Reply With Quote
It's because he only made the all-NBA first team two times in 17 years, and Paul has already done it four times in 9 years.
Wtf. Seriously undervaluing The Glove.
It's because he only made the all-NBA first team two times in 17 years, and Paul has already done it four times in 9 years.
No Tony is not better than Paul but to say a 3-0 advantage doesn't give Parker supporters a strong case ...
Lol 2nd banana doesn't count?
So Shaq's 4th Wades last two and Duncan's 5th don't count?! That is some dumb ass . Damn Amb wtf happened to you? Also why you tearing down a Spurs players legacy you acting like a common Lakers fan ...SMH
Rings matter more than pure point rating or PER.
Parker at the very least deserves consideration for best pg of last 7 years. I wouldn't say best but a strong case can be made.
Agree with some of this but no ing way he is better than Isiah. Thomas was everything Paul is but better tbh Paul is like Dwight compared d to Shaq a lessor modern version. Though Paul is closer to Isiah than Dwight is to O'Neal
cousy
You are a clown. I can name fifty PG's better than Oscar.
Either way, you're just guessing. You don't know . Neither do I. But whether you choose to include him or exclude him, you're merely assuming he would or would not be better than PGs you've actually seen play. This is not, indeed cannot be, an empirical matter. Such is the nature of player comparisons across time.
I'm with you son!that shiiiiiiiiiiit!
2014 championship doesn't add or subtract to Duncan's legacy. We knew who he was before the championship, and he was exactly what we expected him to be.
Same with Shaq. His 4th didn't add to or subtract from his legacy.
And saying Parker < Paul isn't ripping at his legacy, just as saying Ayres < Hakeem isn't ripping Ayres legacy. Blindly propping up a player on your favourite team is called homerism, blindly ripping a player from another team is called being a hater, blinding ripping a legend on your favourite team to prop up your favourite player on your favourite team is called Kobism.
And no, Rings do not matter more in evaluating an individual player. Adam Morrison isn't better than another scrub who never won a championship. They are both scrubs from an NBA sense.
Billups isn't better than Stockton.
Jo Jo White isn't better than Clyde.
Cedric Maxwell isn't better than Chris Mullin
etc ....
Parker, to me, was the perfect player for the Spurs in the last few years. Paul, being the ball dominant player he is, likely won't thrive in the Spurs system. But Parker wasn't the best PG in the league in the last 7 years. That belongs to Paul.
Paul with no rings, yet top 5? lol
Amb the 2014 le does help Duncans legacy IMO. It woulda been a minor vlow to come up short. As the 2010-2014 Spurs needed a ring to top off their excellence
If Spurs win a le this year it would add even more to Duncans legacy.. They cant hurt their legacy at this point, only add to it (the big 3, pop, spurs)z
My earlier post in this thread was from last year, so a year later:
- Magic was obviously better, no discussion
- I undervalued Stockton, his advanced metrics are outstanding and his legacy will age well in the metrics era..his game would thrive in the shooting + ball movement style of today's league
- Nash and Paul is close, Nash has become underrated by the casual fan, tbh, but I'd take Paul
- Paul is a slightly better player than Isiah Thomas IMO..I don't know if Paul has the aggressive mentality to replace Isiah's style on those Pistons teams, but I highly doubt Paul's teams would be any better if you replaced him with Thomas
- Oscar Robertson played in the 60s, he would be a scrub in today's league, realistically-speaking
- Tony Parker is nowhere near this discussion, that's just silly, tbh(the Spurs just won a le with Parker having a net negative on/off during the playoffs
- Gary Payton and Jason Kidd aren't in the discussion, 2 of the most overrated players of my lifetime
Bob Cousy:
10 times 1st team all-NBA
6 rings
1 MVP
Always Kobe why do I even bother?
Just can't think of another fan base who would repeatedly rip their legends just to prop up a player. If you can think of another one, I can update the name.
2014 adds to the legacy of pop more than Duncan. Duncan gets credit for willing to take a backseat.
Don't get me wrong, Duncan was instrumental in that 2014 championship, but this wasn't even one of his best 12 seasons. Just because the team won a ring doesn't make him better. If Jordan won his 7th ring as the second best player or one of the best players on his team, that wouldn't make him any greater.
this x100
We were not discussing that (fanbase trashing legacy that was another thread) Amb, question was Paul's place among PG's. And my point was that rings matter. Here you go again with the wayyyy in left field analogies and comparisons. Who would argue Billups over Stockton? Is that a hot topic of debate at the water cooler, the local open gym or the barbershop where you live?
Back to Paul of course it will matter if he never rings. Stockton is great so was Nash but NOT winning a le keeps you out of GOAT convos imho. ESPECIALLY in the NBA. I cannot think of ONE guy in the NBA team sport or No ...that I consider to be in the GOAT convo that has NOT rang at least once and most have at least twice:
PG's: Magic 5, Isiah 5
SG: MJ 5 Kobe 5
SF: Lebron 2 Bird 3
PF: Duncan 5 (a case can be made for Chuck and Malone at#2 but since Duncan is the clear-cut winner here my point stands)
C: KAreem 6, Shaq: 4 Hakeem:2
YOu can give me all the team sport excuses etc. If you are a GOAT candidate you should ring ...PERIOD. And yes, they do matter. A LOT.
where's wilt?We were not discussing that (fanbase trashing legacy that was another thread) Amb, question was Paul's place among PG's. And my point was that rings matter. Here you go again with the wayyyy in left field analogies and comparisons. Who would argue Billups over Stockton? Is that a hot topic of debate at the water cooler, the local open gym or the barbershop where you live?
Back to Paul of course it will matter if he never rings. Stockton is great so was Nash but NOT winning a le keeps you out of GOAT convos imho. ESPECIALLY in the NBA. I cannot think of ONE guy in the NBA team sport or No ...that I consider to be in the GOAT convo that has NOT rang at least once and most have at least twice:
PG's: Magic 5, Isiah 5
SG: MJ 5 Kobe 5
SF: Lebron 2 Bird 3
PF: Duncan 5 (a case can be made for Chuck and Malone at#2 but since Duncan is the clear-cut winner here my point stands)
C: KAreem 6, Shaq: 4 Hakeem:2
YOu can give me all the team sport excuses etc. If you are a GOAT candidate you should ring ...PERIOD. And yes, they do matter. A LOT.
Billups was the lead banana for that excellent Pistons team that won a championship, Stockton was arguably the 2nd best player (though I would put him as the best) player on a team that never won a championship. This is not a case of Horry vs. Jordan or Salley vs. Duncan, Billups and Stockton were the respective top dogs on their teams, and one won a championship and the other didn't.We were not discussing that (fanbase trashing legacy that was another thread) Amb, question was Paul's place among PG's. And my point was that rings matter. Here you go again with the wayyyy in left field analogies and comparisons. Who would argue Billups over Stockton? Is that a hot topic of debate at the water cooler, the local open gym or the barbershop where you live?
The thing is, put Stockton on the Pistons, and I am sure they win at least one championship, put Billups on the Jazz, they wouldn't likely make the finals. Which illustrates rings are functions of teammates, coaching, compe ion and individual talent, while personal accomplishments are more the function of individual talent than anything else. Logically speaking, it is contradictory to put team accomplishments ahead of personal accolades when evaluating individual legacies.
Duncan winning 5 does nothing to his legacy because we already know that Duncan can lead a team to championships being the clear top dog with a bunch of cast offs (03). The single 03 championship cemented his legacy, and put him on the strata of Hakeem (due to 94 championship). Shaq's absolute dominance in 01, and his ability to lead a team to a championship in 00 puts him in that same strata.
Stockton and Nash would not be GOATs even with multiple championships.Back to Paul of course it will matter if he never rings. Stockton is great so was Nash but NOT winning a le keeps you out of GOAT convos imho. ESPECIALLY in the NBA. I cannot think of ONE guy in the NBA team sport or No ...that I consider to be in the GOAT convo that has NOT rang at least once and most have at least twice:
PG's: Magic 5, Isiah 5
SG: MJ 5 Kobe 5
SF: Lebron 2 Bird 3
PF: Duncan 5 (a case can be made for Chuck and Malone at#2 but since Duncan is the clear-cut winner here my point stands)
C: KAreem 6, Shaq: 4 Hakeem:2
YOu can give me all the team sport excuses etc. If you are a GOAT candidate you should ring ...PERIOD. And yes, they do matter. A LOT.
As for winning once or twice, I see that as definitely relevant, because it proves that a player is strong enough to have a winning team built around him, but whether the number is 1, 2 , 3, 4 or 5 is not important, it is important HOW those championships are won.
Also, Dirk and Garnett won a championship, and Dirk was clearly the man in the 11 run, why doesn't he make it over Chuck and Malone? Or are you going to try and argue comparing Dirk and Garnett to Chuck and Malone is like comparing Salley to Duncan?
In case you missed my stance on the subject. I dont rate players I never saw play. It's not fair to them or me. I am not a numbers guy. SO i would never just use that. As much as I value rings, rings alone or no good either. SO no Russell, Cousy, Oscar West or Elgin in my lists. yes, I have seen some "tape" on NBA's greatest games and I do have some of the Laker greats old games on DVD. But that is them at their best. I saw Magic, Kobe, Bird and even MJ WIN AND FAIL. Watched them in their primes so I can speak on those guys extensively. On what basis could I rank guys that retired before I was born? Kareem tbh barely makes the cut for me because I missed his true prime but saw enough of him to rank him first at center.
Last edited by Killakobe81; 07-30-2014 at 12:59 PM.
It's hard to say Cousy didn't have much better career then Paul, but on the other hand his skills may not have translate to the modern NBA.
Oscar has won 'ships and was a 6'5" athletic freak PG with fantastic passing and scoring, saying he would be a scrub today is . . . no comments. It isn't hard to imagine why he was better then Paul.
Frazier led the Knicks to two 'ships and was a great defensive player, probably was better then Paul too.
DJ led the Sonics to a finals and a 'ship and was an integral part of another 2 'ship teams plus has made it to the finals another two times with the Celtics. He was a great defensive player. Has to be consdiered better then Paul.
Magic played little defense and wasn't a good option to defend PG's, but the way he impacted the game with his cluch passes, shots and ft's he's better then Paul hands down, made it 9 times to the finals with 5 'ships. I seriously doubt MJ would have 6 'ships or 5 MVP's shouldn't Magic retired so prematurely. The best ever PG.
Isaiah led the Pistons to 2 'ships and one finals, was better then Stock and clearly better then Paul too.
Stock made it to the finals two times, has played 20 seasons at very high level and was a good defensive player in his prime, Paul can't compare favorably.
Payton made it to the finals leading the Sonics and has contributed to win a 'ship past his prime with the Heat, was once a DPOY, many all-nba and all-defensive selection - has to be considered better too.
Kidd made it to the finals twice as the best player of the lowly Nets, has won a 'ship with the Mavs already past his prime, was also a great defensive player and very skilled running the point, was better then Paul.
Nash has two MVP's, one of those with Amare injured so it's a no-brainer who was the best player of the team, made it twice to the WCF's leading the Suns, fantastic shooter and great playmaker, his defense was bad but overall could be considered better then Paul.
Parker is a 4 times champion plus a finals, with multiple all-nba selections. His defense is above average. Paul may not have played with anyone as good as Duncan in his prime, but Parker is very consistent too. Put all in and has to be considered better then Paul.
However, Paul's career isn't over yet by any means, he could advance on the list.
1. agree how they won is very important but for themost part EVERY TRULY great player was a key contributor to their # of les I cannot think of anyone that is in GOAT discussion for their position, that is not. Even Kareem at the end, duncan last year all were key contributors even if they were not the #2.
2. Ok you we can play the switch teams argument? Why do we need to do that when Isiah who played against Stockton head to head murdered him (so much so that Malone took a cheap shot to stop him) led his team to les ...and beat the teams and players that people use as an excuse as to why Stockton did not ring? Isiah led teams that beat Magic, Bird and Jordan. Not only that but as good as Dumars, Laimbeer and Rodman were he never had ANY team-mate as good on both ends as Karl Malone. Mj took a two year sabbatical so the MJ excuse doesnt work for me. Dream won. with Kenny freaking Smith as his PG and Otis thorpe as his #2. Not only did stockton have one of the best scorers at his disposal he also had a HOF coach and later on also one of the best pure shooters (hornacek) I have ever seen in person. So no, I dont excuse him for not ringing. You compete vs the guys you face. Despite having the #2 GOAT PF, a top 5 PG and a HOF coach they failed to win the ultimate prize. Isiah had great coaching and a great team a team that is vastly underrated, no doubt.But he also not only faced Jordan, but King, Bird and Magic. He won. Stockton is great absolutely and I agree in some ways even greater than Malone (more clutch definitely) but not greater than Isiah. Both imho are greater than Paul. Dont care what winshares per 48/pur point rating times PER says ...
3. Again duncan winning 5 does NOTHING to his legacy? Really?! Based on who or what? 5 (or more) is a very special club. Even if you take away your obsession only Magic, Kareem and MJ (GOATS) are in that club since 1980.Yes he proved he could win yes he proved he can play more of a David Robinson type role all of that PLUS rinnging adds to his legacy. who gives a if he accepts a lessor role but they lose?
4. Malone and Chuck are special cases. Like i said a case can be made for either as the #2 GOAT PF. But as great as KG or Dirk are (yes they rang) but as it stands today if they were both reired no neither are as great as Malone or Chuck. No, it's not like Billups vs. Stockton but I do believe there is a wide enough gap that the rings wont matter in the end. (im saying general consensus) If Dirk continues to put up numbers and have a significant impact on his team ESPECIALLY if rings again even as a #2 I could see an argument for Dirk as #2 . But for me, rings are really important.
Last edited by Killakobe81; 07-30-2014 at 01:04 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions