Your top 10 players all-time

[Brutalis]

This is the response of a person that has run completely dry of knowledge. I feel sorry for you. This is a great basketball thread and you just took a in it. I still challenge you to find one player on my list that you would remove to add Duncan. All of my big men would have dominated him, and the rest were just all around better players that were great at something.

Hrmmm more like, this is a person trying to figure out why the I am replying to one stupid ass Laker fan who is just stirring up on purpose all over ST.

What's sad is me for even arguing with a dumbass. I realize now people won't be able to tell the difference when you argue one of those.

So, continue about your destructive time wasting ways.

[dbreiden83080]

And to say that Duncan is better than Larry Legend is an insult to the sport.

LOL, now that is a homerism statement and you are a Faker fan.

[balli]

I think Hakeem is getting too much love in this thread. For the first eight years of his career, he wasn't even that good. He was more of a stat than a great basketball player. He was basically Amare Stoudemire with better defensive numbers. The Rockets at one point were even trying to trade him. Oh don't forget how in '86 Bill Walton at about 20% health owned Hakeem repeatedly in the Finals. That was just embarrassing.

He then had an amazing four year stretch of his career before falling into the abyss. That four year stretch was fantastic and right up there with any stretch by a bigman in history. But it should take more than four years of greatness to make the top ten players of all-time list.

Didn't make my ten for that very reason.

[dbreiden83080]

Too much homerism my man. We know for a fact that Hakeem would destroy Duncan just like he did Robinson. We know for a fact that Shaq did destroy Duncan,

Duncan desroyed Shaq too. Shaq never shut Duncan down, he was never a big time defender, he put the final nail in that coffin in this years playoffs, Shaq did nothing when he was checking Duncan.

[Bob Lanier]

played in an era of unathletic white guys

No he didn't.

[timvp]

Great points, but the difference with Hakeem and the rest of the big men on the list is Hakeem never played with a consistant group of players.

Which bigmen played with consistent group of players? Duncan won championships with two totally different casts of players. And really, each of his four championships consisted of different right hand man.

And when Hakeem had his amazing stretch, he happened to have some of the clutchest perimeter shooting in NBA history on his side. Horry, Elie, Cassell, Drexler ... even Kenny Smith hit big shots.

Hakeem's supporting cast was never that bad. Players like David Robinson and Kevin Garnett had far worse supporting casts. In fact, you can argue that Duncan's supporting cast in 2003 was about equal to or worth than a lot of the supporting casts Hakeem had during the first eight years of his career that he did nothing with.

[dbreiden83080]

No he didn't.

Yeah okay, he played with 6'10 physical freaks, they were everywhere.

[timvp]

Shaq is well past his prime, and Duncan will still not guard him.

Did you watch the Suns series?

[ShoogarBear]

Wow, now that I know this Russel isn't . He got all his through his All Star team mates and Celtic fest against 10 teams back in the day.

LMAO Russel.

You really have no idea what you're talking about. None of Russell's "All Star team mates" won before he got there or after he left. Russell won EVERYWHERE he played, including back-to-back NCAA championships and Olympics.

And Piston Pete? Why not Curly Neal?

[Bob Lanier]

Michael Jordan had two amazing three-year stretches in his career. But before, between, and after those three year stretches he was nothing but a stat , a more selfish Vince Carter who only committed himself to defense sporadically. He got three coaches fired and was a horrible team player.

Those three year stretches were fantastic and right up there with any stretch by a swingman in history. But it should take more than six years of greatness to make the top ten players of all-time list, much less number one.

[Bob Lanier]

Yeah okay, he played with 6'10 physical freaks, they were everywhere.

Because it was a smaller league, he did play against 6'10" or taller centers of comparable skill and athleticism to any you care to name virtually every night.

Or did you not watch the games you profess an opinion about?

[dbreiden83080]

Because it was a smaller league, he did play against 6'10" or taller centers of comparable skill and athleticism to any you care to name virtually every night.

Or did you not watch the games you profess an opinion about?

No he didn't, not in regards to skill, not even close. By that logic, Russell is pulling down 20 reb a game in an era of players today that are bigger, stronger and vastly more athletic than he ever was. How many times did Russell have to check and box out guys like Amare and Dwight Howard, KG Tim Duncan, Shaq, just to name a few?? He and Wilt were vastly better than everyone else in that era, overall it was a weak era.

[Bob Lanier]

And Piston Pete? Why not Curly Neal?

Oh, my God, Shoog, look at his uniform. It's so glittery. It looks like one of those rap guys' costumes. Who understands those rap guys? They only dress like him because he looks like a total non-professional. I mean, his game: it's just so street. I can't believe it's so showy. It's just so out there. I mean, it's gauche.

[Bob Lanier]

By that logic, Russell is pulling down 20 reb a game in an era of players today that are bigger, stronger and vastly more athletic than he ever was.

No, he's not, because the game is significantly slower today than it was then, and guards are significantly better overall. In the 1960s, there were 150-200% as many rebounds to be "pulled down" than today; Russell and Chamberlain "pulled down" a comparable percentage of them as Dennis Rodman.

How many times did Russell have to check and box out guys like Amare and Dwight Howard, KG Tim Duncan, Shaq, just to name a few?? He and Wilt were vastly better than everyone else in that era, overall it was a weak era.

I'll put Wilt Chamberlain, Nate Thurmond, Jerry Lucas, Willis Reed against Dwight Howard, Kevin Garnett, and Tim Duncan any day.

[timvp]

Aside from that first le... which was a good team I might add, Duncan has kept his core... Manu, and Parker.

In 2003, Parker and Manu weren't even close to as good as they are now. Manu was a rookie who had only one decent playoff series ... against the Lakers. Parker was a 20-year-old point guard who was inconsistent, as is to be expected for a guy who should have been a sop re in college. You could make a case for Parker being the second best player on that team (although that's likely not the case), however Ginobili was probably the sixth or seventh best player on that team. Totally different than '05 and '07.

The '95 le, Horry was young and had got traded away that same year to Detroit but failed the PT test.

Elliott failed the physical, not Horry.

Kareem had Magic for 10 years. Russell had Cousy for 6 or eight years, plus other really good players. Wilt played in phili for most of his career where he played with two groups of different guys but never enough to win it. He came to LA and played his last five season with West, Goodrich, and Baylor.

All of those big men I have on my list had running mates for atleast 5 years except for Hakeem.

By your logic, shouldn't you lower the status of players who got to play with other great players for the duration of their careers? If you are going to bump up Hakeem, you have to lower the ones at the other end of the spectrum.

[Bob Lanier]

:But the key is Duncan is at the 4 spot. He is the best to ever play that position... hands down

Duncan's a pivot, regardless of whether he wants to be called a "4" or not. And he is not the bes to ever play that position.

Regardless of whether he has David Robinson Garnetting it up at the top of the key or Fabricio Oberto on the baseline, he's a big man. He wants to pretend he isn't so that it's easier to get acclaim, but that doesn't mean we have to accord him special privileges.

[timvp]

Michael Jordan had two amazing three-year stretches in his career. But before, between, and after those three year stretches he was nothing but a stat , a more selfish Vince Carter who only committed himself to defense sporadically. He got three coaches fired and was a horrible team player.

Those three year stretches were fantastic and right up there with any stretch by a swingman in history. But it should take more than six years of greatness to make the top ten players of all-time list, much less number one.

ROFL @ comparing Jordan to Olajuwon. MJ was at least knocking on the door of the Finals before finally breaking through. Jordan had at least eight great years, probably closer to ten.

Hakeem's Rockets didn't even make the playoffs two years before winning their first championship. The four years before that they were eliminated in the first round.

I give Hakeem huge props for figuring it out late in his career. He realized he had to learn how to pass and trust his teammates. He was a horrible passer the first eight years of his career but then realized he had to pass and became a very good passer almost overnight. He also realized he had to actually play defense and not just go for blocked shots and steals. So he transformed from Marcus Camby defensive stat to an actual great defender.

I've never seen a player turn into a winner overnight like Hakeem did. He really wanted to win and figured out how. But you can't ignore the rest of his career.

[rAm]

Somehow I feel that this article fits into this discussion:

http://proxy.espn.go.com/nba/playoff...Performances-1

[Bob Lanier]

ROFL @ comparing Jordan to Olajuwon.

I'll be here all week. Try the veal.

In the meantime, it's not a frivolous comparison. If Olajuwon had had the teammates Jordan had (and didn't play for a bigger Texas city than your own), chances are you'd be saying "ROFL @ comparing Olajuwon to Jordan" about now.

MJ was at least knocking on the door of the Finals before finally breaking through.

I'd like to pretend 1986 never happened, too. I really would. Jordan had at least eight great years, probably closer to ten.

The four years before that they were eliminated in the first round.

How many times was Jordan elimated in the first round? Three, right? BFD.

I give Hakeem huge props for figuring it out late in his career. He realized he had to learn how to pass and trust his teammates.

This is also applicable to Jordan.

He was a horrible passer the first eight years of his career

No, not really. Not as good as Duncan is today, but hardly "horrible".

he transformed from Marcus Camby defensive stat to an actual great defender.

This is laughable. He was a better defender in the late '80s, two or three years into his career, than he was in his championship seasons.

[bobbyjoe]

I'll be here all week. Try the veal.

In the meantime, it's not a frivolous comparison. If Olajuwon had had the teammates Jordan had (and didn't play for a bigger Texas city than your own), chances are you'd be saying "ROFL @ comparing Olajuwon to Jordan" about now.

I'd like to pretend 1986 never happened, too. I really would. Jordan had at least eight great years, probably closer to ten.

How many times was Jordan elimated in the first round? Three, right? BFD.

This is also applicable to Jordan.

No, not really. Not as good as Duncan is today, but hardly "horrible".

This is laughable. He was a better defender in the late '80s, two or three years into his career, than he was in his championship seasons.

Very well said Bob Lanier.

Comparing Olajuwon to a Marcus Camby defensively is just sheer stupidity.

As you suggest, Olajuwon was a MUCH better defender in his early years than his prime. The guy was an absolute behemoth on defense from Day 1.

Besides Bill Russell, never has this game seen a big with that combination of defensive agility, excellent range, superior instincts, and tenacity.

Comparing Duncan's 2003 cast to what Hakeem had his first 8 years of his career is also sheer insanity.

The poster of that must not have realized that after 1986 trip to the Finals the Rockets lost 4 of their core rotational players to injuries and drug suspensions (Sampson, Lloyd, Lucas, Wiggins). This sent Houston into a rebuilding period where they had some casts from 87-92 that were not even close to what Duncan had in 2003. Absolutely not even remotely close.

Walton also did certainly not own Olajuwon in that series. Walton averaged about 8 ppg that series. Hakeem was in his 2nd season and dominating against the best frontline in NBA history arguably in Walton, Parish, McHale, and Bird. Duncan has never faced anything remotely like that. Just last week there was an interview on ESPN with Bird and Walton, where Bird was ribbing Walton about how Hakeem was embarassing him that series.

As Lakers fans, we all remember being in shock that Houston emerged in 86 in the WCF. Hakeem was far and away the #1 reason. And that came against a team which was one of the best dynasties ever right in the middle of their run.

Duncan has never ever played on casts as poorly as the ones Olajuwon did from 87-92. If he had, perhaps some moron would be calling him a stat because he couldnt lead a bunch of scrubs to the NBA Finals...

[dbreiden83080]

but I just have a hard time seeing him replacing anyone on my original top 10 greatest.

Right yet some of your guys in that top 10, are not as accomplisihed as Duncan, not as versatile as Duncan and if you built a team around them and passed on Duncan would not win nearly as much.

[bobbyjoe]

Which bigmen played with consistent group of players? Duncan won championships with two totally different casts of players. And really, each of his four championships consisted of different right hand man.

And when Hakeem had his amazing stretch, he happened to have some of the clutchest perimeter shooting in NBA history on his side. Horry, Elie, Cassell, Drexler ... even Kenny Smith hit big shots.

Hakeem's supporting cast was never that bad. Players like David Robinson and Kevin Garnett had far worse supporting casts. In fact, you can argue that Duncan's supporting cast in 2003 was about equal to or worth than a lot of the supporting casts Hakeem had during the first eight years of his career that he did nothing with.

I defy you to make any sort of a case that Duncan would have got further with Olajuwon's supporting casts in his first 8 years than the Rockets did.

Akeem wasn't as lucky as Duncan was to land on a team with a HOF Center who was 2 yrs removed from MVP and a SF who had been an all star in the past.

After the fallout with Sampson which was 2 yrs into Olajuwon's career, the best player he played with for the next several years was Sleepy Floyd. That team was gutted and featured journeymen and castoffs. It's not even remotely comparable to having a Manu, Parker, Bruce Bowen, and declining David Robinson even if Manu and Parker were young. As noted, that "young" Parker killed Gary Payton in the playoffs in 2002 as a rookie or 2nd yr player.

And OBTW, in those 8 yrs where "Hakeem wasn't very good" he led the league in rebounding 3 years, blocks.

You say he didn't play great defense? Uh, the guy was first team all NBA Defense from 1987-1990. This was an era where there were also some terrific big men. I guess the rest of the coaches, players, and media disagreed. Also first team NBA from 87-90. Led the league in blocks in 3 of these "Amare stoudemire" type of years. 6 consecutive years of over 2.0 steals per game (unheard of for a center).

Let me ask you a question. What do you see that the rest of the world doesn't? Why did he keep getting voted to all defense 1st team or 2nd team yr in and yr out, make the all star game every year, etc? Let me guess: Because one play of the 1986 Finals Bill Walton had a bucket on him?

[dbreiden83080]

Are you serious. Russell had a career average of 22 rebounds a game... 22! The best defensive big man to ever play!

Yes 22 a game in an era where it was far easier to get rebounds. Shaq, Duncan, Hakeem, Robinson you name it all pull down those rebounding numbers in that era there is no doubt of that. These guys are bigger stronger and more athletic than Russell ever was. Duncan also would dominate because of his great fundamentals. Best defensive big men ever based on only his era where it was far easier to rebound and block shots, this argument is not a solid one. Russell is all time great but overated, if you think he would school Duncan you are dead wrong.

Talking about defense this just was posted in another thread ESPN, placing Duncan 2003 final as 3rd best ever.

"Duncan averaged 5.3 blocks per game for the series, the most of any player since the merger, and was at his best in the clinching Game 6 as San Antonio rallied from an eight-point fourth-quarter deficit. He fell two blocks shy of a quadruple-double and forced the Nets' Martin into a 3-for-23 disaster from the floor. Overall, his 32.0 PER for the series is the second-best since the merger."

Now that is defense. Put him in that same era as Russell and watch him dominate.

[Bob Lanier]

Shaq, Duncan, Hakeem, Robinson you name it all pull down those rebounding numbers in that era there is no doubt of that.

Duncan and Olajuwon, yes. Robinson, maybe, although he was rarely very interested in rebounding. O'Neal - it's hard to say. If he stayed in his rookie conditioning, he'd be excellent. But it's just as likely he'd keel over of a heart attack trying to play the game that fast.

These guys are bigger stronger and more athletic than Russell ever was.

Have you ever watched Bill Russell play?

[dbreiden83080]

Have you ever watched Bill Russell play?

Yes i have and he is not up there with some of the elite bigs of today as far as pure athlete goes. Wilt was a freak of an athlete and he put up massive numbers on Russell every time they played. Shaq in that day and Tim i believe would have done the same.