Reply With Quote
Which should therefore say something about Bill Russell, Harlem Heat
So, how many points Amare hung on TD in the last few playoff series we had against the Suns ? Does that make him the better rank player over TD with all factors considered ?
How many championship or even a series won by Chamberlain over Russel ? You can make cases regarding the embarrassment of riches of that stacked Celtics team, but basketball is a team sport, and individual greatness is also affected by what kinda achievement he had as a team member.
I am not making case about Russel as the undisputed no. 1 ranked center of all time, but i do argue that a top 10 inclusion is very well deserved up to this point considering all of his achievement & success, as a basketball player, and especially, as a winner.
Which should therefore say something about Bill Russell, Harlem Heat
Last edited by skulls138; 01-21-2016 at 08:38 PM.
If I was starting a team Id pick MM as my starting center. A rebounding, especially offensive, machine with alot of at ude.
Galileo's authoritative list of these ten re-ranked:
1. The King
2. Russell
3. Shaq
4. The Stilt
5. The Dream
6. Moses
7. Mikan
8. The Admiral
9. Walton
10. Ewing
Even if you're leaning heavily on peak ability, Sabonis deserves to be nowhere near this list. His best season in the NBA was 16 and 10.
I suppose that's correct if you don't take into account the two to three rounds where his team won prior to being swept.
Sorry, but '83 Lakers were not showtime lakersMoses beat the Showtime Lakers w/ motha in' Calvin Murphy as his wingman
Admiral apologist can about him playing w/ All-star ******& not having clutch shooters like Hakeem
but he can't even shine Moses postseason resume, period.
You can look at it this way:
-Admiral: KG
-Moses: Tim
Good post!!I think it might be helpful to reverse thinking on this. Not thinking "could Russel dominate today"...but, would people like Jordan have even made it to the NBA back then?
When there were no massive scouting combines looking at the potential of 12 yr olds back then. Throwing massive money at anything that looks like it could be a potential star. Grooming, training, funding them every step of the way. There wasn't the en led mentality of many kids today. Playing Basketball in the NBA wasn't the dream of every kid on the block. It took a special type of person to overcome societal issues of the day and totally commit themselves to something that wasn't even close to providing the rewards for the players as it does now. The single mindedness of those players to play a game that wasn't near as popular as it is now.
How many current NBA players would have even tried or given up early because nobody was pushing them or supporting them? It wasn't winning the lottery back then. It was a different mindset. The NBA players back then not only had to be physically capable of the game...but, overcome many other obstacles like segregation, etc...to do what they had to do. How many of today's players, if they were raised in those times, would even had the for ude to make it to the NBA? Athletic 6'10" players just didn't start growing in the 90's. They were there in the 50's too. They didn't make it to the NBA. Russell did.
So, you can't compare them. You cannot compare generational players. Because there is so much more going on in each generation outside of just "dribbling the basketball," that determines greatness in those times. You just pick the best of that generation and move on. How they dominated their particular time in history.
And Bill Russell Dominated his generation. 11 rings and 2 NCAA championships. Are you kidding me?? And he did it during some of the most troubled times in our history...which he was an ACTIVE part of as well. Bill Russell would be my number 1 or 2 player. No question about it.
Even tho I've always found him annoying to listen to....
Call them whatever you like but last I checked the core that cons uted the "showtime" Lakers were on the 83 Lakers including Pat Riley.
Wilt lost DESPITE sonning Russell & finally beat him when he had All-NBA teammates so all it says is that Russell had better teammates.
2nd year Hakeem serving Kareem would be the equivalent of 2nd year Tim serving Malone in the 99.
I can agree with that, but even in their primes head to head, neither guy would stop each other.2nd year Hakeem serving Kareem would be the equivalent of 2nd year Tim serving Malone in the 99.
and they had also won 2 les by 83 and went on to win 3 more during the 80sCall them whatever you like but last I checked the core that cons uted the "showtime" Lakers were on the 83 Lakers including Pat Riley.
The reason Kareem is better is b/c he could still dominate guys like Hakeem despite being past his prime meanwhile Hakeem was getting neutralized by Kemp at the tail end of his prime.
Laughable.
I do feel kareem is the greatest center of all time, but playing with magic, worthy, and even byron scott was a of a lot easier than playing with an old drexler, kenny smith, and robert horry.
He also won a championship in Milwaukee with a 32 year old Oscar Robertson as the second best player, and a bunch of no names.
bobby dandridge may not be known, but he was a very good ball player.And Kareem was the baddest man in bball at that time. He wasn't past his prime in 71. I don't know why you and Kawhistorm are debating? I already said it, "i think Kareem is the best center of all time.." what more do yall want me to say? he's personally one of my top 5 player sof all time even though I have always hated the lakers
why are you mentioning his nba years in the same breath as his peak ability?
Prime, pre injury Sabonis can challenge top 5 spot in all time NBA C list if he was playing in the league since the beginning. A complete package, from physical, mental, and skill stand point.
Not sure how you figured that. In the 86 playoffs, Hakeem was the best player on the court in every game.Hakeem got shat on by past prime Kareem
No he didn't. Kareem looked terrible when he was 39, in the end he lost his sky hook and was out there looking like a stiff. I never missed a Lakers game when they were on and it was noticeable how much the game had passed him by.Kareem put up some monster numbers for a 39 year old but, I wouldn't call a second year player that averaged roughly 33 points, 12 rebounds and 4 blocked shots in the series where Houston won in 5 games getting shat on
By his second year in the league, it was obvious that Jordan was the best player in the league and Hakeem was 4th behind him, Magic and Bird.
See my post below
I like to look at how good a center was at their peek and mentally simulate how they would fare against one another. I have a harder time doing so with Wilt and Russell because they are the only two I never actually watched play.
With that said, Sabonis, was a beast, an absolute beast. If he were not in the Soviet Union we might have got him here at a young age. Were that to happen he would have been second only to Hakeem during his time here. His physical ability was higher than Patrick Ewing, his basketball skills were on the same level of Dirk Nowitzki, and his basketball IQ was as high as Tim Duncan's. Oh, and his passing skills were off the charts, probably up there with John Stockton.
I would agree, if he were to have come to the NBA when he was say 20, I think he easily would have been a top 5 center.
I have no doubt Sabonis would have been there were his stars aligned just a little differently.
Not only was Kareem the best C but probably the best of alltime.
I'm curious as to why you would think Hakeem would have been better than Arvydas anyway? Not saying you are necessarily wrong, just wondering what the reasoning is behind it. Of course he schooled other all time great bigs, but as you said, Kareem was way past his prime, Shaq was very young, so you're left with basically Ewing and Robinson.
We know that Hakeem had the ability to play against bigger guys, but he was "only" 6'10, Ewing 6'11, Shaq 7', David 7'1 and Kareem a very thin 7'2.
Sabonis was an athletic 7'4 (with shoes) guy. You've seen how Boban towers over everyone and makes guys like Chandler or Baynes look small compared to him. I think the mere size difference would have been a factor between Hakeem and Arvydas. Even David looked tiny next to him in those Olympics games. Hakeem would have had a hard time defending him at least imho.
What do you think?
Precisely my point, but the reason I even mentioned it is because VC probably wouldn't be able to justify Walton on the list without some emphasis on peak rather than career. Sabonis had a peak as good as anyone on the list, but like you said, it occurred while he was out of the NBA. 16 and 10 is no slouch of a season, and he was a s of himself by that point.
VC, given your emphasis on peak, then Robinson should be higher on the list. Pre-injury he was as good as anyone.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions