Top 10 Players of ALL-Time

[coachmac87]

Chris Boussard just said Tim Duncan is not a Top 10 player ever....:wow

How can he not be Top 10 if you claim him to be the best to ever play his position???

Here is my list

1. MJ
2. Bill Russell
3. Magic Johnson
4. Tim Duncan
5. Kareem-Abdul Jabaar
6. Wilt Chamberlin
7. Kobe Bryant
8. Shaquille O'Neal
9. Larry Bird
10. Oscar Robinson

[Ashy Larry]

lol @ duncan ahead of Cap ....... get off that Sherm


who's Oscar Robinson .........

http://www.memehumor.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/fail.png

[Venti Quattro]

:lmao :lmao :lmao Jim Duncan ahead of Kareem

[Ashy Larry]

I'm still trying to find out who's Oscar Robinson

[Cry Havoc]

This thread is bad and you should feel bad.

[TheMACHINE]

I'm still trying to find out who's Oscar Robinson

http://midwest.antioch.edu/sas/p/orobinson/index.html

[Kyle Orton]

:lmao Bill Russell #2

[JamStone]

I think LeBron Jones will end up being a top 10 player when his career is over.

[jeebus]

:lmao Bonner not on the list

[Bito Corleone]

Russell is not #2

Duncan is not #4

I don't know how I would rank them, but those two choices are dead wrong.

[Ashy Larry]

http://midwest.antioch.edu/sas/p/orobinson/index.html


thanks :toast


never "seent" him in the league .......

[Ashy Larry]

I think LeBron Jones will end up being a top 10 player when his career is over.



agree. all he need are the rings which will be coming shortly because he already has the stats

[Cessation]

Fail thread, tbh.

[Ashy Larry]

1. MJ
2. Cap
3. Oscar
4. Shaq
5. Wilt
6. Magic
7. Bird
8. Bryant
9. Hakeem
10. Duncan
11. Russell
12. Moses

I think you would say these 12 people would be in the top ten ....... if you have to leave two off, more than likely it would be Kobe and Moses. My ten would probably be:

1. MJ
2. Cap
3. Wilt
4. Magic
5. Russell
6. Bird
7. Oscar
8. Duncan
9. Shaquille
10. Hakeem

with Moses and Bryant 11 and 12

[DJ Mbenga]

Chris Boussard just said Tim Duncan is not a Top 10 player ever....:wow

How can he not be Top 10 if you claim him to be the best to ever play his position???

Here is my list

1. MJ
2. Bill Russell
3. Magic Johnson
4. Tim Duncan
5. Kareem-Abdul Jabaar
6. Wilt Chamberlin
7. Kobe Bryant
8. Shaquille O'Neal
9. Larry Bird
10. Oscar Robinson

its a centers league. thats why.

[JamStone]

1. MJ
2. Cap
3. Oscar
4. Shaq
5. Wilt
6. Magic
7. Bird
8. Bryant
9. Hakeem
10. Duncan
11. Russell
12. Moses

I think you would say these 12 people would be in the top ten ....... if you have to leave two off, more than likely it would be Kobe and Moses. My ten would probably be:

1. MJ
2. Cap
3. Wilt
4. Magic
5. Russell
6. Bird
7. Oscar
8. Duncan
9. Shaquille
10. Hakeem

with Moses and Bryant 11 and 12

Not bad. I've come to change my opinion about Oscar. I would list Oscar closer to a borderline top 10 player. I probably put him behind Kobe even.

Oscar Robertson's career (his first 5 seasons especially) is still unbelievable by any standard. But over time and reading arguments by some people, I do temper the impressiveness of his career stats a lot more than I used to. We're talking about a 8-9 team league with nowhere near the athleticism it has today or even in the 80s and 90s. The same era that had Wilt average 50/25 for a season. As impressive as averaging a triple double is, I do think it has to be qualified. Plus he was playing 45 minutes a game. And to not win until pairing up with Kareem, I think that also hurts his cause when you're talking about factoring winning championships as a criteria for individual greatness.

A few years ago, I had Oscar ranked up there in the top 5 or so just like you. I've since changed my opinion. I think he's probably roughly 9-12.

[stretch]

MJ
Kareem
Duncan
Kobe
Magic
Hakeem
Bird
Shaq
Wilt
Robertson
Moses

[z0sa]

1. MJ
2. Wilt
3. Kareem
4. Magic
5. Big O
6. Bird
7. Shaq
8. Tim
9. Hakeem
10. Russell

IMHO

[djohn2oo8]

MJ
Kareem
Duncan
Kobe
Magic
Hakeem
Bird
Shaq
Wilt
Robertson
Moses

Nice joke

[stretch]

1. MJ
2. Wilt
3. Kareem
4. Magic
5. Big O
6. Bird
7. Shaq
8. Tim
9. Hakeem
10. Russell

IMHO

retarded to have Wilt at #2 and not have Kobe in there at all, putting fucking Bill Russell and Oscar over him.

[stretch]

i fuck men

[djohn2oo8]

^ That's ironic coming from "Stretch"

[davethedope]

pyoCeueQJ8U

Watch 2:32-3:22 It is for me what defines Cap, as you call him. Watch Billy C.'s reaction. I love this clip. Kareem hook, Kareem again.
Let the offense flow through you. Talk about closing a game.
He's got to be #2 on any sane list.

[NewcastleKEG]

Chris Boussard just said Tim Duncan is not a Top 10 player ever....:wow

How can he not be Top 10 if you claim him to be the best to ever play his position???

Here is my list

1. MJ
2. Bill Russell
3. Magic Johnson
4. Tim Duncan
5. Kareem-Abdul Jabaar
6. Wilt Chamberlin
7. Kobe Bryant
8. Shaquille O'Neal
9. Larry Bird
10. Oscar Robinson
Why no respect for Bird?

While McHale and Parrish are Top 50 players, he defeated #3 and #5 on your list. That should be worth something

Plus Bird: 5x MVP

[z0sa]

retarded to have Wilt at #2 and not have Kobe in there at all, putting fucking Bill Russell and Oscar over him.

Not really. Wilt would've still dominated today's NBA in my opinion. Not to the tune of 50/25 or leading the League in assists, but he'd still be a 25/12/3ast/2blk superstar-type big man.

I'm much more on the fence for Big O. I haven't seen much of him play, I basically rank him based on his gaudy stats and in relation to where many others place him in their all-time lists.

Kobe: Not a top 10 player IMHO

Russell: I find ranking him #10 is the most fitting. He was a next generation player, especially on defense, in an old-school League, and he was a winner.

[baseline bum]

1. Jordan
2. Magic
3. Bird
4. Wilt
5. Kareem
6. Shaq
7. Hakeem
8. Duncan
9. Bryant

#4 vs #5 is a tough call, as is #6 vs #7. Not sure who to pick #10. Robertson? Erving? Barkley? Moses or Karl Malone? West? Baylor? Russell? Isaiah? LeBron? Wade?

[JamStone]

what is it about kobe that so many people on this particular site are so disillusioned about? the dude has proven time and time again that he isn't a winner without dominant bigs..and that when faced with adversity he folds. now if someone isn't very skilled and does his team more harm than good, everyone is quick to say he sucks. but what about the guy who is very skilled but isn't a team player and still manages to hurt his team sometimes more than he helps? why does his flashy fadeaways and protruded jaw trick you guys? let's take a look here at the top PER in nba history

NBA/ABA



Rank Player PER 1. Michael Jordan (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html)* 27.91 2. LeBron James (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jamesle01.html) 26.91 3. Shaquille O'Neal (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/o/onealsh01.html) 26.43 4. David Robinson (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/r/robinda01.html)* 26.18 5. Wilt Chamberlain (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/chambwi01.html)* 26.13 6. Dwyane Wade (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/wadedw01.html) 25.65 7. Bob Pettit (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pettibo01.html)* 25.37 8. Chris Paul (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/paulch01.html) 25.22 9. Tim Duncan (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/d/duncati01.html) 24.84 10. Neil Johnston (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/johnsne01.html)* 24.73 11. Charles Barkley (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/barklch01.html)* 24.63 12. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/abdulka01.html)* 24.58 13. Magic Johnson (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/johnsma02.html)* 24.11 14. Karl Malone (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/malonka01.html)* 23.90 15. Dirk Nowitzki (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/n/nowitdi01.html) 23.73 16. Hakeem Olajuwon (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/o/olajuha01.html)* 23.59 17. Julius Erving (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/e/ervinju01.html)* 23.57 18. Kobe Bryant (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bryanko01.html) 23.53

yeah, kobe is way down there at 18, right about where he belongs on the all time list coincidentally. stop overrating the chucking fraud guys

Lol you said Scottie Pippen was better than Kobe. Now you use a stat to discredit Kobe where Scottie ranks 101st.

Good stuff.

[stretch]

Not really. Wilt would've still dominated today's NBA in my opinion. Not to the tune of 50/25 or leading the League in assists, but he'd still be a 25/12/3ast/2blk superstar-type big man.

I'm much more on the fence for Big O. I haven't seen much of him play, I basically rank him based on his gaudy stats and in relation to where many others place him in their all-time lists.

Kobe: Not a top 10 player IMHO

Russell: I find ranking him #10 is the most fitting. He was a next generation player, especially on defense, in an old-school League, and he was a winner.

:sleep

dumbassery

[z0sa]

:lol ok stretch.

[Kyle Orton]

lol putting Bill Ben Wallace Russell anywhere near the top 10.

[NewcastleKEG]

lol putting Bill Ben Wallace Russell anywhere near the top 10.
Have to balance out the no defense Wilt & Kareem are bringing

[TheMACHINE]

Lol you said Scottie Pippen was better than Kobe. Now you use a stat to discredit Kobe where Scottie ranks 101st.

Good stuff.

:lmao

[Kyle Orton]

No, he shouldn't be. Russell was a monkeyfreak who was simply more athletic and bigger than the honky scrubs he played against. Kobe actually has skill. Idk what he'd do against a bunch of 6'5" honkies.

Russell should be a borderline HOFer at best.

[Killakobe81]

I think LeBron Jones will end up being a top 10 player when his career is over.

You maybe right. though it looks slim now, he has an "outside" shot at#1 ...

[dirk4mvp]

You maybe right. though it looks slim now, he has an "outside" shot at#1 ...

nope, nuh uh. He threw that out the window the second he packed his bags and headed south. He still will easily be top 10 though.

[Kyle Orton]

let us proceed....

[z0sa]

Russell probably would have been a rich man's Ben Wallace in the 80's and beyond, but 11 rings, 9 (i think) straight titles, and 5 MVPs plus being the progenitor of the skilled yet defensive-minded center in an era of offense is worth a top 10 spot for me.

[Killakobe81]

LOL the thing that gets me besides stats, how exactly are you guys rating players that you have never seen play?
When folks bring up debates right now about who is the best player rings are discounted.
Many love stats but how do you account for stats with players playing in different eras and different caliber of players?

I see some good lists on here, but anyone that include players they have never watched play (except on NBA's greatest games) are suspect. If you discount rings or use them as the sole criteria, that list is suspect as well. If you are only a stats head then your list is probably shit as well. All of those things need to be factored to create a fair, relatively unbiased list.

[Killakobe81]

1. Jordan
2. Magic
3. Bird
4. Wilt
5. Kareem
6. Shaq
7. Hakeem
8. Duncan
9. Bryant

#4 vs #5 is a tough call, as is #6 vs #7. Not sure who to pick #10. Robertson? Erving? Barkley? Moses or Karl Malone? West? Baylor? Russell? Isaiah? LeBron? Wade?


Great list but did you see Wilt play?
...just curious. I also think shaq is too high but a great list. OF course i thinhk Kobe is above duncan but for me, it's close.

[Kuestmaster]

1. MJ
2. Wilt
3. Kareem
4. Magic
5. Tim
6. Bird
7. Shaq
8. Russell
9. Big O
10. Hakeem

[davethedope]

No, he shouldn't be. Russell was a monkeyfreak who was simply more athletic and bigger than the honky scrubs he played against. Kobe actually has skill. Idk what he'd do against a bunch of 6'5" honkies.

Russell should be a borderline HOFer at best.

Idk about that logic, it's faulty at best, founded upon racial stereotypes. I'm not judging, but you can't really put that forward as an argument. By that logic Larry Bird makes no sense at all.

[Kyle Orton]

Idk about that logic, it's faulty at best, founded upon racial stereotypes. I'm not judging, but you can't really put that forward as an argument. By that logic Larry Bird makes no sense at all.

Black people being more athletic than white people is something only morons consider a "stereotype".

[ambchang]

While it is obvious the competition and athleticism in the 50s and 60s is no where close to now, it is simply unfair to look at the other side of the coin.

1) Those players do not have the training and medicine players today have
2) Those players do not better competition to hone their skills
3) Those players do not have as much a base as the current players have to build on

In order to rank players of different eras, they must be evaluated based on their competition and rules. The game has changed dramatically since the 90s, 80s, 70s, 60s and 50s, whether it be rules, defenses, offensive sets, training, and all of that.

For a player like Wilt and Russell to break new grounds back in the day, and be a pioneer and level-setter for the game today is very impressive. Wilt changed rules, Russell changed the way teams were constructed, Dr. J changed the way the game was watched, Bird and Magic changed the team game, Jordan changed the big man dominated culture, Cap added finesse and fludity to the big man role, Shaq changed rules, Duncan melded fundamentals with the modern game, Robertson changed the roll of a big PG. These players are trend-setters, and that's why they are ranked appropriately.

People have to understand the evolution and the history of the game before they chime in, and say absolutely retarded things like Russell would not be able to compete in today's game if he was transported through a time machine. But so what? George Washington would be shredded to pieces as today's president, does that make him a bad president? People are learning about Sir Isaac Newton's discoveries in high school now, does that make him a stupid scientist?

[Kyle Orton]

as far as having the biggest overall impact on the court for his team, kobe ain't top 10 all timePERIOD

Neither is Russell. His 11 titles are overrated as fuck given most of them were won in like an 8 team league with 3+ HOFers on his team and the best coach of all time on the sidelines for nearly all 11 of his titles.

[rayjayjohnson]

:lmao bird at 9.

you high. he's 6, at least. def ahead of jim

[z0sa]

Neither is Russell. His 11 titles are overrated as fuck given most of them were won in like an 8 team league with 3+ HOFers on his team and the best coach of all time on the sidelines for nearly all 11 of his titles.

Dude is probably the most monstrous rebounder ever, outside of Wilt the stat padder who played much of his career for all-offense teams. He would probably still be a DPOY type player even in today's NBA IMHO thanks to his incredible defensive instincts. And the fact he was the undisputed leader of a HOF line-up that won 11 rings, and he did win 5 MVPs despite being a mediocre scorer in a League based around offense, should be points for, not against.

And he did all this dealing with rampant racism, hate, and doubt as the first black superstar in basketball.

[Muser]

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

[DAF86]

1. MJ
2. Wilt
3. Kareem
4. Magic
5. Big O
6. Bird
7. Shaq
8. Tim
9. Hakeem
10. Russell

IMHO

This with Big O all the way down to number ten.

[Kyle Orton]

Dude is probably the most monstrous rebounder ever, outside of Wilt the stat padder who played much of his career for all-offense teams. He would probably still be a DPOY type player even in today's NBA IMHO thanks to his incredible defensive instincts. And the fact he was the undisputed leader of a HOF line-up that won 11 rings, and he did win 5 MVPs despite being a mediocre scorer in a League based around offense, should be points for, not against.

And he did all this dealing with rampant racism, hate, and doubt as the first true black superstar in basketball.

He would be Ben Wallace. A monster rebounder and perennial DPOY candidate, but nowhere near the top 10 players of all time list.

Being the first black star in basketball also meant he had no other black star going up against him. More of an advantage than disadvantage.

[Kyle Orton]

As for my list...

1. MJ
2. Kareem
3. Magic
4. Bird
5. Shaq
6. Duncan
7. Dream
8. Wilt
9. Big O
10. Moses Malone

[rayjayjohnson]

that's a good list imo

[TD 21]

The one consensus one I don't get is Bird over Duncan and O'Neal. There's nothing accomplishment-wise or statistically to suggest he was better than either.

And I've always had a hard time believing that Russell and Chamberlain are better than Duncan, O'Neal and Olajuwon. I'm not saying definitively they weren't, but I look at the era they played in and the competition they played against and it doesn't compare to the past thirty or so years. Give them the advantages of today's players and maybe they're as good now as they were then (not in terms of averages; advanced stats-wise), but I'm not convinced. Russell's lack of anything resembling an elite or even high level offensive game makes him being supposedly better even more questionable.

The only players I can look at and come to the conclusion that they were definitively better than Duncan and O'Neal, are Jordan, Abdul-Jabbar and Johnson. Beyond that, I'm not sure. I have a hard time ranking pre-80s players. So excluding pre-80s players, I'm going to go with . . .

1) Jordan
2) Abdul-Jabbar
3) Johnson
4) Duncan
5) O'Neal
6) Bryant
7) Bird
8) Olajuwon
9) K. Malone
10) James

It may be pre-mature to put James there, but he's like Duncan eight seasons in (minus the championships, of course). He's just too damned dominant statistically to be ignored and it's obvious he's going to go down as the greatest ever at his position. You could make a case for M. Malone, Garnett, Wade and a few others at 9 and 10, but for me, K. Malone's longevity at an elite level gives him the edge.

[Mugen]

As for my list...

1. MJ
2. Kareem
3. Magic
4. Bird
5. Shaq
6. Duncan
7. Dream
8. Wilt
9. Big O
10. Moses Malone

Pretty spot on list. I'd replace Malone with Kobe and switch Timmy with Dream.

Russell would get ridiculously abused by Dwight Howard. I don't even want to think what a prime Shaq/Dream/Duncan would do to him.

[Kyle Orton]

The one consensus one I don't get is Bird over Duncan and O'Neal. There's nothing accomplishment-wise or statistically to suggest he was better than either.

This is personal bias, but I've always considered winning MVP and finals MVP in the same season as more or less the NBA's ultimate achievement. Aside from the other reasons people give, MJ doing that 4 different times is a large reason why I consider him the untouchable G.O.A.T. Bird is the only other player I can think of who has won MVP and finals MVP in the same season more than once (84 and 86), which is why I have him so high.

[JamStone]

bryant ain't being overrated anymore, not on my watch. nuh uh, daddy-O

That's fine wherever you rank Kobe. Everyone has his opinion.

I was laughing at you using the PER stat to discredit Kobe when that exact stat kills your argument as to several players you've specifically listed as better than Kobe. In fact, here's more damning and contradicting evidence from that very stat to your opinion.

Of the 17 players you listed as being better than Kobe...


he ain't gettin ranked above:

chamberlain
bird
russell
mj
magic
kareem
hakeem
shaq
gervin
erving
robertson
duncan
west
pippen
Baylor
rick barry
moses malone

no fucking WAY is the chucking fraud better than ANY of those guys

... only 7 of them (the ones bolded) have a better career PER than Kobe.

According to your list of players you initially thought were better than Kobe and your use of the PER stat as evidence, Kobe is the 8th best player in the history of the NBA.

One more time, good stuff.

[Killakobe81]

yeah just like i said, everyone thinks kobe is sooooo good because he has skill with the flashy crossovers, pullups off the dribble, and fadeaways..but as far as having the biggest overall impact on the court for his team, kobe ain't top 10 all timePERIOD

my top 10:

mj
chamberlain
kareem
magic
bird
shaq
hakeem
russell
big shitty
pippen

Pip, great player but so overrated. I think he was underrated in the 90's ...MJ casted a long shadow until he went to play baseball ... and when he carried the Bulls i think Pip and PJ benefited from showing they could win and thrive sans MJ.
But no way Pipp makes any top 10 list even if you only go back to early 80's.
I would take:

1. MJ
2A. Magic
2B. Kareem
4. Kobe
5. Duncan
6. Shaq
7. Bird
8. Isiah
9. Wade
10. Lebron
11. Malone
12. KG
13. dirk

Maybe not in this exact order and I maybe forgetting someone ...but all of those players I take over Pippen ... TBH

[DMC]

MJ first

From there it's a toss up on so many positions.

[coachmac87]

Well I guess it's safe to say that Duncan is a Top 10 player. Just by looking at most of the list he is around 5-7. I found it hilarious that he put him at 11. He said he was a NO SHOW against Memphis. We know he isn't the same player, but Shaq has been MIA the last 3-4 years yet he is listed on the list.

It also bothers me when people put Shaq above Duncan.

[JamStone]

I never said per was the end all be all. Just one of many reasons I don't think Kobe is top 10 at all. You would have a point If I said these guys are all better than Kobe, this is why! And posted per.

Lol at the idiot who ranked Kobe above bird

Why bring up PER in the first place? Especially when you rank Pippen in your top 10 and he's 101st???

It was foolish to bring PER up at all considering where Bryant ranks among the greatest players YOU yourself listed.

[TheMACHINE]

Why bring up PER in the first place? Especially when you rank Pippen in your top 10 and he's 101st???

It was foolish to bring PER up at all considering where Bryant ranks among the greatest players YOU yourself listed.

http://www.punkrockcds.com/images/Backfire-ChangeTheGame.jpg

[DPG21920]

Killa is literally the only person that puts Kobe above Duncan. He does it to rile people up.

[Isitjustme?]

Pip, great player but so overrated. I think he was underrated in the 90's ...MJ casted a long shadow until he went to play baseball ... and when he carried the Bulls i think Pip and PJ benefited from showing they could win and thrive sans MJ.
But no way Pipp makes any top 10 list even if you only go back to early 80's.
I would take:

1. MJ
2A. Magic
2B. Kareem
4. Kobe
5. Duncan
6. Shaq
7. Bird
8. Isiah
9. Wade
10. Lebron
11. Malone
12. KG
13. dirk

Maybe not in this exact order and I maybe forgetting someone ...but all of those players I take over Pippen ... TBH

:lmao

[Kyle Orton]

Killa is literally the only person that puts Kobe above Duncan. He does it to rile people up.

This kind of behavior from Lakers fans is what leads to skunkers.

[Isitjustme?]

Hakeem (who's also better than Kobe) is missing from that list.

[Isitjustme?]

Forget Duncan, does anyone think Kobe would have done anything but get skunked in the first round with that 1994 Rockets team?

100% serious question.

[DPG21920]

Has nothing to do with being skunked. While this loss is a mark on Kobe's career, it's not a bad one. It's only a bad one to Kobe fan boi's who try to argue Kobe is better than Mike.

In the long haul, Kobe is cemented in his legacy IMO. It's not really moving up or down.

[Kyle Orton]

No, the stupidity and mentally weak behavior from Lakers fans DOES have to do with being skunked. Lakers fans can't have it both ways. They claim to contribute to victories, they also contribute to defeat.

That's it, and that's all.

[TheMACHINE]

Has nothing to do with being skunked. While this loss is a mark on Kobe's career, it's not a bad one. It's only a bad one to Kobe fan boi's who try to argue Kobe is better than Mike.

In the long haul, Kobe is cemented in his legacy IMO. It's not really moving up or down.

i think it can only move up.

[JamStone]

kobe ain't top 10, that's all i know. per or not, having watched enough of him to see that he doesn't have the impact that a truly "great" player normally has. none of those guys on my list got embarrassed, or needed something huge like another top 10 all time player to win. Kobe without the best frontcourt in the league = not making playoffs, out in the first round, etc. kobe with a disgruntled big = swept in the 2nd. jordan never got swept. jordan doesn't get swept by the mavs. sorry but these are the facts.

Lmao Scottie Pippen is in your top 10 greatest NBA players. Nuff said.

[DPG21920]

i think it can only move up.

I probably agree with that, but I don't really see how. If you are playing worse than you ever have, just because you have a stacked team around you with a lesser role doesn't mean you get vaulted up.

By that logic IMO, he should move backwards for getting skunked then.

[TheMACHINE]

Thats was exactly my point in the other thread. He claims Pippen is better then Kobe, then compared Jordan to Kobe saying "Kobe needed another big man to win"... Logic just doesnt make sense eh.

[DPG21920]

Tyson be trollin Jam. No one thinks Pippen>Kobe in real life.

[TheMACHINE]

I probably agree with that, but I don't really see how. If you are playing worse than you ever have, just because you have a stacked team around you with a lesser role doesn't mean you get vaulted up.

By that logic IMO, he should move backwards for getting skunked then.

well everyone in the league gets skunked....and 29 other teams dont win a championship in a given year. To be great, you have to have longevity so you can get those titles. If you fail, you fail...but if you achieve, thats saying alot.

ie, Duncan cant go down just cuz he didnt win the past 4 years, he already did his part when he got his rings. You're right, maybe if your in a stacked team you wont get much credit, but it sure wont make you go down.

[TheMACHINE]

pippen ain't a big. it's a lot different when that guy is a big, you need a big man to win championships, ask kobe. jordan did it with help, but no great big, which says something. kobe without a big? ha, ha.

ahh so Magic aint part of your Top 10 right?

[JamStone]

pippen ain't a big. it's a lot different when that guy is a big, you need a big man to win championships, ask kobe. jordan did it with help, but no great big, which says something. kobe without a big? ha, ha.

Jordan is the GOAT. Kobe's nowhere near in the discussion of being GOAT. The only players in the conversation are Jordan, Wilt, and Kareem. Has nothing to do with Jordan.

You have Scottie Pippen in your top 10 of greatest NBA players. You criticize Kobe, but every criticism you have of Kobe applies to Pippen but even more so. Pippen never did shit as the best player on the team. Hell, he was only the best player on his team for about a season and a half in his entire career.

There is no argument at all to put Scottie Pippen anywhere near a top 10 list. Hell, it's debatable whether he's a top 50 player. Unique player, very versatile. One of the great defenders the league has seen. Not a top 10 player in the history of the league. At this point, it's beyond laughable that you continue to maintain that he is.

[DPG21920]

well everyone in the league gets skunked....and 29 other teams dont win a championship in a given year. To be great, you have to have longevity so you can get those titles. If you fail, you fail...but if you achieve, thats saying alot.

ie, Duncan cant go down just cuz he didnt win the past 4 years, he already did his part when he got his rings. You're right, maybe if your in a stacked team you wont get much credit, but it sure wont make you go down.

I agree, I just don't think you move after a certain point unless you are continually in the top 10 in the league in those twilight years. He won't be and is already starting to slip.

I agree the skunker doesn't move him down, that was my point. I just don't think you can move up after a certain point. He's def not moving down unless Lebron forces his way in an bumps him.

[ohmwrecker]

Watch out, Jam. When Chico fails in an argument he apparently adds your name to his sig.

[JamStone]

Watch out, Jam. When Chico fails in an argument he apparently adds your name to his sig.

So it's kinda like an honor, like a SpursTalk medal?

[DPG21920]

So it's kinda like an honor, like a SpursTalk medal?

http://static.foxsports.com/content/fscom//img/2010/05/28/sunsbrooklopezgif_20100528102802_0_0.GIF

[ohmwrecker]

So it's kinda like an honor, like a SpursTalk medal?

It's more like when your cat leaves a dead bird carcass on the porch. You are kind of disgusted, but you accept that is just the cat's way of saying he loves you.

[DMC]

It's more like when your cat leaves a dead bird carcass on the porch. You are kind of disgusted, but you accept that is just the cat's way of saying he loves you.
I do accept that, then I silently hunt down and kill the cat, and I hang it's corpse for the other cats to see, and they see it and they do not bring dead birds to my door.

[TheMACHINE]

I agree, I just don't think you move after a certain point unless you are continually in the top 10 in the league in those twilight years. He won't be and is already starting to slip.

I agree the skunker doesn't move him down, that was my point. I just don't think you can move up after a certain point. He's def not moving down unless Lebron forces his way in an bumps him.

Yah maybe a certain point if its obvious you are chasing..ie. Shaq in Boston and Cleveland...not so much in Pheonix.

[dbreiden83080]

Of course he is

If there is an all time starting 5 he is at the PF..

[HarlemHeat37]

:lol Scottie Pippen has no business being anywhere near a top 10 players of all-time:lol..he was clearly inferior to Hakeem, Robinson, Barkley, Malone and Ewing, in his own era..winning rings as a sidekick, as great as he was, doesn't elevate him ahead of those players..

I agree with DOK about Bird..his peak matches up with almost anybody..looking back at it now, a lot of people look at him and can't picture his dominance, but his accolades and clutch play speak for themselves IMO..

Wilt and Russell are obviously difficult to judge..Wilt has to be on every list, just for his sheer dominance, but Russell would strictly make a list for his hardware, since his stats and overall talent seem to be underwhelming..

Kareem is the most underrated of the consensus all-timers IMO..

[Leetonidas]

My personal list:

1. Jordan
2. Magic
3. Kareem
4-10 (in no order):
Wilt Chamberlain
Hakeem Olajuwon
Shaquille O'Neal
Tim Duncan
Larry Bird
Oscar Robertson (can't ignore Big O)
Bill Russel (only up here because he has 11 rings)

[resistanze]

:lol Scottie Pippen has no business being anywhere near a top 10 players of all-time:lol..he was clearly inferior to Hakeem, Robinson, Barkley, Malone and Ewing, in his own era..winning rings as a sidekick, as great as he was, doesn't elevate him ahead of those players..

I agree with DOK about Bird..his peak matches up with almost anybody..looking back at it now, a lot of people look at him and can't picture his dominance, but his accolades and clutch play speak for themselves IMO..

Wilt and Russell are obviously difficult to judge..Wilt has to be on every list, just for his sheer dominance, but Russell would strictly make a list for his hardware, since his stats and overall talent seem to be underwhelming..

Kareem is the most underrated of the consensus all-timers IMO..

It's funny because IMO Kareem is the only player besides MJ that can make the argument for GOAT.

[Kyle Orton]

Agreed, IMO, MJ is on his own level as GOAT, and Kareem is on his own level as 2nd best of all time. I think if Magic Johnson's career wasn't cut short he woulda been #2 all time, potentially GOAT.

[dirk4mvp]

Instead he decided to have sex with men.

[HarlemHeat37]

http://stdcarriers.com/images/carriers/MagicJohnsonFatHIV50.jpg

[Kyle Orton]

Goes great with the new avatar tbh

[#41 Shoot Em Up]

As for my list...

1. MJ
2. Kareem
3. Magic
4. Bird
5. Shaq
6. Duncan
7. Dream
8. Wilt
9. Big O
10. Moses Malone

Lol moses Malone
Lol big o
Lol Duncan

[jag]

Instead he decided to have sex with men.

Hey-O!

[JoeTait75]

I don't know if Moses Malone is a top-10 player but he's probably the most underrated great player of all time. He was absolutely dominant in his prime and whipped Kareem on more than one occasion in the postseason. Yet for some reason he isn't all that remembered.

[Kyle Orton]

last player to win MVP on a sub-50 win team tbh....for some reason I'm impressed by little shit like that

[Isitjustme?]

I don't know if Moses Malone is a top-10 player but he's probably the most underrated great player of all time. He was absolutely dominant in his prime and whipped Kareem on more than one occasion in the postseason. Yet for some reason he isn't all that remembered.

Probably because he makes Tim Duncan look like Barkley in the charisma department.

[jag]

I don't know if Moses Malone is a top-10 player but he's probably the most underrated great player of all time. He was absolutely dominant in his prime and whipped Kareem on more than one occasion in the postseason. Yet for some reason he isn't all that remembered.

Only won 1 title. He's a 3-time MVP though so it's kind of strange you don't hear more about him.

[#41 Shoot Em Up]

Easy top ten:
1. Kobe
2. MJ
3.Shaq
4.Kareem
5.Wilt
6.Bird
7.Aids
8.Hakeem
9.Bill Russell
10. Shawn Kemp

[Isitjustme?]

^:lmao

[jag]

#41's schtick doesn't have an ounce of funny in it. It's pretty sad that his best schtick so far was when he followed everyone around catching cum in his mouth.

[Kyle Orton]

:lmao:lmao:lmao scoffing anyone else's list when you have Shawn fuckin Kemp in your top 10.

[#41 Shoot Em Up]

:lmao:lmao:lmao scoffing anyone else's list when you have Shawn fuckin Kemp in your top 10.

dumbazz jew
lol leaving Kobe off
lol leaving Bill "rings" russell off
lol having jim duncan in top ten

[JoeTait75]

MJ
Kareem
Wilt
Hakeem
Bird
Magic
Russell (I hear the arguments against him but he won so much at every level it's tough to leave him off)
Big O
Shaq
Duncan

- Bill Walton would have been top-10 if not for the injuries. LeBron has top-10 talent.

[Kyle Orton]

Yeah, none of that is one one thousandth as stupid as having Shawn Kemp as a top 10 all time player.

[JoeTait75]

Easy top ten:

10. Shawn Kemp

:lol

[jag]

dumbazz jew
lol leaving Kobe off
lol leaving Bill "rings" russell off
lol having jim duncan in top ten

You forgot to say "nigga" in your post, faggot.

[#41 Shoot Em Up]

#41's schtick doesn't have an ounce of funny in it. It's pretty sad that his best schtick so far was when he followed everyone around catching cum in his mouth.

I heard about you..... you that bitch nikka my boyz Luva and Kool took
turns running a train on yo azz:lol
When my nikkas done with you, come to daddy and i'll put you on my stroll

[jag]

You forgot to say "nigga" in your post, faggot.


I heard about you..... you that bitch nikka my boyz Luva and Kool took
turns running a train on yo azz:lol
When my nikkas done with you, come to daddy and i'll put you on my stroll

nikka works, too

[Kyle Orton]

Whenever I see the word "nikka", I think of Jackie Chan in Rush Hour saying to the black bartenders, "Whats up.....my nikka!"

[Amaso]

1st tier - MJ

2nd tier - Magic, Kareem, Kobe

3rd tier - Duncan, Hakeem, Shaq, Bird

I have a hard time ranking guys like Oscar, Wilt, and Russell; didn't get to see them play at all and they played in a completely different era of basketball.

[Isitjustme?]

^:lmao

[dirk4mvp]

Only a blind Kobe ballhugger would put Kobe above Bird, and on a completely higher tier.

[crc21209]

1. MJ
2. Wilt
3. Kareem
4. Magic
5. Big O
6. Bird
7. Shaq
8. Tim
9. Hakeem
10. Russell

IMHO

+1. Pretty good Top 10 there....:tu

[NewcastleKEG]

1st tier - MJ

2nd tier - Magic, Kareem, Kobe

3rd tier - Duncan, Hakeem, Shaq, Bird

I have a hard time ranking guys like Oscar, Wilt, and Russell; didn't get to see them play at all and they played in a completely different era of basketball.
Question

- Why no respect for Bird. He battled toe to toe with Magic and Kareem.....2 guys in your 2nd tier

- What has Kobe done to put him above Duncan/Shaq?
Either you argue he rode coat tails to win titles like Shaq or you try and argue he built the Lakers (Gasol rings) but that still puts him short of Duncan

[Amaso]

Question

- Why no respect for Bird. He battled toe to toe with Magic and Kareem.....2 guys in your 2nd tier

- What has Kobe done to put him above Duncan/Shaq?
Either you argue he rode coat tails to win titles like Shaq or you try and argue he built the Lakers (Gasol rings) but that still puts him short of Duncan

-Bird had tons of help as well to compete against the Lakers, usually i put him in the 2nd tier with those guys(from my posts in the past) but I decided to change my mind. Part of the reason I left him out is cause everyone else besides Hakeem has more rings than him.

-Almost everyone outside of people on this forum ranks Kobe higher than both Duncan and Shaq, and on this forum it's relatively split for non-trolls. Kobe has had as good if not slightly better career than both of those guys ALREADY, and he still has a couple of good years left in him... with a good chance to win another ring. His longevity is helping him(in terms of ranking), as it does with Kareem.

It's too hard to rank players by #'s or even by tier. It all comes down to circumstances that a player is put in, Hakeem won 2 rings with little help, while Bird had way more talent surrounding him and won just 1 more, but he did have to compete against the Lakers. Magic doesn't win 5 rings w/ any other all-star big from the 80s, he's fortunate he had Kareem. Kobe doesn't win 5 titles if he wasn't put in a big market team like LA, hell Shaq may have gone titleless had Kobe not turned out the way he did. MJ doesn't win 6 titles unless he's paired with another top5 player in the league for the 2nd half of his career. Duncan + Kobe would've won more titles than Kobe + Shaq, yet I still put Duncan and Shaq in the same tier.

[Venti Quattro]

MJ
Kareem
Magic
Russell
Bird
Wilt
Duncan
Hakeem
Kobe
Oscar Robinson

[NewcastleKEG]

@ Amaso

- Of course Bird had help but Worthy = Parish and Kareem was far superior to McHale. Plus the Celtics had to battle the 76ers, Pistons and upstart Bulls. I mention Bulls because they were the Pistons biggest competition in those Back2Back title years

Who were the Lakers battling? Blazers and Rockets? Far easier road to the Finals than the Celtics were facing

- How has Kobe had a better career than Duncan/Shaq?
Tim has 5 MVP's compared to Kobe's 3 AND is the greatest PF ever
Shaq has taken 3 different franchises to the NBA Finals

Seems more like flavor of the month and soon enough LeBron will over take Kobe too under this logic



MVP's which is the bottomline on these lists

MJ: 11
Kareem: 8 (but he also loaded up in a much lesser era)
Magic: 6
Bird: 5
Duncan: 5
Shaq: 4
Kobe: 3


Kobe might win 1 more MVP (Finals). His credentials are severely lacking compared to the other greats


Times swept in the Playoffs
Duncan - 2
Kobe - 3 & he missed the playoffs



IMO, the Kobe has a better resume than Duncan is an opinion held by the casual/Under 25 years old NBA fan. That fact is it just does not compare to the Greatest PF of All Time for example. Just like in 5-10 years LeBron will be the greatest player since MJ under this logic

[100%duncan]

you should be ashamed

[Sean Cagney]

yeah just like i said, everyone thinks kobe is sooooo good because he has skill with the flashy crossovers, pullups off the dribble, and fadeaways..but as far as having the biggest overall impact on the court for his team, kobe ain't top 10 all timePERIOD

my top 10:

mj
chamberlain
kareem
magic
bird
shaq
hakeem
russell
big shitty
pippen
:lol:lol Tim in your top ten but he is big shitty? That makes f in sense there.

[Sean Cagney]

Lol moses Malone
Lol big o
Lol Duncan

This dude here is a f in clown, period! Too bad DIRK is not near the top 10 of all times.

[Sean Cagney]

dirk has got to be top 20

Cool I agree there! No arguing as I am a Dirk fan as well! I don't like Dallas at all as a Spurs fan but Dirk is a good dude, a great one. He could up his stake soon to top 15 or near it with a title! Time will tell. I have Tim in my TOP ten of all times as alot do, but Dirk is moving up on that top 20 etc.

[TDMVPDPOY]

dirk is top20 no doubt

then again sooner or later must make way for lebron....in the top20....

[LnGrrrR]

Neither is Russell. His 11 titles are overrated as fuck given most of them were won in like an 8 team league with 3+ HOFers on his team and the best coach of all time on the sidelines for nearly all 11 of his titles.

They should rename it the "Hall of Skill" then, right? :lol

[davethedope]

Originally Posted by Kyle Orton http://spurstalk.com/forums/images/Style_Templates/nba/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5231159#post5231159)
Neither is Russell. His 11 titles are overrated as fuck given most of them were won in like an 8 team league with 3+ HOFers on his team and the best coach of all time on the sidelines for nearly all 11 of his titles.You make no sense. Why is Russell overrated and the 3 HOFers not? By your logic should Red be considered overrated as well? When does the league start in your
opinion, 1990?

[ImDaNuts]

Shaq is overrated.

[Amaso]

@ Amaso

- Of course Bird had help but Worthy = Parish and Kareem was far superior to McHale. Plus the Celtics had to battle the 76ers, Pistons and upstart Bulls. I mention Bulls because they were the Pistons biggest competition in those Back2Back title years

Who were the Lakers battling? Blazers and Rockets? Far easier road to the Finals than the Celtics were facing

- How has Kobe had a better career than Duncan/Shaq?
Tim has 5 MVP's compared to Kobe's 3 AND is the greatest PF ever
Shaq has taken 3 different franchises to the NBA Finals

Seems more like flavor of the month and soon enough LeBron will over take Kobe too under this logic



MVP's which is the bottomline on these lists

MJ: 11
Kareem: 8 (but he also loaded up in a much lesser era)
Magic: 6
Bird: 5
Duncan: 5
Shaq: 4
Kobe: 3


Kobe might win 1 more MVP (Finals). His credentials are severely lacking compared to the other greats


Times swept in the Playoffs
Duncan - 2
Kobe - 3 & he missed the playoffs



IMO, the Kobe has a better resume than Duncan is an opinion held by the casual/Under 25 years old NBA fan. That fact is it just does not compare to the Greatest PF of All Time for example. Just like in 5-10 years LeBron will be the greatest player since MJ under this logic

Yeah, the Celtics did have a tougher path to the finals, particularly in the late 80s, but it still means they were only the best team in the NBA 3 times(theoretically), while the Lakers were the best 5 times. And yeah, I agree Magic had a slightly better overall cast... which is why I was pointing to the logic that it's so hard to rank people better than eachother. Magic won 5 rings playing with Kareem and Worthy, and other top of the line roleplayers... while Kobe won 3 with Shaq and then 2 with Gasol, which is arguably the worst 2nd best player that any of the other top 10 players had besides maybe Duncan and Hakeem. So what makes Magic better than Kobe? Career wise, Kobe has better stats(assuming you look at everything).

And your logic of total mvps is pretty dumb, considering you added in regular season MVP's rofl. Shaq taking 3 teams to the finals doesn't really mean much, he won with 2 of em, and he might not even been the best center on that Miami Heat during that final's series.

What does being under 25 have anything to do with people thinking Kobe is better than Duncan? They played in the same era, you're age argument would only be valid if you made that comparison with someone from the 80s, like Bird or Magic. Who cares if he's the greatest PF of all-time? How does that leapfrog him over the 2nd best center, or 2nd best guard of all-time?

I don't understand what you were getting at by Lebron being the best player since MJ by my logic. He's had essentially no real talent around him, but that's one of the reasons why he has 0 rings. Like I said, circumstances are different, and had Lebron been given the supporting cast any of the other players been given, he'd probably have a similar amount of titles. If you want to think of how close all of these players are, just think about putting Kobe with Pippen during the 90s (assuming MJ is out)... those Bulls would've won 6 rings as well, let me know if I'm wrong.

[NewcastleKEG]

IMO it really comes down to what is your measuring stick. For me it's total MVP's: Finals & Regular Season combined. It's fair because it equals out the team mate factor. Superior team mates might have gotten you to the Finals (compared to a rival who had lesser team mates/front office) but you proved you were the best player on the biggest stage. RARELY does the losing team have the better/best player.

The reason I don't like statistics is because of Kobe vs Dominique Wilkins. Wilk has as good if not superior numbers and had no team mates whatsoever in his career. I assume he is one example of why MJ put Kobe as simple a ''Top 10 guard of All Time''

I also don't think you can disregard off the court issues which many times spill onto the court as we saw with Gasol. Kobe has had 3 instances in his career that should be considered when debating his place in NBA history

1) Fued with Shaq. They easily win 2 or more titles together BUT Kobe was willing to break it up for his own glory. You can't make the argument he just wanted the best for the Lakers long term because he was willing to leave LA as a free agent

2) Quitting in Game 7 of the Suns series. Classic Kobe sending message to the front office and his ''team mates'' that he's had enough and you can't do anything about it. He knew his team would get destroyed in the next Round if they won that Game 7 and he wasn't willing or man enough to take that beating so he quit.

3) The Sweeps & Missing Playoffs: Lack of leadership. Magic was shocked at the lack of effort and mental toughness of this team. How can a so called ''Top 10 Player of All Time" or Top 5 on your list, let that happen? If Kobe is getting all this credit for winning with Shaq & Gasol then he must also take the blame when he as the franchise player allows such things to occur

So ultimately, no I don't think Kobe wins 6 rings with Pippen. History and logic shows that Kobe would find a way through personal feuds or selfishness to sabotage it. IMO Kobe is much like Brett Favre in the NFL. He is a media darling (can do no wrong) and has all the physical skills but his motives are more than JUST WIN

History will show that the peak of Kobe's career was the Game 7 win last year in the Finals. His statistics and accomplishments will begin to decline just like Shaq. Luckily for him he plays for the Yankees of the NBA so he will (As he has the day he joined the league) be surrounded with the top talent in the league. This is also the highest he will rank on these ''All Time lists'' because just like Shaq, the casual fan will remember less and less of Kobe over the years and the media will jump onto the next flashy players bandwagon.

It's a Catch 22 for Kobe. He won't win another title without another Gasol'ish trade but yet that younger player will want the MVP. If the Lakers trade for Howard, Dwight is gonna do all that's necessary to win the MVP. So like I said, last year was the peak of Kobe's career and the peak of his position on the All Time lists. The longer he sticks around the more he will lessen his legacy just like Derek Jeter.

[Amaso]

IMO it really comes down to what is your measuring stick. For me it's total MVP's: Finals & Regular Season combined. It's fair because it equals out the team mate factor. Superior team mates might have gotten you to the Finals (compared to a rival who had lesser team mates/front office) but you proved you were the best player on the biggest stage. RARELY does the losing team have the better/best player.

The reason I don't like statistics is because of Kobe vs Dominique Wilkins. Wilk has as good if not superior numbers and had no team mates whatsoever in his career. I assume he is one example of why MJ put Kobe as simple a ''Top 10 guard of All Time''

I also don't think you can disregard off the court issues which many times spill onto the court as we saw with Gasol. Kobe has had 3 instances in his career that should be considered when debating his place in NBA history

1) Fued with Shaq. They easily win 2 or more titles together BUT Kobe was willing to break it up for his own glory. You can't make the argument he just wanted the best for the Lakers long term because he was willing to leave LA as a free agent

2) Quitting in Game 7 of the Suns series. Classic Kobe sending message to the front office and his ''team mates'' that he's had enough and you can't do anything about it. He knew his team would get destroyed in the next Round if they won that Game 7 and he wasn't willing or man enough to take that beating so he quit.

3) The Sweeps & Missing Playoffs: Lack of leadership. Magic was shocked at the lack of effort and mental toughness of this team. How can a so called ''Top 10 Player of All Time" or Top 5 on your list, let that happen? If Kobe is getting all this credit for winning with Shaq & Gasol then he must also take the blame when he as the franchise player allows such things to occur

So ultimately, no I don't think Kobe wins 6 rings with Pippen. History and logic shows that Kobe would find a way through personal feuds or selfishness to sabotage it. IMO Kobe is much like Brett Favre in the NFL. He is a media darling (can do no wrong) and has all the physical skills but his motives are more than JUST WIN

History will show that the peak of Kobe's career was the Game 7 win last year in the Finals. His statistics and accomplishments will begin to decline just like Shaq. Luckily for him he plays for the Yankees of the NBA so he will (As he has the day he joined the league) be surrounded with the top talent in the league. This is also the highest he will rank on these ''All Time lists'' because just like Shaq, the casual fan will remember less and less of Kobe over the years and the media will jump onto the next flashy players bandwagon.

It's a Catch 22 for Kobe. He won't win another title without another Gasol'ish trade but yet that younger player will want the MVP. If the Lakers trade for Howard, Dwight is gonna do all that's necessary to win the MVP. So like I said, last year was the peak of Kobe's career and the peak of his position on the All Time lists. The longer he sticks around the more he will lessen his legacy just like Derek Jeter.

You make some good points, but like I said in another thread... non-laker fans are going to point out every "flaw" that happens that would hurt Kobe's legacy, and everyone here particularly is going to point to these things when they want to bump Kobe down the all-time list. He's the only player in today's game that has that legacy to try and diminish by your typical nba fan. He is hated by lots of fans, which just goes to show his greatness, so theres a bias that comes in when you're talking about rankings. No one hates Duncan, so there is no reason for trolls that post here(the majority here), to try and diminish his accomplishments.

I doubt Dominque Wilkin's stats are as good as Kobe's, and it's obvious by using the "eye" test that he's not even in the same stratosphere as Kobe.

As far as using off the court drama to determine someone's legacy, you are just proving my point that there's a bias in fans when it comes to ranking players. You are seriously lacking some nba knowledge. Kobe only missed the playoffs because he was injured that year as well as Odom(idk how you don't know that and are trying to argue with me about any sort of basketball debate). And if you remember, they had D-league players surrounding those two.

Duncan got swept by the suns last year, lost to the #8 seed; none of which is going to ruin his legacy when it's all said and done. And Shaq has done literally nothing in the league the past 5 years and that isn't going to hurt his legacy.

Kobe is a media darling? what?

So Kobe isn't going to win 6 rings if he was paired with Pippen in that same era, not because of his skill, but because he is going to ruin something off the court along the way? You do remember all of MJ's issues right? When did you become a Bull's fan, in this decade?

Either way, the more I think about it, I'd rather just lump #2-#10 in the same category, and would include MJ with them as the same calibur if it wouldn't cause a shitstorm among everyone.

[ambchang]

I don't get how Kobe fan bois can compare individual player rankings by taking into account the 2nd best player on the team, and yet totally ignore competition. So which one is it? Other players matter, or other players not matter? Isiah Thomas had Joe Dumars as his 2nd best and won two championships against Jordan, Magic and Bird in their primes, does that make Isiah > that the other three? Why not take into account the defensive make-up and the coach of the team? Rick Barry won a championship with nobodies around him, where would he rank then? Havlicek won with Dave Cowens against some pretty weak competition, where does this put him?

Kobe fanbois just take what supports the argument of proping up Kobe, and ignores anything else. And when arguments go against them, they throw previous greats and Kobe's teammates under the bus. Just absolute despicable behaviour.

[Amaso]

I don't get how Kobe fan bois can compare individual player rankings by taking into account the 2nd best player on the team, and yet totally ignore competition. So which one is it? Other players matter, or other players not matter? Isiah Thomas had Joe Dumars as his 2nd best and won two championships against Jordan, Magic and Bird in their primes, does that make Isiah > that the other three? Why not take into account the defensive make-up and the coach of the team? Rick Barry won a championship with nobodies around him, where would he rank then? Havlicek won with Dave Cowens against some pretty weak competition, where does this put him?

Kobe fanbois just take what supports the argument of proping up Kobe, and ignores anything else. And when arguments go against them, they throw previous greats and Kobe's teammates under the bus. Just absolute despicable behaviour.

You obviously didn't read my other posts(i'm assuming you are talking about me), I said there's so many different variables that go into how players career's are looked back on, and how it's too hard to tell who is actually better than who... which is why I group players.

[ambchang]

I did read your other posts, and you group Kobe above Bird, using absolutely illogical and contradictory "variables" to evaluate them.

Using Kobe's and Odom's injury in 04-05 to dismiss them missing the playoffs is an easy way out. Both of them missed about 15 games that season, the 16 games that Kobe missed, the Lakers were 6-10, which is similar to their overall season record. Not mentioning that two of those losses came at the end of the season, when the Lakers were in full tank mode.

The misses of Kobe didn't just come when he is past his prime, like Duncan. He destroyed the Lakers dynasty (along with Shaq) during his prime, he had always has issues with his shot selection throughout his career, he performed poorly in big games when he had was the obvious leader on his team, he refused to shoot in a Game 7 vs. the Suns (for whatever reason), he was rumoured to clash frequently with teammates (Shaq, Bynum trade demand, Gasol) and his coach, he shot his team out of the finals to show he is the man against the underdog Pistons. All of these obvious flaws lines up.

I am not just talking about a guy who is acting like a jerk, I am talking about a guy who did some pretty stupid things and put personal glory above team success. Granted, he still won 5 rings, but they were due to some very crafty moves by the front office to make the last two possible, and everyone knows he rode Shaq's coattails to the first 2, possibly first 3.

[Killakobe81]

Pippen > Kobe. These are the facts

LOL density is not only a term used in physics ...

[Killakobe81]

The one consensus one I don't get is Bird over Duncan and O'Neal. There's nothing accomplishment-wise or statistically to suggest he was better than either.

And I've always had a hard time believing that Russell and Chamberlain are better than Duncan, O'Neal and Olajuwon. I'm not saying definitively they weren't, but I look at the era they played in and the competition they played against and it doesn't compare to the past thirty or so years. Give them the advantages of today's players and maybe they're as good now as they were then (not in terms of averages; advanced stats-wise), but I'm not convinced. Russell's lack of anything resembling an elite or even high level offensive game makes him being supposedly better even more questionable.

The only players I can look at and come to the conclusion that they were definitively better than Duncan and O'Neal, are Jordan, Abdul-Jabbar and Johnson. Beyond that, I'm not sure. I have a hard time ranking pre-80s players. So excluding pre-80s players, I'm going to go with . . .

1) Jordan
2) Abdul-Jabbar
3) Johnson
4) Duncan
5) O'Neal
6) Bryant
7) Bird
8) Olajuwon
9) K. Malone
10) James

It may be pre-mature to put James there, but he's like Duncan eight seasons in (minus the championships, of course). He's just too damned dominant statistically to be ignored and it's obvious he's going to go down as the greatest ever at his position. You could make a case for M. Malone, Garnett, Wade and a few others at 9 and 10, but for me, K. Malone's longevity at an elite level gives him the edge.

I like James at 10 but I wont list him until he rings ...As i have said on other threads he has an "outside shot" at #1. Thing is I did not need stats to get to the same conclusion you can just watch Lebron and see he is special.

[Killakobe81]

I did read your other posts, and you group Kobe above Bird, using absolutely illogical and contradictory "variables" to evaluate them.

Using Kobe's and Odom's injury in 04-05 to dismiss them missing the playoffs is an easy way out. Both of them missed about 15 games that season, the 16 games that Kobe missed, the Lakers were 6-10, which is similar to their overall season record. Not mentioning that two of those losses came at the end of the season, when the Lakers were in full tank mode.

The misses of Kobe didn't just come when he is past his prime, like Duncan. He destroyed the Lakers dynasty (along with Shaq) during his prime, he had always has issues with his shot selection throughout his career, he performed poorly in big games when he had was the obvious leader on his team, he refused to shoot in a Game 7 vs. the Suns (for whatever reason), he was rumoured to clash frequently with teammates (Shaq, Bynum trade demand, Gasol) and his coach, he shot his team out of the finals to show he is the man against the underdog Pistons. All of these obvious flaws lines up.

I am not just talking about a guy who is acting like a jerk, I am talking about a guy who did some pretty stupid things and put personal glory above team success. Granted, he still won 5 rings, but they were due to some very crafty moves by the front office to make the last two possible, and everyone knows he rode Shaq's coattails to the first 2, possibly first 3.

LOL Bird over Kobe ...

[DMC]

blah blah blah kobe blah blah kobe blah blah kobe blah blah rings blah blah kobe. Rinse and repeat.

[Josepatches_]

dirk is top20 no doubt

then again sooner or later must make way for lebron....in the top20....


If Dirk is top20 then Lebron is top20

LeBron>Dirk

[Amaso]

I did read your other posts, and you group Kobe above Bird, using absolutely illogical and contradictory "variables" to evaluate them.

Using Kobe's and Odom's injury in 04-05 to dismiss them missing the playoffs is an easy way out. Both of them missed about 15 games that season, the 16 games that Kobe missed, the Lakers were 6-10, which is similar to their overall season record. Not mentioning that two of those losses came at the end of the season, when the Lakers were in full tank mode.

The misses of Kobe didn't just come when he is past his prime, like Duncan. He destroyed the Lakers dynasty (along with Shaq) during his prime, he had always has issues with his shot selection throughout his career, he performed poorly in big games when he had was the obvious leader on his team, he refused to shoot in a Game 7 vs. the Suns (for whatever reason), he was rumoured to clash frequently with teammates (Shaq, Bynum trade demand, Gasol) and his coach, he shot his team out of the finals to show he is the man against the underdog Pistons. All of these obvious flaws lines up.

I am not just talking about a guy who is acting like a jerk, I am talking about a guy who did some pretty stupid things and put personal glory above team success. Granted, he still won 5 rings, but they were due to some very crafty moves by the front office to make the last two possible, and everyone knows he rode Shaq's coattails to the first 2, possibly first 3.

Yes cause averaging something like 28/6/6 over those 3 championship years is riding the coattails of someone. Kobe was the closer of that team, that's where alot of his legacy will be remembered from.

Every superstar clashes with teammates, I don't see how that makes someone better than someone else.

And like I said in my earlier post, I usually consider Bird to be in that 2nd tier group, but I just don't think his career adds up to the likes of Magic, Kareem, or Kobe... who all have a multiple ring advantage over him.

[dirk4mvp]

LOL Bird over Kobe ...

There is virtually zero argument to put Kobe above Bird.

[Amaso]

There is virtually zero argument to put Kobe above Bird.

notsureifsrs

[dirk4mvp]

:lol there's a reason most all time lists have Bird above Kobe.


Kobe fanboys are pathetic.

[Kyle Orton]

:lol Kobe over Bird

[Amaso]

:lol there's a reason most all time lists have Bird above Kobe.


Kobe fanboys are pathetic.

Most all time lists haven't been updated. Kobe winning his last 2 championships has moved up his ranking from ~#10 before to whatever most people want to put him now.

[dirk4mvp]

Oh so because teaming up with an all star big man and being drug back from irrelevancy to win 2 titles, 1 in which he shot 6-24 in the game 7 puts him above Bird? That makes sense.

[Amaso]

Oh so because teaming up with an all star big man and being drug back from irrelevancy to win 2 titles, 1 in which he shot 6-24 in the game 7 puts him above Bird? That makes sense.

I'm pretty sure Bird shot like 32% in a game 7 as well. Not to mention Kobe has 2 more rings.

[NewcastleKEG]

You make some good points, but like I said in another thread... non-laker fans are going to point out every "flaw" that happens that would hurt Kobe's legacy, and everyone here particularly is going to point to these things when they want to bump Kobe down the all-time list. He's the only player in today's game that has that legacy to try and diminish by your typical nba fan. He is hated by lots of fans, which just goes to show his greatness, so theres a bias that comes in when you're talking about rankings. No one hates Duncan, so there is no reason for trolls that post here(the majority here), to try and diminish his accomplishments.

I doubt Dominque Wilkin's stats are as good as Kobe's, and it's obvious by using the "eye" test that he's not even in the same stratosphere as Kobe.

As far as using off the court drama to determine someone's legacy, you are just proving my point that there's a bias in fans when it comes to ranking players. You are seriously lacking some nba knowledge. Kobe only missed the playoffs because he was injured that year as well as Odom(idk how you don't know that and are trying to argue with me about any sort of basketball debate). And if you remember, they had D-league players surrounding those two.

Duncan got swept by the suns last year, lost to the #8 seed; none of which is going to ruin his legacy when it's all said and done. And Shaq has done literally nothing in the league the past 5 years and that isn't going to hurt his legacy.

Kobe is a media darling? what?

So Kobe isn't going to win 6 rings if he was paired with Pippen in that same era, not because of his skill, but because he is going to ruin something off the court along the way? You do remember all of MJ's issues right? When did you become a Bull's fan, in this decade?

Either way, the more I think about it, I'd rather just lump #2-#10 in the same category, and would include MJ with them as the same calibur if it wouldn't cause a shitstorm among everyone.
- Kobe & Wilkins (Keep in mind Wilkins played til he was 39 so his averages should be EVEN better)
PPG: 25.3 vs 24.8 - Kobe
TRB: 5.3 vs 6.7 - Z
APG: 4.7 vs 2.5 - Kobe
SPG: 1.5 vs 1.3 - Kobe
BPG: 0.5 vs 0.6 - Z
TOV: 2.9 vs 2.5 - Z
FG%: .45 vs .46 - Z

So why is Kobe better because ESPN tells you so? I'll listen to MJ, he faced both and there is a reason he rated Kobe as simply a ''Top 10 guard ever''

- 2005 Lakers were 3-19 to end the season and Kobe played in 20 of those games. How does an elite player allow that happen? That's just MIND BOGGLING

- Kobe had Odom & Caron Butler on that team. D-Leaguers?

- MJ's issues were gambling. Unless you believe he was forced to retire in '94 because of this, then MJ's off the court issues never spilled over to the court

- It's not fair to compare anyone to MJ. But yeah I have a hard time believing Kobe would win 6 rings when Jordan has more playoff game winning ASSISTS than Kobe has baskets. Kobe is and always will be a selfish player that's why his production always declines in the Finals. Look at the Shaq years and Kobe's statistics either decline compared to the rest of the playoffs or he can't match Shaq's increase.

Jordan IS the Bulls
Duncan IS the Spurs

How many rings would Kobe have if he stayed on the Hornets?..... Chances are Zero. He would be the Dominque Wilkins and nothing more. When he doesn't have a Top3 Post Player on his roster, Kobe flames out or misses the playoffs all together.

[Texas_Ranger]

^
What he said!

[ambchang]

Yes cause averaging something like 28/6/6 over those 3 championship years is riding the coattails of someone. Kobe was the closer of that team, that's where alot of his legacy will be remembered from.
First off, it was 25/6/5 through those three years.
Second, the offense and defense was clearly centered around Shaq back in those days.
Third, the entire league was trying to stop Shaq, not Kobe, by signing all these oversized talentless big (to no avail)
Fourth, Shaq actually finished similar to Kobe in clutch statistics in 00, 01 and 02. 00 vs. Portland, Shaq dunked the ball (courtesy of a Kobe pass), vs. Kings, Horry nailed the clutch shot, vs. Spurs in 04, Fisher nailed the turnaround. The only game I could think of that Kobe took over was a playoff game vs. the Spurs when Shaq fouled out. That’s it.

Every superstar clashes with teammates, I don't see how that makes someone better than someone else.
In fact, I can’t think of another superstar in the top 10 who ran the best/2nd best player out of town.
Duncan didn’t. Jordan didn’t run Pippen out of town, Magic didn’t run Kareem out of town and vice versa, Isiah didn’t run Dumars out of town, Hakeem didn’t run Otis Thorpe/Drexler out of town, Wilt didn’t even care about basketball to run anyone out of town, Russell didn’t run Cousy out of town, Moses didn’t run Dr. J out of town, Shaq just got out of town with Penny, Kobe and Wade. No, can’t think of one.

And like I said in my earlier post, I usually consider Bird to be in that 2nd tier group, but I just don't think his career adds up to the likes of Magic, Kareem, or Kobe... who all have a multiple ring advantage over him.
Funny how Bird did in fact beat Magic AND Kareem on the same team with McHale and Parish. While McHale and Parish aren’t chopped liver, I struggle to understand how Bird, who’s career couldn’t add up to Magic and Kareem, could actually beat them in a seven game series with two guys who are so far down the line that they don’t even factor into the discussion.
And rings advantage? So what is this now, does teammates matter or not? You just said Kobe only had Pau Gasol and ignored competition, and now you are saying rings is a big advantage, and totally ignored the fact that Magic had Kareem, and Kareem had Magic, two players you said were clearly a strung above Bird.

I'm pretty sure Bird shot like 32% in a game 7 as well. Not to mention Kobe has 2 more rings.
Kobe didn’t just shoot 32% in A game 7 (he actually shot 25%, and somehow won the finals MVP), he shot a combined 35% in 5 elimination games over the last 4 years. I can understand how players can have a bad game at an important time, it happens all the time, but to consistently throw in bad shooting performances at the most critical moment is a huge black mark.
So 2 more rings is the argument now? Did Bird have Shaq for three of his rings? Did Bird have another top 10 player on his team for any of the three rings? Did Kobe have competition like the 6ers, Lakers and Pistons of the 80s?

[JamStone]

Couple things...

-Larry Bird > Kobe Bryant. There is a small argument using total rings, but it's not very strong. Larry Bird was the best player in the league right before Jordan started to dominate. He's one of I believe 6 players to have won multiple League MVPs and multiple Finals MVPs. Michael, Kareem, Magic, Duncan, and Russell (assuming he'd have won a couple Finals MVPs during his run). That's greatness. After Michael, Kareem, and Wilt, I believe Bird is up there with Magic and anyone else as next in line among the all time greats. Kobe is great but Larry is the in the conversation of top 5 players ever. Kobe is in the conversation of top 10 players ever.


-Comparing Kobe to Dominique is fine if you're just using statistics and statistics only. Greatness goes beyond just statistics. And for the record, Dominique's stats compare favorably to any of the all time great perimeter scorers after Michael and Larry Bird. Winning usually is part of the distinction of what makes a great player great.

If we acknowledge Kobe as similar to Dominique based on stats, then we could say that Patrick Ewing and Bob McAdoo were just as good as Tim Duncan. Hell, Charles Barkley put up similar numbers to Kareem Abdul Jabbar. Do we put those two at the same level? The distinction is winning. You can wax rhapsodic all you want about who had better teammates or who had greater or lesser competition and some of it might be completely valid, but it's still all hypothetical. You can't take away who they played with or played against. Winning is still winning, if you win with 5 HOF teammates or win with a team full of smurfs. Dominique had a great career, especially statistically. No one would compare Bob McAdoo to Tim Duncan. It's pretty silly to compare Nique to Kobe.

[picc84]

Not having Kobe over Bird and Duncan makes sense. Both were better peak-wise and have more individual accomplishments.

Not having Kobe in a top 10 list is fishy.

[lefty]

Couple things...

-Larry Bird > Kobe Bryant. There is a small argument using total rings, but it's not very strong. Larry Bird was the best player in the league right before Jordan started to dominate. He's one of I believe 6 players to have won multiple League MVPs and multiple Finals MVPs. Michael, Kareem, Magic, Duncan, and Russell (assuming he'd have won a couple Finals MVPs during his run). That's greatness. After Michael, Kareem, and Wilt, I believe Bird is up there with Magic and anyone else as next in line among the all time greats. Kobe is great but Larry is the in the conversation of top 5 players ever. Kobe is in the conversation of top 10 players ever.


-Comparing Kobe to Dominique is fine if you're just using statistics and statistics only. Greatness goes beyond just statistics. And for the record, Dominique's stats compare favorably to any of the all time great perimeter scorers after Michael and Larry Bird. Winning usually is part of the distinction of what makes a great player great.

If we acknowledge Kobe as similar to Dominique based on stats, then we could say that Patrick Ewing and Bob McAdoo were just as good as Tim Duncan. Hell, Charles Barkley put up similar numbers to Kareem Abdul Jabbar. Do we put those two at the same level? The distinction is winning. You can wax rhapsodic all you want about who had better teammates or who had greater or lesser competition and some of it might be completely valid, but it's still all hypothetical. You can't take away who they played with or played against. Winning is still winning, if you win with 5 HOF teammates or win with a team full of smurfs. Dominique had a great career, especially statistically. No one would compare Bob McAdoo to Tim Duncan. It's pretty silly to compare Nique to Kobe.

Great post :tu

Too bad Barkley couldn't play D to save his life

[Kyle Orton]

I'm pretty sure Bird shot like 32% in a game 7 as well. Not to mention Kobe has 2 more rings.

Horry > Kobe > bird. Got it.

[Kyle Orton]

Not having Kobe over Bird and Duncan makes sense. Both were better peak-wise and have more individual accomplishments.

Not having Kobe in a top 10 list is fishy.

Yeah, I might be stretching it having Moses Malone over Kobe, but like I said previously, I'm bias towards players who have won MVP and finals MVP in the same season.

[NewcastleKEG]

Great post :tu

Too bad Barkley couldn't play D to save his life
Hey that's not fair. Barkley is like 6 foot 6

[Killakobe81]

Couple things...

-Larry Bird > Kobe Bryant. There is a small argument using total rings, but it's not very strong. Larry Bird was the best player in the league right before Jordan started to dominate. He's one of I believe 6 players to have won multiple League MVPs and multiple Finals MVPs. Michael, Kareem, Magic, Duncan, and Russell (assuming he'd have won a couple Finals MVPs during his run). That's greatness. After Michael, Kareem, and Wilt, I believe Bird is up there with Magic and anyone else as next in line among the all time greats. Kobe is great but Larry is the in the conversation of top 5 players ever. Kobe is in the conversation of top 10 players ever.


-Comparing Kobe to Dominique is fine if you're just using statistics and statistics only. Greatness goes beyond just statistics. And for the record, Dominique's stats compare favorably to any of the all time great perimeter scorers after Michael and Larry Bird. Winning usually is part of the distinction of what makes a great player great.

If we acknowledge Kobe as similar to Dominique based on stats, then we could say that Patrick Ewing and Bob McAdoo were just as good as Tim Duncan. Hell, Charles Barkley put up similar numbers to Kareem Abdul Jabbar. Do we put those two at the same level? The distinction is winning. You can wax rhapsodic all you want about who had better teammates or who had greater or lesser competition and some of it might be completely valid, but it's still all hypothetical. You can't take away who they played with or played against. Winning is still winning, if you win with 5 HOF teammates or win with a team full of smurfs. Dominique had a great career, especially statistically. No one would compare Bob McAdoo to Tim Duncan. It's pretty silly to compare Nique to Kobe.

Bird is great I saw him play ...a lot. I saw him hurt my team a lot. But when you say best player you have to define it. For me it's:
1. Rings
2. Consistent greatness
3. A period of dominance
4. Numbers
5. Personal opinion.

Part of any list has some personal bias unless you are a stats only guy, but even stats have some bias.

Offensively of course there are stats that favor Bird, especially shooting % .... But when you factor in defense, athleticism, number of years producing at a high level, Kobe is better. In fact Bird has said the same his own self. Not only was bird a better shooter but his vision is better and he was a more "willing" passer. Except maybe Bird's vision and shooting Kobe pretty much can do all Bird can and has in many big playoff games ...but there is plenty that Bird can not do that Kobe can. But again just my opinion. I have no issue with yours, because unlike many on here Jam, you will call out you favorite players and I respect that. But anyone that has Bird and especially Pippen over Kobe are wrong.

MVP's and final MVP's are great honors but don't prove shit....even though I freely admit the award when Bird had it, had a lot more integrity then it does now.

It's not just rings that Kobe has over Bird. Bird was one of the league's best players from 1980 - 1986 but it was not unanimous by any stretch. Moses, Magic, KAreem and even Doc all had cases (prior to MJ) and Bird was up there with those guys, sure. His teams won so of course he got the MVP's and the Finals MVP's to show for it. But by 1987 Magic and Mj were clearly better and Bird just showed flashes of greatness after 1987 before retiring due to back trouble. Are Birds 7 seasons better than any 7 of Kobe's? maybe so. But when you take all 15 of Kobe's I say he is the greater player.

To me, saying Bird>Kobe that's like saying Hakeem or shaq's shorter period of dominance carries greater weight than Kareem's. If you give me 2000 MVP shaq, or Hakeem his MVP year against KAreem sure they were prety damn dominant. For just one year, when you factor his playoffs and Finals Shaq's 2000 MVP year has a strong case against anyone. I would stack him against Kareem, Hakeem, duncan MJ or any other great and one could call Shaq the greater player.

But when i look at their career as a whole, Duncan is even greater than Shaq as is obviously Kareem and MJ. Bird was amazing but I think he benefits for how he saved the NBA (along with Magic) his whole body of work is not as impressive as others in top 10 consideration IMHO.

*I also realize one could argue HIV cut Magic's career short too ...and could knock him down a few notches.

[Killakobe81]

And this was not an argument just for Kobe. I could do the EXACT same for duncan. Why is it that everyone automatically has Bird in their top 10, but not Tim? Like Kobe, duncan has multiple Finals MVP's he won more rings was better defender and was able to remain an elite player longer. sure, Bird's best years maybe greater offensively than Duncan's but I think you could make a case that Duncan is a greater two way player and winner ...especially when you factor he had to battle Kobe and Shaq together, to win 2 of the rings he got. Plus he battled Malone, KG Dirk at his "position" as well.

[picc84]

What separates Bird from Kobe is ball IQ. Skillwise, Kobe compares with any player in history. Its that noggin of his thats kept him from the top of the mountain. Its also whats propelled him near it, but if you aren't on the top you aren't on the top.

[Killakobe81]

What separates Bird from Kobe is ball IQ. Skillwise, Kobe compares with any player in history. Its that noggin of his thats kept him from the top of the mountain. Its also whats propelled him near it, but if you aren't on the top you aren't on the top.

Hey for me, I don't have Kobe at the top either ...i say he is borderline top 5 but DEFINITELY top 10 ...
And Bird to me, is in the same category. I give the Kobe the edge for having more years at the top and the rings ...

[ambchang]

Kareem's peak year is as good as, if not more so, than Hakeem or Shaq's peak years.

Duncan's peak year is comparable to Shaq's or Hakeem's peak years. Stats don't necessarily show it on the surface, but when you look at it deeper by factoring in pace, they are very comparable.

Bird's peak years is greater than Kobe's, there are no questions about that. Bird was simply dominant. He was one of 3 players to ever win 3 straight MVPs.

[ambchang]

There is no way in hell Kobe is top 5. You are probably one of about 20 people on earth, including Kobe's family, who would even consider putting Kobe in the top 5. Jordan, Kareem, Wilt, Magic, and Bird easily tops Kobe in terms of greatness.

Duncan, Shaq, Hakeem, Moses, and Russell are clearly above Kobe.

You can make a case for the Big O, Jerry West, Dr. J, John Havlicek, Elgin Baylor.

[Killakobe81]

Kareem's peak year is as good as, if not more so, than Hakeem or Shaq's peak years.

Duncan's peak year is comparable to Shaq's or Hakeem's peak years. Stats don't necessarily show it on the surface, but when you look at it deeper by factoring in pace, they are very comparable.

Bird's peak years is greater than Kobe's, there are no questions about that. Bird was simply dominant. He was one of 3 players to ever win 3 straight MVPs.

1. again Im not a stats guy, so if you directing it at me, I appreciate it but doesnt change my mind.

2. Nash could of won 3 straight MVPs' so that means he is in the conversation of 2nd best to Bird?

3. Malone (and Chuck) won some MVP's even though MJ was clearly the best player. Right around those years I started giving less than two shits about the award and Im not even a big MJ fan. When they started giving it to the 2nd best player due to "fatigue" and began concocting other factors I was done with the award. At least Bird won his prior, but again cases could be made for other players during any of his 3 MVP seasons.

4. I can find stats that support Kobe over Bird ...but why would I? Again Im not a stats guy.

5. I dont need Stats to show me Duncan compares favorable to shaq and Hakeem, I saw Duncan carry the spurs to a title in what his 2nd season? Just like Bird IIRC, not not only that he took the Spurs to another 8 years later while bird won his last title only 6 years after his first. Duncan has a strong case over Bird TBH, I normally rank Bird ahead ...but Im starting to see a stong case for Tim. If he was the primary facor for this year's run I think i would go with duncan over Bird ...right now to me it's close for all 3 (Bird, Duncan and Tim but I'll use rings to break the tie) so Kobe>Duncan>Bird.

[Killakobe81]

There is no way in hell Kobe is top 5. You are probably one of about 20 people on earth, including Kobe's family, who would even consider putting Kobe in the top 5. Jordan, Kareem, Wilt, Magic, and Bird easily tops Kobe in terms of greatness.

Duncan, Shaq, Hakeem, Moses, and Russell are clearly above Kobe.

You can make a case for the Big O, Jerry West, Dr. J, John Havlicek, Elgin Baylor.

LOL I said he wasn't top 5 I said borderline. And again we had this debate before.If you notice, I dont have Will, russel etc. BECUASE i never saw them play. My top 10 every time I post one mentions the fact that I never saw wilt play ...did you? SO how can i fairly rank them just on stats and on rings?

[ambchang]

So individual accolades and stats are not something you put much credence to. You are right, Bird and Duncan carried their teams to titles. Bird carried the Celtics to the 84 title, Duncan did it in 03. They obviously got help, but they were dominant throughout the playoffs.

I can't say the same for Kobe in any of the 5 championships. Shaq was clearly the best player in the first two titles, you can argue about 02, but the Lakers were still designing the entire team offense around Shaq.

In 09 and 10, Gasol absolutely shined in critical moments of the game, especially in the finals, and yet Kobe were performing at, or below, his regular season output in both finals appearance (or in the playoffs).

Kobe never ever carried the Lakers, and dominated the competition in any playoff series like any of the other players in the top 10 discussions did. You have an argument for the Kobe series against Spurs in 02 or 03, but that was when the entire Spurs defense was designed to crowd Shaq and leave the other open. Even Fisher averaged like 15ppg in that series.

[Killakobe81]

There is no way in hell Kobe is top 5. You are probably one of about 20 people on earth, including Kobe's family, who would even consider putting Kobe in the top 5. Jordan, Kareem, Wilt, Magic, and Bird easily tops Kobe in terms of greatness.

Duncan, Shaq, Hakeem, Moses, and Russell are clearly above Kobe.

You can make a case for the Big O, Jerry West, Dr. J, John Havlicek, Elgin Baylor.

LOL getting all upset, when i said 4 pages back my list only factors poeple I saw, and I get that people dont always read the entire thread, I do that sometimes myself. But we had this debate last season. So i expect better from you. Im not gonna start at "ground zero". I started watching in 1980 Bird and Magic's rookie year Kareem's last MVP season (IIRC) ...so Iam definitely qualified to discuss every player in my top 10. Never saw Big O, Wilt, Russ or Hondo EXCEPT on NBA classics. will not ranke them because that makes no sense to me ..

[picc84]

You are a beacon of hate. :lol You don't even leave room for attempt at rational argument. Is this what the NBA forum has done to you or were you born this way?

[Killakobe81]

So individual accolades and stats are not something you put much credence to. You are right, Bird and Duncan carried their teams to titles. Bird carried the Celtics to the 84 title, Duncan did it in 03. They obviously got help, but they were dominant throughout the playoffs.

I can't say the same for Kobe in any of the 5 championships. Shaq was clearly the best player in the first two titles, you can argue about 02, but the Lakers were still designing the entire team offense around Shaq.

In 09 and 10, Gasol absolutely shined in critical moments of the game, especially in the finals, and yet Kobe were performing at, or below, his regular season output in both finals appearance (or in the playoffs).

Kobe never ever carried the Lakers, and dominated the competition in any playoff series like any of the other players in the top 10 discussions did. You have an argument for the Kobe series against Spurs in 02 or 03, but that was when the entire Spurs defense was designed to crowd Shaq and leave the other open. Even Fisher averaged like 15ppg in that series.

You never answered my question, did you see all those guys play?
Also factoring caveats such as they designed defense and all that other bullshit is weak. If you gonna use stats to back that duncan, or Bird "carried" dont use the argument that the spurs defense was designated for Shaq, because your best defender guarded Kobe and because they ALL had help even tim. His help was not as great as Kobe. Shaq's or Bird's but no one not even MJ wins without help.

I gave you my criteria, the era I am judging and my list. you can disagree. but since 1980 hell yes Kobe is top 5. And yes, I have him above duncan and Bird (though to me they are close).
To me MJ and KAreem are the top of the class.
Magic just below that.
then it's Kobe, duncan, Bird and Shaq and Hakeem. To me all pretty close and a case can be made for any of them. But Kobe and duncan to me are ranked higher because of rings and consistency and longer primes.

[Killakobe81]

So individual accolades and stats are not something you put much credence to. You are right, Bird and Duncan carried their teams to titles. Bird carried the Celtics to the 84 title, Duncan did it in 03. They obviously got help, but they were dominant throughout the playoffs.

I can't say the same for Kobe in any of the 5 championships. Shaq was clearly the best player in the first two titles, you can argue about 02, but the Lakers were still designing the entire team offense around Shaq.

In 09 and 10, Gasol absolutely shined in critical moments of the game, especially in the finals, and yet Kobe were performing at, or below, his regular season output in both finals appearance (or in the playoffs).

Kobe never ever carried the Lakers, and dominated the competition in any playoff series like any of the other players in the top 10 discussions did. You have an argument for the Kobe series against Spurs in 02 or 03, but that was when the entire Spurs defense was designed to crowd Shaq and leave the other open. Even Fisher averaged like 15ppg in that series.

LOL PER disagrees ...but sure.

[Killakobe81]

lol putting the chucking fraud top 5

i'd take clyde drexxler over him as my 2nd pick if i'm building a team...kobe ain't no winner without a dominant big, and he'll still do his best to lose despite having awesome bigs (see: 2003, 2004, 2008, 2011)

LOL Clyde Drexler ...:lol the guy that couldnt win without Hakeem ...that guy? Who failed to win in college with Hakeem? the guy that lost to an aging Lakers squad in 1990 despite having HCA? that guy?

[lefty]

LOL Clyde Drexler ...:lol the guy that couldnt win without Hakeem ...that guy? Who failed to win in college with Hakeem? the guy that lost to an aging Lakers squad in 1990 despite having HCA? that guy?
Not his fault if his teammates choked

lol Kersey and Buck Williams

[z0sa]

1. Rings
2. Consistent greatness
3. A period of dominance
4. Numbers
5. Personal opinion.


TBH anyone who puts rings as their number one is suspect of having an agenda. Winning might be what the game is entirely about when 10 players are on the floor, but not when judging individual players against each-other's legacies. That doesn't mean winning isn't one of the most important factors, especially for franchise players who are considered the emotional and on-court leaders of their respective teams. I just don't think winning a ring does more than put you into the discussion of all-time great, with each ring adding a little more "extra" substance to whatever that great's stats and other qualities were.

I've been contemplating what the best line of reasoning for determining a player's greatness is, IE, which steps one can take when comparing two players that would more certainly (than random conjecture and opining) establish one as the better player. The problem is always each player's competition and teammates, and how they fit in around that superstar's game and leadership style.

I would personally rank as follows, and find it to be the most objective way, personally:

1. Stats and personal accomplishments must come first; Horry would be in the top 10 all-time, considering competition, if rings were of foremost importance when ranking. Russell would be number 1 almost indisputably despite the competition.
2. I agree that period of dominance is important, but it must be balanced by peak performance. It's the main reason why Wilt vs. Kareem is such a tough call IMHO; I personally go with the person who had a higher peak when comparing two similar caliber players.
3. Teammates. How good were one player's teammates compared with another's, statistically?
4. Competition. Probably the "lamest" argument to have, because almost none of us have even a clue what pre-80's basketball was like on a day to day basis
5. Rings then come into play once all the above factors have been accounted for. One player's rings can mean or less than another player's ring(s), depending on the factors above.

[Killakobe81]

yeah after i drafted a guy like shaq (true #1) i'd pick a guy like drexxler to compliment him rather than chuck and take shots away from him..

yep Drexler does know how to defer, only way he can win.
LOL bring Drexler in to this debate ...

[lefty]

Anyway

I can watch Bird and Magic play all-day :D

[Sportstudi]

My list:

1. MJ
2. Kareem
3. Magic
4. Wilt
5. Bird
6. Duncan
7. Hakeem (better peak than Duncan, but the peak was shorter)
8. Shaq (great career, but a lazy fat ass; could have become a much better player by putting more effort into practise)
9. Russell (can't ignore 11 rings)
10. Kobe/Big O

[Killakobe81]

TBH anyone who puts rings as their number one is suspect of having an agenda. Winning might be what the game is entirely about when 10 players are on the floor, but not when judging individual players against each-other's legacies. That doesn't mean winning isn't one of the most important factors, especially for franchise players who are considered the emotional and on-court leaders of their respective teams. I just don't think winning a ring does more than put you into the discussion of all-time great, with each ring adding a little more "extra" substance to whatever that great's stats and other qualities were.

I've been contemplating what the best line of reasoning for determining a player's greatness is, IE, which steps one can take when comparing two players that would more certainly (than random conjecture and opining) establish one as the better player. The problem is always each player's competition and teammates, and how they fit in around that superstar's game and leadership style.

I would personally rank as follows, and find it to be the most objective way, personally:

1. Stats and personal accomplishments must come first; Horry would be in the top 10 all-time, considering competition, if rings were of foremost importance when ranking. Russell would be number 1 almost indisputably despite the competition.
2. I agree that period of dominance is important, but it must be balanced by peak performance. It's the main reason why Wilt vs. Kareem is such a tough call IMHO; I personally go with the person who had a higher peak when comparing two similar caliber players.
3. Teammates. How good were one player's teammates compared with another's, statistically?
3. Rings then come into play once all the above factors have been accounted for

I have no agenda. When i started watching Ball Magic and Bird all they talked about were rings. No MVP's no scoring lists, just rings. That was what I was "raised on". So for me it matters when you discuss all-time greats. Because you play to win the game period. (thanks, Herm) I may be narrow minded on the subject but I am consistent.

Im a cowboys fans so I will stay away from Barry vs. Emmitt, but lets use Dan Marino as an example. I love the guy threw a pretty ball, great release only guy to beat the 85 Bears. Love him. I think he was a better QB than Elway, Montana and Manning.But when i rank QB's for me agin winning matters more. Sure I dont like Farve yes he had reggie white etc as team-mates. Marino did not. Bottom line is farve has similar stats and he won. SO if rank em even though Marino i like better, farve deserves to be put ahead. he won.

Woud i put dilfer or Rypien ahead of Marino? No, they won but they are not in this conversation. So bringing up robert Horry or Kerr makes as much sense as bringing up trent Dilfer in a great QB conversation.

Back to basketball ... When you debate great players stats can be influenced by pace, offensive style and quality of team-mates. When i rank great players I always start my top 10 with winners. Lebron is easily one of the 10 best basketball players I have ever seen. Problem is he hasn't won yet. when he does Im not gonna bitch about the fact he plays with wade. and if he wins multiples he will climb up my list. Everyone on my list and Im sure yours are ALL great players. At that level, to me rings are the ultimate tie-breaker.

[Killakobe81]

well since kobe isn't a #1, they're both #2s and should be compared

and as a #2, i'd take drexxler

therefore drexxler > kobe

sorry dude

To steal a line from "menace" ... "i feel sorry for your mother" ...:lol

It's all good Tyson, i love that you troll i will get back to the debate if you don't mind ...

[Killakobe81]

My list:

1. MJ
2. Kareem
3. Magic
4. Wilt
5. Bird
6. Duncan
7. Hakeem (better peak than Duncan, but the peak was shorter)
8. Shaq (great career, but a lazy fat ass; could have become a much better player by putting more effort into practise)
9. Russell (can't ignore 11 rings)
10. Kobe/Big O

Not a bad list did you see Wilt or Russell play? Or is this based on stats and rings only?

[z0sa]

i edited since then. But like I said, I sort of approach things from a different angle - rings are more the QUALIFIER of being an all-time great. For example, I wouldn't put Big O, regardless of his gaudy stats, in the top 10 unless he had ringed - and he needed big time help to do it, which is why I've always been on the fence with him. But since he did ring, his gaudy stats aren't as 'empty'. His game won at the biggest level.

[Killakobe81]

i edited since then. But like I said, I sort of approach things from a different angle - rings are more the QUALIFIER of being an all-time great. For example, I wouldn't put Big O, regardless of his gaudy stats, in the top 10 unless he had ringed - and he needed big time help to do it, which is why I've always been on the fence with him. But since he did ring, his gaudy stats aren't 'empty'.

But did you see all of them play? And not trying to be an asshole. Just curious. I just feel silly talking or arguing about players i never saw. There are old-timer Laker fans that argue West is better than Kobe. i never saw West so how could I say no he is not?

[Killakobe81]

no troll, kobe just doesn't have the same impact the other guys in the top 10 had for their teams. sorry "killakobe"

Drexler ...:rollin

No trollin' DREXLER :hat

[z0sa]

Dude, I'm a child of the 90's when it comes to the basketball. I wasn't even alive when Bird and Magic were duking it out for the future of the NBA. In 20 years, there'll be people just like us arguing the same shit about MJ, Tim, Shaq, Kobe, and others' places but never having actually watched them play on a day to day basis. Shit, I've mainly seen what the Spurs and their fans have seen if you want to argue for an opinion requiring consistency of observation.

That's why I've tried to figure out an objective way to rank players. There'll never be another person to see Bill Russell in his prime; does that mean we just N/A him from the list? And any other players we've never seen? Speculation may be just that, but it can be justified in a hypothetical argument such as this one.

[Killakobe81]

Revised list (post 1980)

1. MJ
2. Kareem (might be one if i saw him in the 70's)
3. Magic
4. Kobe
5a. Duncan
5b. Shaq
7. Bird
8. Hakeem
9. Isiah
10 Mose*

the 10 spot is on hold pending the heat winning a title. IF both wade Lebron are dominant I may bump the last two spots but I may wait for Lebron to win 2 and wade his 3rd ...

LOL drexler was good but he is not even as good as Wade TBH ...

[Killakobe81]

Dude, I'm a child of the 90's when it comes to the basketball. I wasn't even alive when Bird and Magic were duking it out for the future of the NBA. In 20 years, there'll be people just like us arguing the same shit about MJ, Tim, Shaq, Kobe, and others' places but never having actually watched them play.

That's why I've tried to figure out an objective way to rank players. There'll never be another person to see Bill Russell in his prime; does that mean we just N/A him from the list? And any other players we've never seen? Speculation may be just that, but it can be justified in a hypothetical argument such as this one.

Oh im not saying we shouldnt discuss, hell people still mention Babe Ruth and jim Brown in other sports. I'm just asking if you saw them. Just because i dont rank them doesnt mean you shouldn't ...Im just curious how many people on here that have them on their list saw those guys play ....

[Kyle Orton]

lol team accomplishments being the #1 criteria used to judge an individual player

[Killakobe81]

drexler and wade and kobe are all fighting it out for top 20..only an idiot would put kobe at #4 :lmao

Learn to read. since 1980 name 20 no 15 players better than Kobe or wade since 1980 ... Ill give you a head start:

Mj, Kareem, Bird, Malone, Chuck, Magic, Moses, some of those are debateable but since you seem to lose focus and have a drexler fetish, i thought I would help you out.

[Killakobe81]

lol team accomplishments being the #1 criteria used to judge an individual player

Lol winning not being the uiltimate criteria when judging a sport ...

Again this is my list. Winning does matter to me. Im not ranking all-time accomplishments. My top 10 list is greatest players but probably should be entitled greatest Winners. I will rank Malone, chuck etc. But they cant crack MY top 10 without a ring. I have chuck, nique, Malone just outside the top 10.

[Kyle Orton]

Winning is a team accomplishment. Using team accomplishments to compare individual players is horribly flawed logic.

[Kyle Orton]

Why don't you have Robert Horry on your list?

[Kyle Orton]

2 more rings, 2 more arrows

anyone who disagrees doesn't value winning

[Killakobe81]

Winning is a team accomplishment. Using team accomplishments to compare individual players is horribly flawed logic.

That is your opinion and you are entitled. MJ said he wanted 6 to pass magic. Kobe wants 6 to catch MJ. Was Mj better than Magic before he got 6 probably. But for folks with "old school" mindsets it's the ultimate scoreboard.If Kobe catches MJ does that means he is greater ...no. But for the best of the best rings are what matters.
And I stand by opinion that the truly best players in any era win a title. All the greats that have not won, Baylor, Malone, chuck etc. were great players but not an all-time top 10 great. If they were they would find a way to win at least one. Since most of the greatest players have won the best way to me to seperate them is by rings. Funny thing is most people's top 10 lists would look the same if we took stats or rings.

If you go by consensus media:(just pulled up a random list)
1. MJ
2. Kareem
3. Magic
4. Bird
5. Shaq, wilt or Russell
6. Probably Big O


if you go by rings only Oscar is out of place ...and the list I pulled said they factored: winning, dominance of their era, stats and "impact on the game."

any list would be flawed. You scoffing at mine is no different than me scoffing at yours. there is no right answer here, only debate.

Since mine is flawed list yours again with the reason why... otherwise your list is just as flawed as mine because it's all subjective.

[Killakobe81]

Why don't you have Robert Horry on your list?

Top 10 all-time, winning not only criteria read the thread smart guy ...same reason Phil simms is not on my all time QB list ...

[Kyle Orton]

You're list is by no means the only flawed one. Anyone who has Russell in their top 10 has a flawed list.

[Killakobe81]

robert horry didn't ever get skunked by the mavs, AND he has more rings

Horry >> kobe, he get's 2 ">"

Nope, just skunked by the Jazz ..sound reasoning chandler you are on fire!!!

And now KO has your back!!! LOL Drexler and Horry!!!

[jacobdrj]

I would put Moses Malone in over Dr. J or Oscar Robertson...

[z0sa]

And I stand by opinion that the truly best players in any era win a title. All the greats that have not won, Baylor, Malone, chuck etc. were great players but not an all-time top 10 great. If they were they would find a way to win at least one.

Why do you think one player, no matter how great, can will a team to a championship? Only 2 players in recent history have done that: Tim Duncan and Hakeem Olajuwon, two essentially undisputed top-10 players of all-time (or close, counting possible disputes). One is the best ever at his position. Winning requires a team, but furthermore, it requires luck. That's why putting so much stock in winning is like rolling a die on which player you think is great, instead of just THINKING which player is great. If you get my drift.

[DAF86]

You're list is by no means the only flawed one. Anyone who has Russell in their top 10 has a flawed list.

You talk about Russell like if you had seen him play.

[jacobdrj]

robert horry didn't ever get skunked by the mavs, AND he has more rings

Horry >> kobe, he get's 2 ">"

Well, those Mavs are Carlisle Mavs, and therefore are not subject to the same criticism.

[Killakobe81]

You're list is by no means the only flawed one. Anyone who has Russell in their top 10 has a flawed list.

How so you never saw him play. Neither have I ...that i why he is not on mine.

I get you are still in college, but you do realize "flawed list" is condescending. You or I could write for eSPN or Fox it doesnt make our opinion any more meaningful. And because they already do Wilbon, broussard etc. list doesnt mean more either ... this is all opinion.

[Killakobe81]

Why do you think one player, no matter how great, can will a team to a championship? Only 2 players in recent history have done that: Tim Duncan and Hakeem Olajuwon, two essentially undisputed top-10 players of all-time (or close, counting possible disputes). One is the best ever at his position. Winning requires a team, but furthermore, it requires luck. That's why putting so much stock in winning is like rolling a die on which player you think is great, instead of just THINKING which player is great. If you get my drift.

I agree you need help and luck. But if you play in the NBA at high level and are a top 10 player at some point you should have a chance to win it all and come through. The winning is what seperates Duncan from Malone. Malone made it twice and lost. Duncan made it 4 times and won all 4. Im not gona debate quality of casts etc. to me you are an all-time great player you get to the dance and you win one. you don't you still can be great ...but all time? Not likely ...

[JamStone]

Couple more thoughts...

-But Karl Malone faced arguably the greatest player in the history of the league the two times he made it to the Finals. There are a bunch of different factors you have to consider when comparing players and their ability to lead their teams to championships. That's why you could argue Larry Bird's three championships were more impressive than Shaq-Kobe's threepeat because of the competition faced. At least there's that argument.

-When you rank and compare players, team success absolutely should be a factor because it is linked to a great player's ability to help make a team great. But it by no means should be the main or first factor to consider. If so, Bill Russell should be number 1 above everyone, and for pretty much forever. But that's not commonly accepted as the case.

-Something else I've read a couple times with regards to Hakeem (especially as it relates to Duncan). I've read in this thread and on this forum before that Hakeem's "peak" wasn't that long, particularly as it relates to Duncan's "peak." Okay, but if you regard roughly 1992 through 1996 as Hakeem's peak years, well the 8 seasons before that "peak" he was averaging roughly 22 points, 12 rebounds, 3-4 blocks, and shooting 51% from the field. That's his "non-peak." He was arguably a top 5 player in the league his first 12 seasons in the NBA. 12 seasons is pretty long for dominance. It's roughly the same as Duncan. You could argue Hakeem dominated longer. I don't get the "peak" argument when people slide Hakeem down their lists.

-I haven't posted my list yet. Here's mine:

1. Michael
2. Wilt
3. Kareem (had a hard time picking who to put at 2)
4. Magic
5. Bird
6. Hakeem
7. Shaq
8. Duncan
9. Russell (I don't have him as high but don't think it's ridiculous to put him in the top 10)
10. Moses Malone (thought about Kobe, but the 3 MVPs make for a compelling case)

[Kyle Orton]

You talk about Russell like if you had seen him play.

Kinda like how you talk about the NFL :lol

[DAF86]

Kinda like how you talk about the NFL :lol

Stream watching is still watching. Besides I do get SNF and MNF, tbh.

[Kyle Orton]

lol stream watching

lol watching a scrub black QB twice a year and pretending to be an expert on him

[resistanze]

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

Kareem is the only person IMO with a resume and skill/number that can rival MJ. If you add his collegiate (generally regarded as the greatest), you can make an argument for #1.

[LnGrrrR]

Why do you think one player, no matter how great, can will a team to a championship?

I'm not sure if this holds true for Malone; Stockton was pretty damned good. If Jordan never existed, I don't see how Malone/Stockton don't ring at least once.

[HarlemHeat37]

I'm not a Karl Malone hater, at all, I think he has become fairly underrated with time..

However, Utah won against an extremely weak Western Conference..arguably the weakest Western Conference in NBA history, even weaker than the West that the Lakers have went through, prior to this season..

Karl Malone was known to regress in the playoffs, compared to other big-time players, just like a few other key names in the 90s, too..

[JoeTait75]

However, Utah won against an extremely weak Western Conference..arguably the weakest Western Conference in NBA history, even weaker than the West that the Lakers have went through, prior to this season.

Don't concur with this at all. The West was much stronger than the East even then. In the 1997 and '98 playoffs the Jazz went up against the Shaq-Kobe Lakers (twice), the Duncan-Robinson Spurs and the Barkley-Drexler-Olajuwon Rockets- and dominated all of them.

The only East opponent Chicago faced in those two years that was comparable to Utah's competition was Indiana in the '98 ECF. Miami was a straw dog, Atlanta and Charlotte were a joke.

I thought Utah was BY FAR the second-best team in basketball those two years and would have decisively beaten anyone in the East other than the Bulls.

[Kyle Orton]

In 1997, they went up against the Shaq and an 18 year old rookie Kobe, the Spurs were tanking for Duncan that year, and a Rockets team where they were all past their prime w/ Matt Maloney at PG who was raped by John Stockton like no other. The 1997 West was one of the weakest conferences of all time.

[ohmwrecker]

Harlem with the bads.

lol "the weakest Western Conference in NBA history"

[ohmwrecker]

The Stockton/Malone era Jazz was only one year?

[JoeTait75]

The 1997 West was one of the weakest conferences of all time.

That same postseason Chicago went up against Atlanta and Miami in the ECSF and ECF, neither of which were even on the same planet as those Laker and Rocket teams.

Utah would have shit all over the Hawks and Heat just as the Bulls did.

Not only wasn't the 1997 West one of the weakest conferences of all time, it wasn't even the weakest conference that season. West > East from the downfall of the Bad Boys on.

[Kyle Orton]

The 90s were just bad in terms of overall talent level. The Jazz wouldn't even make the Western conference finals in today's NBA.

[JoeTait75]

The 90s were just bad in terms of overall talent level.

Can't argue with that. Three expansions in seven years diluted the talent level big-time.

[NewcastleKEG]

Let's give the Jazz credit for taking out that Rockets team in the WCF

- Hakeem
- Barkley
- Drexler

[HarlemHeat37]

My point wasn't to compare the East and the West..

Like DOK said, which is also agreed by most people, the 90s as a whole were weak, especially during the 2nd Bulls 3-peat..

My point is that those were the only 2 years that Karl Malone made the Finals, and it was against very shitty competition in the West, especially '97..a bunch of teams that were built for the regular season, or teams that weren't ready to make the jump yet..

[DMC]

Kinda like how you talk about the NFL :lol
That's called a red herring... you deflecting his point back at him.

You do talk a lot about people you've obviously never watched play the game.

What do you know about Bill Russell? Did you read some Bill Simmons article and feel enlightened about Russell? Did you see someone else give a take on it and take it as the gospel?

Kids these days...

[DMC]

My point wasn't to compare the East and the West..

Like DOK said, which is also agreed by most people, the 90s as a whole were weak, especially during the 2nd Bulls 3-peat..

My point is that those were the only 2 years that Karl Malone made the Finals, and it was against very shitty competition in the West, especially '97..a bunch of teams that were built for the regular season, or teams that weren't ready to make the jump yet..

Jordan's Bulls made these teams look weak just as Lance made the other riders look weak. Revisionists love to minimize the greatness of the Bulls by saying the field was weak. It wasn't.

[Deuce Bigalow]

1. Michael Jordan
2. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
3. Wilt Chamberlain
4. Magic Johnson
5. Bill Russell
6. Larry Bird
7. Shaquille O'Neal
8. Kobe Bryant
9. Tim Duncan
10. Hakeem Olajuwon

[Deuce Bigalow]

Players with 5 championships and multiple Finals MVPs

Jordan
Kareem
Magic
Kobe

[Deuce Bigalow]

dude your so funny

[Deuce Bigalow]

no troll, kobe just doesn't have the same impact the other guys in the top 10 had for their teams. sorry "killakobe"

lets look at Kobe's playoff stats in the last 3 years which they went to the Finals

30/6/6
30/5/6
29/6/6

not impactfull?

[Deuce Bigalow]

lets take a look at kobe's finals fg% for the last 3 finals

32%
33%
40%

:lmao

false

its actually

41%
43%
41%

[LkrFan]

what is it about kobe that so many people on this particular site are so disillusioned about? the dude has proven time and time again that he isn't a winner without dominant bigs..and that when faced with adversity he folds. now if someone isn't very skilled and does his team more harm than good, everyone is quick to say he sucks. but what about the guy who is very skilled but isn't a team player and still manages to hurt his team sometimes more than he helps? why does his flashy fadeaways and protruded jaw trick you guys? let's take a look here at the top PER in nba history

NBA/ABA



Rank Player PER 1. Michael Jordan (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html)* 27.91 2. LeBron James (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jamesle01.html) 26.91 3. Shaquille O'Neal (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/o/onealsh01.html) 26.43 4. David Robinson (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/r/robinda01.html)* 26.18 5. Wilt Chamberlain (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/chambwi01.html)* 26.13 6. Dwyane Wade (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/wadedw01.html) 25.65 7. Bob Pettit (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pettibo01.html)* 25.37 8. Chris Paul (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/paulch01.html) 25.22 9. Tim Duncan (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/d/duncati01.html) 24.84 10. Neil Johnston (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/johnsne01.html)* 24.73 11. Charles Barkley (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/barklch01.html)* 24.63 12. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/abdulka01.html)* 24.58 13. Magic Johnson (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/johnsma02.html)* 24.11 14. Karl Malone (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/malonka01.html)* 23.90 15. Dirk Nowitzki (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/n/nowitdi01.html) 23.73 16. Hakeem Olajuwon (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/o/olajuha01.html)* 23.59 17. Julius Erving (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/e/ervinju01.html)* 23.57 18. Kobe Bryant (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bryanko01.html) 23.53

yeah, kobe is way down there at 18, right about where he belongs on the all time list coincidentally. stop overrating the chucking fraud guys

PERfect argument. :lmao

[Deuce Bigalow]

PERfect argument. :lmao

lol

[lefty]

Bird
Jordan
Russell
Kareem
Chamberlain
Magic
Isiah Thomas
Olajuwon
Jim Dunan
Scottie Pippen

[DMC]

The deal with Kobe is that he took more shots than the rest of the team combined (or close). So as Kobe's FG% goes, so goes the team. Fortunately Pau shot 60% and Fish and Odom shot well also.

I've always felt that the Lakers won despite having Kobe, not because of him. There are plenty of chuckers in the league (there were then) who could put up those numbers with that many shots. The impressive thing was how the rest of the team absorbed it.

The Lakers won because of defense, and Kobe is a pretty good defender as well, but his offense isn't nearly as good as he thinks it is. He also doesn't buy into the concept of ball movement and how the whole is greater than the sum of it's parts.

[jacobdrj]

Bird
Jordan
Russell
Kareem
Chamberlain
Magic
Isiah Thomas
Olajuwon
Jim Dunan
Scottie Pippen

Scottie. Pippen.
Scottie... Pippen...
Really? Really?
Really?
...

Really?
Like, Scottie Pippen, the guy who played with Jordan on those Bulls teams?

You would take Scottie Pippen over Snaq? Really?

[lefty]

Scottie. Pippen.
Scottie... Pippen...
Really? Really?
Really?
...

Really?
Like, Scottie Pippen, the guy who played with Jordan on those Bulls teams?

You would take Scottie Pippen over Snaq? Really?
Yeah, Snaq without his brute strength was



well, nothing


Overrated POS

[namlook]

I've always felt that the Lakers won despite having Kobe, not because of him.

This is a troll. No one who has the intellectual ability to log on to a forum and make a post can possibly be so lacking in insight to honestly hold an opinion like this.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Yeah, Snaq without his brute strength was



well, nothing


Overrated POS
:lmao that's some really fucktarded logic. I wasn't aware when comparing someone to all time greats, you use the player he'd be if he didn't have any strength.

[dirk4mvp]

If Duncan didn't have great fundamentals, he would totally suck!

[lefty]

If Duncan didn't have great fundamentals, he would totally suck!
:lol

[pass1st]

Jordan
Magic
Bird
Hakeem
Kareem
Russel
Shaq
Kobe/Duncan
Duncan/Kobe
Erving

Toss up between Kobe and Duncan, both produced. Kobe is a better individual player, but Duncan brings it all together better. Depends how you define best.

Honorable mentions -

Isiah, Barkley, Pippen, Pistol Pete, AI, Pettit, Garnett, Mikan, West, Stockton, Malone, Nash, Ewing, McHale, Parish, Luke Walton and Adam Morrison.

[MR.SILVER&BLack]

Jordan
Magic
Bird
Hakeem
Kareem
Russel
Shaq
Kobe/Duncan
Duncan/Kobe
Erving

Toss up between Kobe and Duncan, both produced. Kobe is a better individual player, but Duncan brings it all together better. Depends how you define best.

Honorable mentions -

Isiah, Barkley, Pippen, Pistol Pete, AI, Pettit, Garnett, Mikan, West, Stockton, Malone, Nash, Ewing, McHale, Parish, Luke Walton and Adam Morrison.

how is kobe the better individual player? all he does is score more points with much more shot attempts. kobe at best will be #10 on the list if he doesnt get bumped by lebron.

[Deuce Bigalow]

The deal with Kobe is that he took more shots than the rest of the team combined (or close). So as Kobe's FG% goes, so goes the team. Fortunately Pau shot 60% and Fish and Odom shot well also.

I've always felt that the Lakers won despite having Kobe, not because of him. There are plenty of chuckers in the league (there were then) who could put up those numbers with that many shots. The impressive thing was how the rest of the team absorbed it.

The Lakers won because of defense, and Kobe is a pretty good defender as well, but his offense isn't nearly as good as he thinks it is. He also doesn't buy into the concept of ball movement and how the whole is greater than the sum of it's parts.

certified idiot

did you not watch the
'08 WCF,
'09 WCF,
'09 Finals,
'10 WCF,
'10 WCSF
i could on...

2008-2010 playoffs
kobe
30/6/6
30/5/6
29/6/6

gasol
17/9/4
18/11/3
20/11/4

[Deuce Bigalow]

how is kobe the better individual player? all he does is score more points with much more shot attempts. kobe at best will be #10 on the list if he doesnt get bumped by lebron.

more points, more assists, more steals, more free throws
more championships, more finals

kobe is easily top 10 alltime since 2010, he become the 4th player ever to have 5 championships and multiple finals MVPs, and became the 3rd in playoff points, and the only player to score atleast 600 points in 3 consecutive postseasons (duncan and lebron do not have 1 postseason with 600 points)

[DMC]

certified idiot

did you not watch the
'08 WCF,
'09 WCF,
'09 Finals,
'10 WCF,
'10 WCSF
i could on...

2008-2010 playoffs
kobe
30/6/6
30/5/6
29/6/6

gasol
17/9/4
18/11/3
20/11/4

I've been watching the Lakers since Magic's days.

I'm not arguing with a drive by poster.

[Deuce Bigalow]

I've been watching the Lakers since Magic's days.

I'm not arguing with a drive by poster.

watched all the playoff games during kobes time,
he carried that team, and its not even a debate, he was the best player in the game

[MR.SILVER&BLack]

more points, more assists, more steals, more free throws
more championships, more finals

kobe is easily top 10 alltime since 2010, he become the 4th player ever to have 5 championships and multiple finals MVPs, and became the 3rd in playoff points, and the only player to score atleast 600 points in 3 consecutive postseasons (duncan and lebron do not have 1 postseason with 600 points)

more points, worse fg%, way more shot attempts, dissapears in the finals. only thing im really seeing is points & TEAM achievements. lebron already has the individual achievements and lets not kid our selfs with wade they will eventually win consecutive titles. like i said kobes at the end of the list.

[Deuce Bigalow]

more points, worse fg%, way more shot attempts, dissapears in the finals. only thing im really seeing is points & TEAM achievements. lebron already has the individual achievements and lets not kid our selfs with wade they will eventually win consecutive titles. like i said kobes at the end of the list.

more assists, steals, free throws, almost double more finals, championship

kobe has more championships and better numbers
duncan is at the end of the list, sorry bud

disappears from the finals? wtf
fg% is your argument i bet lol
your boy duncan has failed to shoot 50% in 3/4 of his finals, whats a center/power forward doing shooting less than 50%?

[daslicer]

Kobe is the most overrated player of all time. He is great player but he isn't as great as people make him out to be. Having a career 44-45 FG percentage is crap and its pathetic that even in his prime he could never shoot above 46 percent. If you look at other great perimeter players besides MJ and you will see guys like Bird and DR J managed to shoot above 50 percent several times in there career. Impact wise Kobe sucks if you had him in his prime on a crappy team like the Bobcats its safe to say they would still be a crappy team whereas put a Duncan,Shaq,Magic,Dr J,Jabbar,Olaujuwon, and I would say the bobcats atleast become a top 4 team in their conference.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Kobe is the most overrated player of all time. He is great player but he isn't as great as people make him out to be. Having a career 44-45 FG percentage is crap and its pathetic that even in his prime he could never shoot above 46 percent. If you look at other great perimeter players besides MJ and you will see guys like Bird and DR J managed to shoot above 50 percent several times in there career. Impact wise Kobe sucks if you had him in his prime on a crappy team like the Bobcats its safe to say they would still be a crappy team whereas put a Duncan,Shaq,Magic,Dr J,Jabbar,Olaujuwon, and I would say the bobcats atleast become a top 4 team in their conference.

lol

kobe is a career .454 fg%
he takes PERIMETER SHOTS, thats a good percentage

and kobe has shot over 46% in 6 seasons

best fg% years
.469
.468
.467
.465
.464
.463

impact wise he sucks? wtf, prove that dumbass

[jacobdrj]

Yeah, Snaq without his brute strength was



well, nothing


Overrated POS

If my grandmother had wheels...

I don't care why he was higher on the list. He is higher on the list...

Let me throw another one at you:
Pippen over Moses Malone? One of the best bigmen in history. Uber-durable, post game, defense... Complete package... And you would take Pippen over him?

[Deuce Bigalow]

dr j, duncan, ect all the ones u mentioned dont take the perimeter shots that kobe takes

how many 3s have that taken?

Kobe has taken 4,185

[DMC]

dr j, duncan, ect all the ones u mentioned dont take the perimeter shots that kobe takes

how many 3s have that taken?

Kobe has taken 4,185
You really are anti-Kobe and it really does show.

[Lincoln]

Tbh dirk is a perimeter player as well, shoots better percentages from 2 and 3 and ft, has less help, defense locks in on him because there is no true #2

[Deuce Bigalow]

Kobe is the most overrated player of all time. He is great player but he isn't as great as people make him out to be. Having a career 44-45 FG percentage is crap and its pathetic that even in his prime he could never shoot above 46 percent. If you look at other great perimeter players besides MJ and you will see guys like Bird and DR J managed to shoot above 50 percent several times in there career. Impact wise Kobe sucks if you had him in his prime on a crappy team like the Bobcats its safe to say they would still be a crappy team whereas put a Duncan,Shaq,Magic,Dr J,Jabbar,Olaujuwon, and I would say the bobcats atleast become a top 4 team in their conference.

when kobe was on a crappy team, he became the 5th player in nba history to average 35+ in a season

2005-06
35/5/5 + 1.8 steals per game and on the all nba 1st team and all defensive 1st team

2006-07
31.6 ppg on 22.8 FGA
32/6/5
all nba 1st team, and all defensive 1st team

not impactfull, duncan can average 30+ ppg, or 6 apg?
or score 50 points in 4 consecutive games like kobe did

[daslicer]

Tbh dirk is a perimeter player as well, shoots better percentages from 2 and 3 and ft, has less help, defense locks in on him because there is no true #2

Agreed on that I thought about mentioning him but then again some would argue he is 7ft but yeah Dirk has a good FG percentage career wise. He has managed to shoot at 50 percent and above a few times.

[daslicer]

when kobe was on a crappy team, he became the 5th player in nba history to average 35+ in a season

2005-06
35/5/5 + 1.8 steals per game and on the all nba 1st team and all defensive 1st team

2006-07
31.6 ppg on 22.8 FGA
32/6/5
all nba 1st team, and all defensive 1st team

not impactfull, duncan can average 30+ ppg, or 6 apg?
or score 50 points in 4 consecutive games like kobe did

Yeah but Kobe's teams were pure trash considering they consistently finished in the 6-8 range in the conference during those years. If he had a great impact on the game he would have found a way to get the 4h seed or get out of the first round at least once. Those are things he couldn't do. Its hard for me to believe if you had Duncan in his prime on those Laker teams that they wouldn't have managed to get at least top 4 in the conference with at least one second round appearance. Also Kobe wasn't able to shoot above 46 percent which you will try to round up but its still 46 percent so it means good portion of those points weren't scored in an efficient manner which hurt his team.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Yeah but Kobe's teams were pure trash considering they consistently finished in the 6-8 range in the conference during those years. If he had a great impact on the game he would have found a way to get the 4h seed or get out of the first round at least once. Those are things he couldn't do. Its hard for me to believe if you had Duncan in his prime on those Laker teams that they wouldn't have managed to get at least top 4 in the conference with at least one second round appearance. Also Kobe wasn't able to shoot above 46 percent which you will try to round up but its still 46 percent so it means good portion of those points weren't scored in an efficient manner which hurt his team.

this deserves a facepalm

tell me who was on that roster?
ill help
smush parker, kwame brown, chris mihm, chucky atkins, luke walton, ect
the only good player he had was lamar odom

duncans always had a good roster
and if duncan was on that 05-07 laker team, they wouldnt be better, they would be worse, the lakers were totally dependent on kobe dropping 40 every night
replacing a 35/5/5 and 32/6/5 kobe with a 20/11/3 Duncan, no way would they be better

[DMC]

Anyone will look like trash on a team where one guy shoots the ball every trip. Kwame Brown was a 1st overall pick. Lakers chose him over Caron Butler.

You are what you make yourself to be. The Lakers don't develop players, they buy them.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Anyone will look like trash on a team where one guy shoots the ball every trip. Kwame Brown was a 1st overall pick. Lakers chose him over Caron Butler.

You are what you make yourself to be. The Lakers don't develop players, they buy them.

yeah and pay off the refs
rig championships
yeah i heard all of peoples excuses

[pass1st]

how is kobe the better individual player? all he does is score more points with much more shot attempts. kobe at best will be #10 on the list if he doesnt get bumped by lebron.

You make him sound like he's an inefficient chucker like Arenas. If a guard shoots 45% or above, he's good. Kobe, during his prime, was a complete player with an ego problem. It's pretty hard to compare a PF (expected FG% 50% and rarely shoot) to an SG (expected to shoot 43-45% and shoot more than get in the paint).

I just see him as a more individually talented player