Slam Magazine Top 50 Greatest Players of all time

[sonic21]

http://www.slamonline.com/online/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/130mj_0808.jpg

1) Michael Jordan
2) Wilt Chamberlain
3) Bill Russell
4) Shaquille O'Neal
5) Oscar Robertson
6) Magic Johnson
7) Kareem Abdul Jabbar
8) Tim Duncan
9) Larry Bird
10) Jerry West
11) Elgin Baylor
12) Kobe Bryant
13) Hakeem Olajuwon
14) Bob Pettit
15) Julius Erving
16) Moses Malone
17) John Havlicek
18) Karl Malone
19) Isiah Thomas
20) Charles Barkley
21) Rick Barry
22) John Stockton
23) Elvin Hayes
24) Bob Cousy
25) David Robinson
26) Kevin McHale
27) Scottie Pippen
28) Jason Kidd
29) George Mikan
30) Kevin Garnett
31) Willis Reed
32) Wes Unseld
33) Nate Thurmond
34) Dolph Schayes
35) Walt Frazier
36) Patrick Ewing
37) Jerry Lucas
38) Gary Payton
39) Allen Iverson
40) Billy Cunningham
41) Clyde Drexler
42) LeBron James
43) Dominique Wilkins
44) Dave Cowens
45) George Gervin
46) Bob McAdoo
47) Earl Monroe
48) Dennis Rodman
49) Walt Bellamy
50) Steve Nash

[gaKNOW!blee]

The top looks alright then the bottom half starts to get a little shaky.

[dirk4mvp]

Bill Russell is so overrated it's kind of disgusting.

[gaKNOW!blee]

Bill Russell is so overrated it's kind of disgusting.

I gotta agree, no way he is #3 all time

[Nick, the Nazi]

Rodman in top 50 all time?

[YellowFever]

Why Lebron but no Wade?

[TheMACHINE]

1) Michael Jordan
2) Wilt Chamberlain
3) Bill Russell
4) Kareem Abdul Jabbar
5) Tim Duncan
6) Magic Johnson
7) Shaquille O'Neal
8) Kobe Bryant
9) Larry Bird
10) Oscar Robertson
11) Elgin Baylor
12) Jerry West

[BRHornet45]

sons its a pretty good list .... Dirk has no business being in the top 50. MAYBE top 75

[dirk4mvp]

sons its a pretty good list .... Dirk has no business being in the top 50. MAYBE top 75

Sons if the Canadian Alien can make it, then so can Dirk.

[BRHornet45]

Sons if the Canadian Alien can make it, then so can Dirk.

son I am just trying to get Ghazi's vagina sore

[dirk4mvp]

son I am just trying to get Ghazi's vagina sore

Sons it's been sore from watching Tyson Chandler plow his wife on the daily.

[Allanon]

Shaq #4 is too high
Kobe will move into Top 10 with this ring
Steve Nash's 2 MVPs sealed him into the All Time 50
Hakeem at #13 seems a bit high but he was skilled in pretty much everything. His reign was a bit short though.

[ffadicted]

1) Michael Jordan
2) Wilt Chamberlain
3) Bill Russell
4) Kareem Abdul Jabbar
5) Tim Duncan
6) Magic Johnson
7) Shaquille O'Neal
8) Kobe Bryant
9) Larry Bird
10) Oscar Robertson
11) Elgin Baylor
12) Jerry West

umm......

Much better actually lol

[Amaso]

I always hate these kinds of lists because its hard to compare players of different generations. Bill Russell might not even be a perennial all-star in today's generation, Jerry West and Elgin Baylor ahead of Kobe? Lebron James should already be top 15 and he hasn't even done too much in his career yet. As the years go by, the players get better, and the competition gets harder.

[dougp]

Putting West and Baylor over Kobe is disgraceful.

Wait, what? Hah ... Shaq is WAY too high.

[sook]

BS list.

Hakeem over Kobe.

[sook]

shaq #4 is too high
kobe will move into top 10 with this ring
steve nash's 2 mvps sealed him into the all time 50
hakeem at #13 seems a bit high but he was skilled in pretty much everything. His reign was a bit short though.

wtf!

[iggypop123]

steve nash at 50 destroys the credibility of the list

[Amaso]

Hakeem at #13 is way too damn low.

[poop]

good to see Tim at no.8. id put Hakeem a bit higher though, seems like people are already starting to forget and overlook him. he was a top 3 all-time center.

[Allanon]

wtf!

Hakeem's dominance was probably 93-95. Albeit at his peak, I think he was better than guys like Shaq and Duncan.

But it was such a short peak while most of the other guys dominated over a 5-10 year period.

[cobbler]

i stopped reading when i saw shaq at 4

Me too... he's not even a top 4 Laker.

[dirk4mvp]

Bird is easily top 5 and better than Kobe.

[DeadlyDynasty]

where is Pistol Pete on that list?

[KidCongo]

Why Lebron but no Wade?

Wade should be there.

[IronMexican]

No way should any big man come before Kareem.

[dirk4mvp]

where is Pistol Pete on that list?

I like Pistol a lot, but he's where he should be.

[monosylab1k]

Who reads Slam magazine? I literally don't know anybody who has ever read it or even owned a copy.

[monosylab1k]

Putting Steve Nash on this list is hilarious.

[monosylab1k]

also, I know they want to show some respect to the past, but Bob Pettit, Dolph Schayes, & George Mikan don't belong in the top 200.

[Ghazi]

Dirk top 50

[sonic21]

Me too... he's not even a top 4 Laker.

he's only behind magic and kareem

[Chieflion]

How can Shaq be in the top 5? No way he is in the immortal 6.

1. Michael Jordan
2. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
3. Wilt Chamberlain
4. Bill Russell
5. Magic Johnson
6. Larry Bird

[JoeTait75]

Hakeem down at #13 is a joke. IMO he's the third-best center of all time, behind only Wilt and Kareem, and should be in the top 10 of this list at the very least.

[JoeTait75]

Putting Steve Nash on this list is hilarious.

Yup. Nash is Mark Price v. 2.0.

[GSH]

John Stockton at #22? Put Stockton on a team without Malone, and without Jerry Sloan coaching that pick and roll, and he's not even in the discussion. A good PG, yes, but not one of the Top 100 players of all time. But the 22nd best player of all time? C'mon.

For that matter, Nashy is a good PG, but outside of that run-and-gun circus offense, and he's just that... a good PG. Would you really take him over CP3? I don't think so.

People are always going to argue with these kinds of lists. This guy should be ahead of that guy. But, damn. They ought to be able to do better than Stockton at #22. Are we really supposed to believe that he was the second best PG of all time, behind Jerry West?

[baseline bum]

Russell would definitely be an all-star year in and year out in any era with his athleticism, his agility, and his intelligence. No way he's a top 10 player all-time though. Hakeem at 13 is flat-out lunacy.

[baseline bum]

My top 9:

1) Jordan
2) Magic
3) Bird
4) Kareem
5) Wilt
6) Shaq
7) Hakeem
8) Duncan
9) Oscar
10) Not sure who to take here between Baylor, Barkley, Erving, and Bryant

[baseline bum]

John Stockton at #22? Put Stockton on a team without Malone, and without Jerry Sloan coaching that pick and roll, and he's not even in the discussion. A good PG, yes, but not one of the Top 100 players of all time. But the 22nd best player of all time? C'mon.

For that matter, Nashy is a good PG, but outside of that run-and-gun circus offense, and he's just that... a good PG. Would you really take him over CP3? I don't think so.

People are always going to argue with these kinds of lists. This guy should be ahead of that guy. But, damn. They ought to be able to do better than Stockton at #22.

Take Stockton off that team and I wonder where Malone would be. Stockton was the heart and soul of those Jazz teams and by far their best big game player. Stockton was as clutch as they come.

[dirk4mvp]

Russell would definitely be an all-star year in and year out in any era with his athleticism, his agility, and his intelligence. No way he's a top 10 player all-time though. Hakeem at 13 is flat-out lunacy.

He would have to put on some serious weight to even be relevant in today's league. What was he, like 210 lbs?

[sonic21]

my top 10

1-jordan
2-kareem
3-magic
4-bird
5-shaq
6-hakeem
7-duncan
8-wilt
9-russell
10-baylor

[kingmalaki]

Kobe over Hakeem?? Now that's just plain funny.

I honestly don't see how you can really have much seperation between where you rank Shaq/Hakeem/Duncan. I don't see how anyone can definatively argue that one was better than the other. it's so close....

[GSH]

Take Stockton off that team and I wonder where Malone would be. Stockton was the heart and soul of those Jazz teams and by far their best big game player. Stockton was as clutch as they come.


He's the second PG on the list. Do you really believe that he was the second best PG of all time?

And to be honest, Stockton and Malone both owe a hell of a lot to Jerry Sloan. They were both great players in their own right, but a lot of their legendary status came from being together, and running that precise, repetitive pick and roll. I'm not knocking either one, just saying that the system made the most of them. And remember, neither of them ever got a championship - with two of the best players of all time, on the same team and in their prime.

I know just how good, and how tough Stockton was. But if I was trying to build a championship team, and had a choice between Stockton or Chris Paul? I'm taking Paul. But he's not even on the list, and Stockton is #22. It doesn't fit.

[SnakeBoy]

Too soon to put Lebron on any all time greatest lists.

[BUMP]

John Stockton at #22? Put Stockton on a team without Malone, and without Jerry Sloan coaching that pick and roll, and he's not even in the discussion. A good PG, yes, but not one of the Top 100 players of all time. But the 22nd best player of all time? C'mon.

For that matter, Nashy is a good PG, but outside of that run-and-gun circus offense, and he's just that... a good PG. Would you really take him over CP3? I don't think so.

People are always going to argue with these kinds of lists. This guy should be ahead of that guy. But, damn. They ought to be able to do better than Stockton at #22. Are we really supposed to believe that he was the second best PG of all time, behind Jerry West?

Maybe Stockton, wouldn't be that great without Malone, but you can't really play the what if game with these lists because you simply don't know what he would've done without.

And :lmao at Dennis Rodman actually being on this list

[Ghazi]

Too soon to put Lebron on any all time greatest lists.

No it isn't.

[GSH]

And :lmao at Dennis Rodman actually being on this list


Yeah, a rebounding specialist on the Top 50 list. Why not Horry? He actually specialized in winning games... and he has more rings than Elton John. He belongs there every bit as much as Rodman. Which is not at all.

[Jacob1983]

Dirk deserves to be on the list. He should be on the list and Nash shouldn't. Why isn't Reggie Miller on the list?

[sook]

Hakeem down at #13 is a joke. IMO he's the third-best center of all time, behind only Wilt and Kareem, and should be in the top 10 of this list at the very least.

the mind of reason speaks!

[KSeal]

Why isn't Reggie Miller on the list?

Because this list sucks complete ass.

[SnakeBoy]

No it isn't.

24 years old, promising but hasn't won anything. If he gets injured this summer and is never the same he'll just be another "could've been like Mike". Longevity matters. If he stays healthy he'll probably be in the top ten someday.

[mavs>spurs2]

You faggots need to stop hating on Hakeem. 93-95 Hakeem was the 2nd best player OF ALL TIME. No one has ever dominated the game on both ends like he did

[JoeTait75]

Too soon to put Lebron on any all time greatest lists.

Not really. At worst he's #4 on the list of small forwards, behind Bird, Baylor and Dr. J.

Look at it this way: Gale Sayers only played six seasons in the NFL- actually only three when he was completely healthy- and a lot of people would put him in an all-time top 50 in his sport.

[bringbackmario]

1. Michael Jordan
2. Wilt Chamberlin
3. Magic Johnson
4. Oscar Robertson
5. Kareem
6. Tim Duncan
7. Hakeem
8. Shaq
9. Bird
10.Rusell


51. Tony Parker
8.

[dirk4mvp]

Only Spur fan who has cat shit for brains would even think about putting Duncan in front of Bird or Hakeem.

[bringbackmario]

He won more titles than Hakeem and is more decorated than Bird fuck head

[dirk4mvp]

He won more titles than Hakeem and is more decorated than Bird fuck head


I forgot where the list says Players with most titles and most decorated. Why isn't Bill Russell the unanimous no.1 on all these lists?

[anakha]

Only Spur fan who has cat shit for brains would even think about putting Duncan in front of Bird or Hakeem.

Just playing devil's advocate here...

Bird definitely should be ranked above Duncan, but I can see other people wanting to rank Duncan above Hakeem based on championships and the length of time each player's respective team was considered a contender.

I wouldn't agree with that assessment per se, but I understand where those people are coming from.

[bringbackmario]

Only Spur fan who has cat shit for brains would even think about putting Duncan in front of Bird or Hakeem.

Only Mav fan cock gobblin would put dirk on the list period. Maybe top 100, I guess as a courtesy to any MVP

[dirk4mvp]

Only Mav fan cock gobblin would put dirk on the list period. Maybe top 100, I guess as a courtesy to any MVP

So basically you just threw in the towel and posted something that had nothing to do with the discussion. Good job :tu

[JoeTait75]

Anyone who watched Hakeem and Duncan and doesn't have a bias knows who was better.

http://openlettersmonthly.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/olajuwon.jpg

[ginobili's bald spot]

Hakeem and Kareem are getting majorly disrespected by this list. Shaq is too high. And Rodman on a top 50 list? Seriously?

[Galileo]

This list has some major errors.

First of all, Hakeem is a top 10 player, and Duncan a top 5 player.

Second, Shaq is lucky to be in the top 10, he is not top 5 material. That also goes for Oscar, he is top 10-15 material, and not as good as Jerry West.

Kobe is not as good as Oscar or Jerry West or Bob Cousy. Kobe is one of the most overrated players in history, followed closely by Shaq.

Jabber is the best player of all time. He took an expansion team and won the NBA title in his 2nd year, the Bucks third year. He was on the cover of TIME magazine when he was in high school. In the 1985 NBA Finals over 20 years later, he was still the MVP. He was 7' 2" and is the only player in history to shoot the SKY HOOK. He was already the best basketball player in the world by his sophomore year of college, where he won three straight player of year awards, three straight NCAA championships, and three straight times named outstanding player of the Final 4.

He was his team's leading scorer for his first 17 NBA seasons.

Overall, Jabber won 9 championships:

67, 68, 69, 71, 80, 82, 85, 87, 88

Went to Finals:

74, 83, 84, 89

If anybody thinks Jordan is better than Jabber, you're high. Jordan is a guard. Jabber was one of the best shotblocjers and defenders of all time, guards cannot impact the game on D like Jabber.

Russell is only 6' 9" he is not as good as Jabber.

Chamberlain is the only player who can compare to Jabber. The fact is, Jabber was better.

[SnakeBoy]

Jabber :lol

[IronMexican]

I think Jabbar had retired by 89, Galileo. And why do you always say Jabber?

[BUMP]

i know i already posted the :lmao comment about Rodman but that is such a travesty that he makes this list i'm gonna post it again

:lmao at Rodman making the top 50

If you switch him with any fucking PF that made an all star team in NBA history, he'd have won the same amount of rings that Rodman did with the Bulls and that includes Jamal Magloire.

Surprised Kukoc isn't on this list, maybe he's #51

[JustBlaze]

Lol Kidd 11 spots ahead of AI. :lol

[ehz33satx]

Bill Russell is so overrated it's kind of disgusting.

As well are the Mavericks.

[dirk4mvp]

As well are the Mavericks.

Write this one down in your diary.

[ehz33satx]

What for? In my diary, I write down the feelings I have for the Spurs and their 4 trophies gleaming in their trophy case. Fuck the Mavs.

[dirk4mvp]

America, eatin' my lunch from a single bowl in my parents basement, where I'm livin'. Happy Birthday, I'm forty-three.

Don't want to waste those precious calories...chewin'. Jesus come move my jaw for me, help me get my sloppy food down my throat

[ehz33satx]

You know, you've said that quote many a time before. I still don't know what it means.

[Rogue]

Deprecations of Jordan are totally from those loyal homers of Magic or Jabber whose only purpose in downing Jordan is just for giving more applause to their legends they love, even though Jordan is undoubtedly the first player to be thought of once we start a talk about NBA. Jordan is well worth the first place on this list, while that is the only correct point it makes. Any list excluding Dirk can only be considered BS.

[YellowFever]

Wade should be there.

In a backward kind of way, I meant Lebron should not be on that list either.

The guy has mad game, proobably a rung above everyone else in the league right now but he hasn't done it for long enough.

Hell, I don't think I'd put Wade in there also but at least Wade went to the big dance and won (please Ghazi..no comments).

That's why I think it was right to put Duncan over Olajuwan on this list.

Those two years Hakeem dominated were better years than any Duncan had but Duncan had staying power, which the dream clearly lacked.

Bron , if on his current pace, would probably end up anywhere from #1-5 but I would definitely not put him up in the top 50 right now.

[Jacob1983]

I'm sure some of you will disagree but I don't think Wilkins should be on the list. I've always thought he was a little overrated.

If you put Hakeem in his prime against Duncan in his prime, Hakeem would win hands down. Hakeem was more dominant in his prime than Duncan. And yes, Hakeem did fade away during the last years of his career but that tends to happen to big men.

[YellowFever]

Deprecations of Jordan are totally from those loyal homers of Magic or Jabber whose only purpose in downing Jordan is just for giving more applause to their legends they love, even though Jordan is undoubtedly the first player to be thought of once we start a talk about NBA. Jordan is well worth the first place on this list, while that is the only correct point it makes. Any list excluding Dirk can only be considered BS.

You don't get it.

Jordan is only considered the "greatest" because he's still fresh in our minds.

As ludicrous as it seems, I wouldn't be surprised if Kobe is considered the greatest ten years from now, and Lebron the "greatest" 20 years from now.

Sure, we'd all be pissed and say Jordan not being considered the greatest is idiotic but there are many..many old timers out there saying we are idiots because we put Jordan over Wilt, Kareem, Russell...etc.

How about this?

Besides the six MVP's in the finals, what stat does Jordan have over Kareem?

Kareem's Stats:

Games played - 1560 (2nd most in NBA history)
Field goal % - 55.9 (8th highest in NBA history)
Free throw % - 72.1
Three-point % - 05.6
Rebounds - 17,440 (3rd most in NBA history)
Rebounds per game - 11.2 (tied for 24th highest in NBA history)
Assists - 5,660 (31st in NBA history)
Assist per game - 3.6
Steals - 1,160
Steals per game - 0.74
Blocks - 3,189 (3rd most in NBA history) (Note: blocks were not officially tabulated until the 1973-74 season..4 years after he came into the league)
Blocks per game - 2.57
Points per game - 24.6 (12th highest)
Holds NBA career record for:
Most points - 38,387
Most minutes played (57,446)
Most field goals made (15,837)
Most field goals attempted (28,307)
Most All-Star selections (19)
Most All-Star games played (18)
6 Regular season MVP's
2 Finals MVP's

You might say it took Abdul-Jabbar much longer to reach those numbers than Jordan but I consider longetivity in and of itself a measure of greatness also.

And yes, you are right, Nowitzki probably should be on that list.

[Amaso]

Hakeem down at #13 is a joke. IMO he's the third-best center of all time, behind only Wilt and Kareem, and should be in the top 10 of this list at the very least.

Hakeem is better than Kareem. And nobody knows how dominant Wilt would be against modern players and their size. He'd be an all-star but would he be a top 5 player of all time?

[YellowFever]

Hakeem is better than Kareem. And nobody knows how good Wilt would be against modern players and their size.

:lmao :rollin

[JoeTait75]

:lmao :rollin

Not that outlandish. Certainly Hakeem was the better defender of the two. I wouldn't put Hakeem ahead of Jabbar, but it isn't the stupidest take in the world by a long shot.

[YellowFever]

I think it is.

Most people remember the late Lakers years from Kareem where he hardly rebounded and hardly blocked any shots and just jogged down the court for the skyhook.

I'd put any season Kareem had between 1969 to 1979 over Hakeem's most dominant season any day of the week.

[Amaso]

I think it is.

Most people remember the late Lakers years from Kareem where he hardly rebounded and hardly blocked any shots and just jogged down the court for the skyhook.

I'd put any season Kareem had between 1969 to 1979 over Hakeem's most dominant season any day of the week.

You could take Kareem's entire career and make an argument of him over Hakeem, but to say Kareem's best years were better than Hakeem's best years is completely wrong.

[Rogue]

We have to make some projected simulations to compare some players to other players of different times, as we can never put them all back onto their primes to hold a fair game on the horizontal court, and the stats are pretty much a business of their contemporaries and positions they play rather than the capabilities of themselves. Jordan would have gained an unbelievable 8 championship streak if he hadn't been playing baseball during his 2 absent seasons. In 1990s, Jordan had got may powerful rivals like Malone and Hakeem but he never allowed anyone of them to win even one championship except for the two seasons when he was playing in another league.

[Nahtanoj]

From watching them play, and factoring in their compatibility in all eras, it's more like:
1) Michael Jordan (GOAT, had good timing in his career)
2) Kareem Abdul Jabbar (Dominated the 1970s, Won 5 titles in the 1980s, longevity = greatness)
3) Magic Johnson (Greatest Point Guard Ever)
4) Shaquille O'Neal (Most dominant force I've ever seen, Wilt not even close, once he had the triangle, Phil, + Kobe matured, he became a winner)
5) Tim Duncan (Best defensive anchor I've seen, at the same time a two-way player, unbelievably consistent, should've been Finals MVP 2007 imo)
6) Larry Bird (White Men Can't Jump, intelligent player)
7) Kobe Bryant (MJ upgraded, MJ Remix, MJ with longer range, playing in zone era)
8) Wilt Chamberlain (Dominated the 1960s, widening of lane affected his production, but still great because of what he did for the game, Dwight Howard is a remix of him)
9) Hakeem Olajuwon (Unbelievable player at 7-0, career leader in blocks, back2back titles, outplayed all Cs in his era during his prime)
10) Bill Russell (11 Titles)

[Muser]

Dirk is one of the best foreign players ever to play in the NBA and he's not on the list?

[anakha]

You could take Kareem's entire career and make an argument of him over Hakeem, but to say Kareem's best years were better than Hakeem's best years is completely wrong.

Hakeem's career stats:
http://www.basketballreference.com/players/playerpage.htm?ilkid=OLAJUHA01%20

Kareem's career stats:
http://www.basketballreference.com/players/playerpage.htm?ilkid=ABDULKA01

Hakeem's peak, production-wise, was from 1992-1996. And those numbers are dwarfed by Kareem's numbers in any 4-season span from 1969-1977.

I'm not saying that Kareem's better by any means. Just pointing out that your argument has holes in it.

[ambchang]

This is so ridiculously stupid. How in the world can Shaq be above Kareem, Hakeem, and Magic?
How can Stockton and Barkley be over Robinson? Pippen over Gervin?

[Nahtanoj]

This is so ridiculously stupid. How in the world can Shaq be above Kareem, Hakeem, and Magic?
How can Stockton and Barkley be over Robinson? Pippen over Gervin?

LOL Elliott Kalb had Shaq at #1 in his top 50 players book, this coming from a guy who never missed a single Michael Jordan Finals game - but he wrote it in 2003 so it's understandable.

That being said, I have Shaq above Hakeem, but not Kareem/Magic. Stockton and Barkley shouldn't be above The Admiral - and Pippen over Gervin is justifiable, Gervin was only a 1 way player - you can argue Rodman (who was placed too low imo) above Gervin as well.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

steve nash at 50 destroys the credibility of the list

Agreed. Nash doesn't deserve to be on this list.

[Nahtanoj]

Agreed. Nash doesn't deserve to be on this list.

SLAM compelled to put him there because of the abomination that is the back to back MP3s. If Dirk isn't on the list, Nash shouldn't be there either.

[resistanze]

Shaq @ 4? Over Kareem and Magic? :lmao

[sook]

Best Cs of all time

Kareem
Wilt
Hakeem
Shaq

[baseline bum]

He's the second PG on the list. Do you really believe that he was the second best PG of all time?


No, he's not the second best point guard of all time. Fifth is about right, which is where he appears on the list.

5) Oscar Robertson
6) Magic Johnson
10) Jerry West
19) Isiah Thomas
22) John Stockton



I know just how good, and how tough Stockton was. But if I was trying to build a championship team, and had a choice between Stockton or Chris Paul? I'm taking Paul. But he's not even on the list, and Stockton is #22. It doesn't fit.

I'd probably take a chance on Paul too, but no way you can put him over Stockton this early in his career.

[baseline bum]

He would have to put on some serious weight to even be relevant in today's league. What was he, like 210 lbs?

He was 220 when he entered the league. Besides, Rodman was an elite defender in Detroit at 210, and Russell is Rodman plus MUCH better shot blocking minus the sideshows. I was really skeptical about Russell too until I started seeing a lot of his games on ESPN Classic and NBATV. I have never seen anyone with his quickness off the floor and his ability to anticipate shots and not fall for fakes.

[baseline bum]

Hakeem is better than Kareem. And nobody knows how dominant Wilt would be against modern players and their size. He'd be an all-star but would he be a top 5 player of all time?

No way. How many other players could dominate a Finals against a team (and frontcourt) as amazing as what the 85 Celtics had at age 38?


You could take Kareem's entire career and make an argument of him over Hakeem, but to say Kareem's best years were better than Hakeem's best years is completely wrong.

Most of Kareem's peak years in LA were played with an extremely weak supporting cast (LA gutted their team to trade for him). If you watch the guy in the 70s he was a serious athletic freak, and he carried the Bucks to a title and to a game 7 of the Finals in his 4-5 year stay there.

[Dr. Gonzo]

Kobe should be number 1 on the list.

[BlackBellamy]

Not a horrible list
Still, No Pete Maravich, and they have the balls to put Nash/Kidd on the list? Hold on, I think I'm gonna be a little sick...

[BlackBellamy]

I like Pistol a lot, but he's where he should be.
Dead? That's pretty harsh.

[TDMVPDPOY]

He was 220 when he entered the league. Besides, Rodman was an elite defender in Detroit at 210, and Russell is Rodman plus MUCH better shot blocking minus the sideshows. I was really skeptical about Russell too until I started seeing a lot of his games on ESPN Classic and NBATV. I have never seen anyone with his quickness off the floor and his ability to anticipate shots and not fall for fakes.

maybe he was playin against slowpokes....

[sook]

Not a horrible list
Still, No Pete Maravich, and they have the balls to put Nash/Kidd on the list? Hold on, I think I'm gonna be a little sick...

Yea no pistol pete bugs the hell out of me and Oscar rob. avgd a triple double an entire season folks.

[Nahtanoj]

Kobe should be number 1 on the list.

In due time..

[Amaso]

Hakeem's career stats:
http://www.basketballreference.com/players/playerpage.htm?ilkid=OLAJUHA01%20

Kareem's career stats:
http://www.basketballreference.com/players/playerpage.htm?ilkid=ABDULKA01

Hakeem's peak, production-wise, was from 1992-1996. And those numbers are dwarfed by Kareem's numbers in any 4-season span from 1969-1977.

I'm not saying that Kareem's better by any means. Just pointing out that your argument has holes in it.

You can't actually believe what you type. For one, dominant players like Kareem in the 60s/70s will have their stats skewed because he was playing in the early 70's where it would be easier to dominate in an era with less physically dominant players than suppose the 1990s when the average NBA players were hitting their physical peak. Most people take stats way too far into consideration when they're trying to rank players and not enough people take into account the generation in which the players played in. It's dumb for us to compare centers like Shaq/Hakeem to centers like Chamberlain and Russell because they played in different eras.

The only fair way to rank players is by decade or generation.

[Dr. Gonzo]

In due time..

Epic
Lolz

[Killakobe81]

I agree this list is disrespectful to Kareem who is the greatest Laker center and best center I have ever seen. I am too young to have seen wilt or Russell I started watching hoops in 1980 at age 5.

So here is my list ...not in EXACT order but as they came to me ...

Jordan
Magic
Bird
Duncan
Kareem
Hakeem
Kobe
Isiah
Shaq
Stockton
Ewing
Robinson
Barkley
Malone
Moses
Dr.J
Wilkins
Miller
Drexler
McHale
Worthy
Payton
Kidd
Dirk
KG
Pierce
Ray Allen
Allen Iverson

I lso put emphasis on rings and dominant palyoof first and regular season play ...

[TimDuncan>Kobe]

Me too... he's not even a top 4 Laker.

Can I have some of your pot? LA would have 3 fewer championships under its belt sans Shaq.

[The Third Man]

Hakeem's dominance was probably 93-95. Albeit at his peak, I think he was better than guys like Shaq and Duncan.

But it was such a short peak while most of the other guys dominated over a 5-10 year period.

Jesus, as a Lakers fan you of all people should realize he was dominant right away. Check out Kareem's birth certificate- Hakeem is now recognized as his father after what he did to him in the '86 playoffs. He was dominant for a good 12 years, easily.

[SouthTexasRancher]

son I am just trying to get Ghazi's vagina sore


:rollin:rollin:rollinROTFFLMFAO...! :rollin:rollin:rollin

[baseline bum]

You can't actually believe what you type. For one, dominant players like Kareem in the 60s/70s will have their stats skewed because he was playing in the early 70's where it would be easier to dominate in an era with less physically dominant players than suppose the 1990s when the average NBA players were hitting their physical peak. Most people take stats way too far into consideration when they're trying to rank players and not enough people take into account the generation in which the players played in. It's dumb for us to compare centers like Shaq/Hakeem to centers like Chamberlain and Russell because they played in different eras.

The only fair way to rank players is by decade or generation.

Kareem's competition in his prime was Wilt, Willis Reed, Dave Cowens, and Bill Walton. It's not like he was going against scrubs.

[Allanon]

Jesus, as a Lakers fan you of all people should realize he was dominant right away. Check out Kareem's birth certificate- Hakeem is now recognized as his father after what he did to him in the '86 playoffs. He was dominant for a good 12 years, easily.

I'll be the first to admit, I don't really know jack about 80's and early 90's basketball.

I only started watching basketball casually around 93 I think as a kid.

So I'll take your word for it.

[Amaso]

Kareem's competition in his prime was Wilt, Willis Reed, Dave Cowens, and Bill Walton. It's not like he was going against scrubs.

Willis Reed and Dave Cowens would be too small to play center in today's NBA. I think they were both 6'8 or 6'9 and like 235 lbs. I'm not diminishing Kareem or his career achievements. I was saying I would take Hakeem in his prime over Kareem in his prime but as I said earlier I could see how some people rank Kareem higher because of his entire career accomplishments.

[Sissiborgo]

Allen Iverson suckS!:fro

[Spursfan092120]

where is Pistol Pete on that list?
:tu I loved Pete. If he had been drafted a Celtic, he would have been an all time top 5. Celtics at that time, knew how to play team ball, and Atlanta and New Orleans just wanted him as a sideshow. Sad situation...he could have been the best ever.

[Spursfan092120]

To say that Shaq belongs at the 4 spot, ahead of Robertson, Duncan, Magic, Kareem, or a BUNCH of players that are below him, is completely ludicrous.

[Brazil]

Iverson is overated

[mavs>spurs2]

Shaq > Duncan

[robbie380]

I'll be the first to admit, I don't really know jack about 80's and early 90's basketball.

I only started watching basketball casually around 93 I think as a kid.

So I'll take your word for it.

you should check out that series if you get a chance on espn classic if it ever comes on. dream was a monster. i really hate this revisionist history that forgets how awesome dream was leading up to his peak championship years. the guy was stuck on some shitty teams for years after that 86 finals team imploded from injuries and drugs.

[Nathan Explosion]

Shaq > Duncan

Duncan has a higher winning percentage in the regular season and post season compared to Shaq.

Duncan- Reg% .712 Post% .631
Shaq- Reg% .672 Post% .601

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/090522/part2&sportCat=nba

Source, Elias Sports Bureau

Shaq was more domninant in his prime, but Duncan had staying power. Duncan won more and is therefore a better player. Especially considering Shaq played many years alongside Kobe.

[mavs>spurs2]

Duncan has a higher winning percentage in the regular season and post season compared to Shaq.

Duncan- Reg% .712 Post% .631
Shaq- Reg% .672 Post% .601

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/090522/part2&sportCat=nba

Source, Elias Sports Bureau

Shaq was more domninant in his prime, but Duncan had staying power. Duncan won more and is therefore a better player. Especially considering Shaq played many years alongside Kobe.

I don't care about your stats. Shaq as a player > Duncan as a player

[Spursfan092120]

I don't care about your stats. Shaq as a player > Duncan as a player
I call total bullshit on that. What does Shaq have that Timmy doesn't? Where is Shaq's jumpshot? Shaq's bigger...Timmy's better.

[EmantheSpursFan]

Tim took down shaq in his prime in 1999...
:bking

[urunobili]

lol Shaq ahead of TD

[mavs>spurs2]

Shaq ahead of TD

:tu

[urunobili]

:td

[Shank]

Shaq ahead of TD

Take off the Spurs homer glasses. Shaq was dominant.

[HarlemHeat37]

Kareem is severely underrated..

Oscar Robertson is the most overrated player of all-time IMO..being ahead of Magic is ridiculous..

Shaq is too high..

Bird is too low..

Elgin Baylor is also very overrated..

David Robinson is way too low, so is KG..

Iverson shouldn't be ahead of Drexler or Lebron..

Nash does deserve to be on it, he has 2 MVPs..you can criticize him all you want, but you can't take that away from him..

[resistanze]

Nash does deserve to be on it, he has 2
MVPs..you can criticize him all you want, but you can't take that away from him..
No one's taking that away from him, but doesn't mean he's in the Top 50. If they give Matter Bonner the MVP for the next 3 MVPs, he still wouldn't crack my top 50.

[stretch]

Jesus, as a Lakers fan you of all people should realize he was dominant right away. Check out Kareem's birth certificate- Hakeem is now recognized as his father after what he did to him in the '86 playoffs. He was dominant for a good 12 years, easily.

You mean the year that the Lakers tanked so that they wouldn't get embarrassed by the Celtics in the Finals?

[Spursfan092120]

Take off the Spurs homer glasses. Shaq was dominant.
WTF? And Timmy wasn't? No one could handle Tim. He has a better FT percentage, and actually has a jumpshot. Just because Shaq could use his weight to back people up to the basket doesn't make him a better player. Tim had a better skillset, and was more clutch. Tim is overall the better player...period.

[monosylab1k]

No one could handle Tim.

except this guy

http://nemendur.gbf.is/09/10/steini/myndir/act_desagana_diop.jpg

[duncan228]

except this guy

http://nemendur.gbf.is/09/10/steini/myndir/act_desagana_diop.jpg

In overtime, where Diop was fresh and Duncan was so tired (41/15/6/3/1) he needed two bags of fluids after the game.

:)

[Spursfan092120]

In overtime, where Diop was fresh and Duncan was so tired (41/15/6/3/1) he needed two bags of fluids after the game.

:)
:tu

[mavs>spurs2]

People actually think Tim Duncan is top 10?

[IronMexican]

People actually think Tim Duncan is top 10?

I definitely think he is. But, behind Shaq.

[duncan228]

People actually think Tim Duncan is top 10?

Yup. :)

We know I'm biased, but Duncan is listed top ten on pretty much any list out there. I think his place among the greats is cemented.

[monosylab1k]

In overtime, where Diop was fresh and Duncan was so tired (41/15/6/3/1) he needed two bags of fluids after the game.

:)

:lol I know I know. I just think it's funny how after the Mavs traded him the first time, lots of Spurs fans here regarded Diop as some kind of "Duncan Stopper" because of a couple good defensive stops in one game.

[Spursfan092120]

People actually think Tim Duncan is top 10?
Um...dude I haven't seen a single list that says he's not. I'd love to see one that does...and I'd love to see who they put above him.

[carrao45]

From watching them play, and factoring in their compatibility in all eras, it's more like:
1) Michael Jordan (GOAT, had good timing in his career)
2) Kareem Abdul Jabbar (Dominated the 1970s, Won 5 titles in the 1980s, longevity = greatness)
3) Magic Johnson (Greatest Point Guard Ever)
4) Shaquille O'Neal (Most dominant force I've ever seen, Wilt not even close, once he had the triangle, Phil, + Kobe matured, he became a winner)
5) Tim Duncan (Best defensive anchor I've seen, at the same time a two-way player, unbelievably consistent, should've been Finals MVP 2007 imo)
6) Larry Bird (White Men Can't Jump, intelligent player)
7) Kobe Bryant (MJ upgraded, MJ Remix, MJ with longer range, playing in zone era)
8) Wilt Chamberlain (Dominated the 1960s, widening of lane affected his production, but still great because of what he did for the game, Dwight Howard is a remix of him)
9) Hakeem Olajuwon (Unbelievable player at 7-0, career leader in blocks, back2back titles, outplayed all Cs in his era during his prime)
10) Bill Russell (11 Titles)
This.
Except i think Tim Duncan, Larry Bird, Kobe Wilt and Hakeem are better than Shaq. So move Shaq to #9 and Tim, Larry, Kobe, Wilt, and Hakeem up 1

[carrao45]

This is so ridiculously stupid. How in the world can Shaq be above Kareem, Hakeem, and Magic?
How can Stockton and Barkley be over Robinson? Pippen over Gervin?

Pippin was better than Gervin, because of championships won. But i agree with everything else u said

[Spursfan092120]

Pippin was better than Gervin, because of championships won. But i agree with everything else u said
I agree with most of everything you said except for this. Gervin was better than Pippen. Everyone knows Pippen won his titles because of Jordan. Gervin was the man. A monster.

[carrao45]

I call total bullshit on that. What does Shaq have that Timmy doesn't? Where is Shaq's jumpshot? Shaq's bigger...Timmy's better.

I agree TD is better than Shaq. But shaq being bigger does not take away from his greatness. Size is just as important as talent in basketball

[Spursfan092120]

I agree TD is better than Shaq. But shaq being bigger does not take away from his greatness. Size is just as important as talent in basketball
yes..it is...and I'm not taking away from his greatness at all by saying he's bigger..I'm just saying I think Timmy's better.

[carrao45]

I agree with most of everything you said except for this. Gervin was better than Pippen. Everyone knows Pippen won his titles because of Jordan. Gervin was the man. A monster.

A man/monster that didnt play Defense and never even went to the finals

[carrao45]

yes..it is...and I'm not taking away from his greatness at all by saying he's bigger..I'm just saying I think Timmy's better.

And i agree with that.

In Their Primes: Shaq>>>Duncan
Overall (Consistency, Longevity, Winning Etc.) Duncan>Shaq

[carrao45]

This list has some major errors.

First of all, Hakeem is a top 10 player, and Duncan a top 5 player.

Second, Shaq is lucky to be in the top 10, he is not top 5 material. That also goes for Oscar, he is top 10-15 material, and not as good as Jerry West.

Kobe is not as good as Oscar or Jerry West or Bob Cousy. Kobe is one of the most overrated players in history, followed closely by Shaq.

Jabber is the best player of all time. He took an expansion team and won the NBA title in his 2nd year, the Bucks third year. He was on the cover of TIME magazine when he was in high school. In the 1985 NBA Finals over 20 years later, he was still the MVP. He was 7' 2" and is the only player in history to shoot the SKY HOOK. He was already the best basketball player in the world by his sophomore year of college, where he won three straight player of year awards, three straight NCAA championships, and three straight times named outstanding player of the Final 4.

He was his team's leading scorer for his first 17 NBA seasons.

Overall, Jabber won 9 championships:

67, 68, 69, 71, 80, 82, 85, 87, 88

Went to Finals:

74, 83, 84, 89

If anybody thinks Jordan is better than Jabber, you're high. Jordan is a guard. Jabber was one of the best shotblocjers and defenders of all time, guards cannot impact the game on D like Jabber.

Russell is only 6' 9" he is not as good as Jabber.

Chamberlain is the only player who can compare to Jabber. The fact is, Jabber was better.

Actually Jabbar was overrated as a defender and rebounder. Wilt, Russel, and Hakeem were better defenders and rebounders than Kareem

[Amaso]

Here's what I've noticed from these lists.

- Kareem is slightly overrated because of his longevity and the pure amount of achievements/stats that come with it.

- People don't take into account how certain players would fare in the modern NBA era (1980-2009). Thus ranking players too high like Jerry West, Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, Oscar Robertson, and even Kareem to an extent. It's sort of unfair but its true.

- Hakeem is extremely underrated.

- Lebron James is too low. I'm not necessarily a Lebron James fan but if we were picking teams for a game he'd definitely be in the top 10. Yeah I know he hasn't won anything yet, but he's young and it doesn't disregard how he would dominate most of the players on this list.

[HarlemHeat37]

Kareem is overrated, even though he's at 7?..You need to brush up on your research bro..

Fans that don't consider the extreme advantages of today's player over the older players are the ones that are being unfair..humans don't evolve as quickly as new age fans would like to believe, and there's a significant advantage in training/equipment/technology and pretty much everything..

Hakeem isn't underrated at all..people seem to be unable to understand that Hakeem was a different player at different points of his career..he was never the entire package at one single point of his career..he's underrated in the sense that he's #13 on this list, but he's actually overrated by fans on the internet..

[Amaso]

Hakeem isn't underrated at all..people seem to be unable to understand that Hakeem was a different player at different points of his career..he was never the entire package at one single point of his career..

:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol

:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol

That's sig material right there.

[carrao45]

Here's what I've noticed from these lists.

- Kareem is slightly overrated because of his longevity and the pure amount of achievements/stats that come with it.

- People don't take into account how certain players would fare in the modern NBA era (1980-2009). Thus ranking players too high like Jerry West, Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, Oscar Robertson, and even Kareem to an extent. It's sort of unfair but its true.

- Hakeem is extremely underrated.

- Lebron James is too low. I'm not necessarily a Lebron James fan but if we were picking teams for a game he'd definitely be in the top 10. Yeah I know he hasn't won anything yet, but he's young and it doesn't disregard how he would dominate most of the players on this list.
Lebron will end up Top 5 All-Time. Definitely. But he's where he belongs on this list, because, like you said, he hasn't won anything yet.

[carrao45]

Kareem is overrated, even though he's at 7?..You need to brush up on your research bro..

Fans that don't consider the extreme advantages of today's player over the older players are the ones that are being unfair..humans don't evolve as quickly as new age fans would like to believe, and there's a significant advantage in training/equipment/technology and pretty much everything..

Hakeem isn't underrated at all..people seem to be unable to understand that Hakeem was a different player at different points of his career..he was never the entire package at one single point of his career..he's underrated in the sense that he's #13 on this list, but he's actually overrated by fans on the internet..




:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol

That's sig material right there.
:lol:rollin:lol:rollin:lol:rollin:lol:rollin:lol
I Agree

[nevitt_&_smrek]

What an insult it is to have Kareem at #7. How about #1? Definitely no lower than 3.

[robbie380]

Kareem is overrated, even though he's at 7?..You need to brush up on your research bro..

Fans that don't consider the extreme advantages of today's player over the older players are the ones that are being unfair..humans don't evolve as quickly as new age fans would like to believe, and there's a significant advantage in training/equipment/technology and pretty much everything..

Hakeem isn't underrated at all..people seem to be unable to understand that Hakeem was a different player at different points of his career..he was never the entire package at one single point of his career..he's underrated in the sense that he's #13 on this list, but he's actually overrated by fans on the internet..

so you watched dream in 86?

[carrao45]

Wasn't Chuck Nevitt a 7'4" guy that played with the showtime Lakers, but never actually played in the games???

[Findog]

Kareem took an expansion team to a title? I'm sorry, but any team that has KAJ and Oscar Robertson on it is NOT an expansion team.

[Findog]

- People don't take into account how certain players would fare in the modern NBA era (1980-2009). Thus ranking players too high like Jerry West, Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, Oscar Robertson, and even Kareem to an extent. It's sort of unfair but its true.

.

I think all those guys you listed could play in the League today if they hoped in a time machine. Easily. And I agree that today's players are bigger, stronger, quicker, but those guys could still contribute and not be scrubs. Especially Wilt. I don't think he'd average a 50 and 25 like he did in 1962, but he'd still be a force.

[Findog]

Pippin was better than Gervin, because of championships won. But i agree with everything else u said

Gervin was a more versatile scorer than Pippen. Pippen was by far a more complete and well-rounded player.

[nevitt_&_smrek]

Actually Jabbar was overrated as a defender and rebounder. Wilt, Russel, and Hakeem were better defenders and rebounders than Kareem

Hakeem was super-agile and quick off his feet for sure. I think Jabbar's defense is actually quite under-appreciated, just like his career is by most. Led the league in blocks four times, maybe more had they counted that stat during his first few years.

The stats that are quite overrated are the rebounding numbers by Russell and Chamberlain. In the very least, they can't be used for comparison at all. The league was so different. They played at a faster pace, more shot attempts at a low proficiencies. A good analogy is baseball in the early days, when pitchers used to get 35-40 wins per season. Apples to oranges.

[Amaso]

I think all those guys you listed could play in the League today if they hoped in a time machine. Easily. And I agree that today's players are bigger, stronger, quicker, but those guys could still contribute and not be scrubs. Especially Wilt. I don't think he'd average a 50 and 25 like he did in 1962, but he'd still be a force.

I definitely agree. Some of those guys would be all-stars in todays game, if not most of them. All of the top 50 guys (that played in the 60s/70s) would be good NBA players today.

[carrao45]

Gervin was a more versatile scorer than Pippen. Pippen was by far a more complete and well-rounded player.

Because Pippin could play 4 postions on the floor as well...and Pippin was a great defender, Gervin...not so much

[carrao45]

No He'd be just as good if not better. The only reason he would not be as good is if he didn't get the same touches. The only reason he didn't average 70 or 80 points per game was because the opposing players could beat the crap out of him without a foul being called.

Also I wouldn't argue with me about this one. Wilt was and is the greatest of all time. He was better than MJ and was easily the best athlete of all time.

There were MANY more shots taken in that era, and a much faster pace, that makes for more rebounds and baskets and points. Also, Wilt played in a league with only like two other seven footers, and the second best center was only 6'9" Bill Russel. No way he averages even 35 ppg in todays era with bigger centers, zone, triple teams and things like that.

Wilt was not the best Basketball Player of all time. Wilt was held way under his season scoring averages in the playoffs and in the biggest games of his career. MJ was HUGE when it mattered most. Plus, Wilt's poor free-throw shooting made it impossible for his teams to go to him in crunch time. Teams could just foul him, and he would miss his free throws. His FT% is worse than Shaq's. Wilt was an unbelievably dominant force, but he was not the greatest of all time, at all. In fact, i might go so far as to say he was a choke artist

[Findog]

No He'd be just as good if not better. The only reason he would not be as good is if he didn't get the same touches. The only reason he didn't average 70 or 80 points per game was because the opposing players could beat the crap out of him without a foul being called.

Also I wouldn't argue with me about this one. Wilt was and is the greatest of all time. He was better than MJ and was easily the best athlete of all time.

Wilt would still be a premier center in today's game, but I'm pretty sure he wouldn't be dropping 50 and 25 every night. Sorry, but there were very few guys back then that were NBA caliber athletes by today's standards. He dominated much inferior competition for a huge portion of his career.

[carrao45]

Very common misconception. While the game was not as wide spread, the players of the 1960s and 1970s could easily play in today's game. I can't say the same about the players of the 1950s and 40s.

Still though, if Wilt got as many touches in today's game as he got in 1962 then he would easily average in the 50s.

I have made this arguement before. Wilt was the greatest athlete the league has ever seen. He was stronger, faster, smarter and could jump higher than anyone of today or yesterday.

He wouldnt even average 35ppg against zone, triple teams, and having to play 7 footers every night. He also wouldnt even get 15 Boards Per Game today. And the reason he got so many touches, and rebounds and points, was because in the 60's basketball was played at a much faster pace. Thats why he got so many rebounds, and points. Wilt would still be a force today, but No way he gets 35 a night...let alone easily get 50. he might be 25 and 10 a night though

[carrao45]

1. MJ
2. Magic
3. Kareem
4. Wilt
5. Bird
6. Kobe
7. Duncan
8. Hakeem
9. Russel
10. Shaq

[layupdrill]

I know that making a list like this is virtually impossible to please everyone, no matter how long or how respected your brand is.

Comparing different eras where there was no salary cap, expansion, etc is not realistic.

[Spursfan092120]

1. MJ
2. Magic
3. Kareem
4. Wilt
5. Bird
6. Kobe
7. Duncan
8. Hakeem
9. Russel
10. Shaq
Only a complete and total homer would have Kobe above Duncan...

[carrao45]

Only a complete and total homer would have Kobe above Duncan...

Sorry i meant to have shaq at Duncan's place, and duncan at the 10

[Spursfan092120]

Sorry i meant to have shaq at Duncan's place, and duncan at the 10
aww..he gets angry that someone calls him a homer so he says something that's supposed to make me angry..nice try

http://samueljscott.files.wordpress.com/2007/04/homer_simpson.jpg

[carrao45]

aww..he gets angry that someone calls him a homer so he says something that's supposed to make me angry..nice try

http://samueljscott.files.wordpress.com/2007/04/homer_simpson.jpg
I dont care if u call me a homer. you're not gonna change my mind. And Shaq was more dominant Duncan ever was, Duncan is Top 10, but shaq is higher