, Steve Na.."
Shaq: "No."
Shaq knows who has one of his MVP trophies.
They forgot to put Shaq on that list.
Kenny: "Two time MVP, Steve Na.."
Shaq: "No."
Shaq knows who has one of his MVP trophies.
Shaq was voted one of the top 50 players so he does not need to be on that list.
As for Webber, he is like Wallace from that era. Really good but not greatest of all time. The 2000s was the decade of the power forward and Tim, KG and Dirk were the best of a very deep pool.
TP should definitely be mentioned when we talk about point guards. I have no problem putting his achievements in the NBA against Kidd, Payton, and Nash.
Manu will always be one of my favorite players and if you look at his total body of work he is absolutely one of the best ever. However, only looking at the NBA he gets penalized because he was a good teammate who willingly played less minutes off the bench and allowed TP to be the main scoring option on the team after TD. He also suffered too many injuries that shortened several seasons.
AI is a no brainer, league MVP, scoring champ, led a team of misfits to the finals.
Manu and Parker, as an NBA player, is no where close to the level of AI in terms of individual accomplishments. I mean, the rings argument is stupid as they BOTH played with Duncan.
My list, in order:
Duncan
Lebron
Kobe
Dirk
Garnett
Nique
AI
McAdoo
Kidd
Payton
In a few years, if things go the way it did, Durant will take that place.
Players who were good and deserves discussion:
Tmac
Nash
Webber
Chris Paul
Wade
McAdoo
Miller
MVPau
Alex English
Mullin
Players who didn't make it because of injuries/fat:
Carter
Kemp
Grant Hill
Players who should be removed from the original top 50 list:
Dave Bing
Paul Arizin
Jerry Lucas
Earl Monroe
Hal Greer
Sam Jones
Bill Sharman
James Worthy
All great players, but none of them were really leaders on great teams.
Yeh, my bad but how the did Shaq deserve to be on that list in '96?
He did not. I think they looked at what he had accomplished to that point and decided he would be. They were right. The only thing that could have stopped him would have been an injury like what Walton suffered. Then Shaq would have had to nominate himself just like he did for Walton.
Seeing the panel vote for Webber initially was painful tbh. Payton, Nash, Dumars, Dennis Johnson, Miller, Mcgrady, Rodman, Pierce and Allen are all above Webber imo.
players who should be locked:
Duncan
Kobe
Lebron
Wade
Dirk
Garnett
Kidd
Durant
Shaq didn't deserve it in '96 and still doesn't cause the er never played D. These lists make me sick when they're filled with one-way players like Carmelo.
Worst post ever. You talk like Duncan was so relevant in '13 or 07
I take Manu over AI any day of the week.. A.I is a low IQ basketball player, monkeyballer
Carmelo was never even mentioned. And while Shaq certainly was never the defensive great that Duncan is, he is only one spot below Tim on the total career blocks list, and edges Tim out by one spot in the career bpg category. So he may not have been an all-time anchor (not everyone can be) but he certainly made a big difference for his teams.
You think Duncan is not that relevant in 07, 13 and 14, and you are talking about good vs. bad posts? I mean, seriously?
Duncan led the Spurs in WS in 07, and was second in 13 and 14, Spurs still center their interior defense around Duncan, and Duncan plays an important part on the offense with his low post scorer, rolls, picks, and passes.
Manu is a fantastic player, but he was never the leader on the Spurs. It has always been, and still is, Duncan. Manu is actually one of my favourite players ever, but he is an X-factor type of player, not a superstar type of player in the NBA. He could have been if you disregard his injury issues, and I am sure he could lead a team deep in the playoffs. That said, he never actually did, he has always been the 2nd or 3rd best team on a championship contender.
AI didn't have low bball IQ, he had a low IQ. The way he break down defenses was phenomenal for a player of that size, and he played very well on the defensive end as well. He dominated a game that were traditionally dominated by giants. Standing barely 6', he led the league in scoring four times and steals 3 times. He finished at a phenomenal rate around the basket, and was feared as a finisher around the league during his prime.
Trying to put Manu or Parker anywhere near the top 50 list is re ed.
It's arguable that Manu never had the stamina and health to anchor a team for 5, 6, 10 years like a Duncan or Dirk, and he's never been by himself on a team to rack up individual achievements like an A.I. Kidd and Payton have to be near the beginning of the discussion because they've been arguably the best at their position for 5-10 years at a time.
Shaq got on in 96 because...have you seen tape of that guy run in his early years in the league? FUUUUUCK!
He didn't. It was a slap in the face to many good players, but history has proven it a good choice.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
